I think as a country we are putting too much priority on the SCOTUS as if they are some kind of a supreme mentor of our society. I don't think the equal branches of the government meant they had the final decision
--The court invalidated the firearms convictions of two men prosecuted in Texas on a variety of charges for their roles in a series of 2014 gas station robberies in Texas. Although the robbers were armed, no shots were fired.
The law, the most recent version of which was passed by Congress in 1986, imposed additional penalties on anyone who committed certain violent crimes while in possession of a firearm.
Gorsuch, appointed by Trump in 2017, wrote that laws passed by Congress must give ordinary people notice of what kind of conduct can land them in prison.--
So the law said there was a possibility they might not land in prison if they robbed a series of gas stations with guns?
Iggy, a better explanation from SCOTUS blog:Opinion analysis: Vagueness doctrine as a shield for criminal defendants
Today, as expected, the Supreme Court invalidated 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B). In United States v. Davis, the court declared that the categorical approach is dead, and with it Section 924(c)(3)(B). Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the opinion for a 5-4 majority (joined by the four more liberal justices), and Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the dissent.
This case involved the constitutionality of a federal criminal statute — Section 924(c). Section 924(c) makes it a crime to use a firearm during or in relation to a crime of violence, and Section 924(c)(3)(B) (now defunct) defined a crime of violence as “any other offense that is a felony and that, by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense.”
In Sessions v. Dimaya, the Supreme Court held that the identical language was unconstitutionally vague when it appeared in Section 16(b), the general federal definition of a crime of violence. Today in Davis, the court said what is good for the goose is good for the gander: Section 924(c)(3)(B) is unconstitutionally vague as well.
In Davis, the federal government had agreed that Section 924(c)(3)(B), as currently interpreted, is unconstitutionally vague. Courts interpret Section 924(c) using the so-called categorical approach, which requires courts to assess whether the “typical version” of the defendant’s offense, defined by its elements, involves a substantial risk of force.
The government had urged the Supreme Court to kill the categorical approach in order to save Section 924(c). In its place, the government would have had courts assess whether the defendant’s actual conduct involved a substantial risk of force. Gorsuch’s majority opinion begins by conceding that a statute requiring an inquiry into the defendant’s actual conduct would not be unconstitutionally vague.
But, the majority continues, Section 924(c) is not that statute. Rather, after engaging in a straightforward exercise of statutory interpretation, the majority concludes that the text, structure and context of 924(c) all suggest that the statute requires courts to look at a generic offense and assess the risk of that offense, rather than the defendant’s conduct. The “language in the statute before us,” the majority goes on to say, “isn’t the language posited in the dissent’s push poll.” After determining the proper interpretation of Section 924(c), there was not much left for the majority to decide, because the court had already found that interpretation to be unconstitutionally vague in Dimaya.
Gorsuch’s majority opinion contains an interesting passage on the relationship between the doctrine of constitutional avoidance and the rule of lenity, which requires ambiguous criminal laws to be read in a defendant’s favor — an issue that he had raised at oral argument. The government had urged the court to invoke the canon of constitutional avoidance and interpret Section 924(c) in a way that would make it constitutional. The majority opinion primarily rejects the application of the canon of constitutional avoidance because the (much) better reading of the statute is that it requires the categorical approach.
But Gorsuch’s majority opinion suggests that the canon of constitutional avoidance is inapplicable for another reason as well. The opinion reasons:
[N]o one before us has identified a case in which this Court has invoked the canon to expand the reach of a criminal statute in order to save it… Employing the avoidance canon to expand a criminal statute’s scope would risk offending the very same due process and separation-of-powers principles on which the vagueness doctrine itself rests.
The majority opinion thus ensures that the canon of constitutional avoidance can function as a sword for criminal defendants. But it also declares that the vagueness doctrine operates as a shield to protect criminal defendants from attempts by the government to wield the constitutional-avoidance canon against them.
Twitter and Facebook are not a part of my life and I am grateful for the privacy.
That they are now found to be anti conservative and deleting and hiding posts does not surprise me.
Coongratulations to JOMer Tonto, whose husband Harry Stein, who is getting a major shout-out from Ol' Yeller, reading his excellent article in City Journal over the airways. I met Harry at a JOM meet-up, and it was quite a privilege.
President Trump's message to the leader of Iran: "My only message is this -- he has the potential to have a great country and quickly. Very quickly. I think they should do that rather than going along this destructive path." https://t.co/R9dM585QL1pic.twitter.com/98PuPCJPnL
Harry quoted me (from here) in a prelude to one of his books. Janet sent me a copy. The book was at last partly about race, published fairly soon after Obama's ascension.
I'll confess that did give me pause. So let me conclude, for safety's sake, with a comment with which I wholehartedly agree made by a reader called Extraneus on the excellent JustOneMinute website: "For the record, I have no problem with Obama's black half. His white half is the most incompetent, anti-American asshole ever to inhabit the office of the presidency, but his black half is fine."
Yeah Ig, knew that too. Had the respiratory depression issue driven home when the MIL, who has crippling OA and a long history with Vicodin, completed an incomplete stress fracture of her femur. ER doc had a helluva time knocking down the pain enough to straighten the leg. Fentanyl was our friend, but the doc earned the money.
Surgeon who did the rodding surgery didn’t bother with anything else post-op.
I understand the problems, but I’m pissed that life is made difficult and more painful because of a minority.
Every morning, 72 year-old Stephen Mckears kept finding his tools that he'd left on his workbench the day before—stored back in his toolbox. He put a camera on his workbench overnight and it revealed a mouse that spent two hours every night putting everything back in the toolbox! pic.twitter.com/Jpkpskviyn
Mark Knoller
Verified account @markknoller
2m2 minutes ago
Tuesday at the WH: Pres Trump presents the Medal of Honor to retired Staff Sergeant David G. Bellavia, for conspicuous gallantry under enemy fire in Fallujah, Iraq in November 2004. He's the first living recipient of the Medal for actions during Operation Iraqi Freedom.
the other part is opiates are muscle relaxants as is alcohol
Not muscle relaxants, but respiratory depressants--they decrease the brain's response to CO2 and low O2, so we don't breath as much each minute as we need to if taken in excess.
Morgan Ortagus
Verified account @statedeptspox
5m5 minutes ago
Today, @SecPompeo met with Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and discussed Libya, Sudan, Iran, tensions in the region, and the need for more robust maritime security in order to promote freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.
I did the same for a while. One thing Rupert improved was the entertainment coverage. Unfortunately that was a tertiary reason for subscribing. It was nice to read it after being well informed about news but when that went south...
E. Jean Carroll on her allegation against Trump: “The word rape carries so many sexual connotations. This was not sexual. ... I think most people think of rape as being sexy. They think of the fantasies”
Orin Kerr on SG at SCOTUS w/opinion on CA tax scam, I mean scheme::
https://twitter.com/orinkerr/status/1143270983320686595?s=21
Posted by: Melinda | June 24, 2019 at 05:40 PM
Gorsuch is determined that Congress write clear laws.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-guns/us-supreme-court-strikes-down-stiff-firearms-penalties-idUSKCN1TP1YR?fbclid=IwAR19jMv-PxKG7w8Pcisrz5dq1uix5xYmZY9ltgkheNa5TvEuX7JHbT6xH3I
No penumbras of emanations or finding a tax when the govt isn't arguing that the mandatory insurance provision is a tax.
Posted by: clarice | June 24, 2019 at 05:42 PM
Clarice:
Finally a justice who calls it fairly.
No double speak .
No do-overs.
Get it right the first time.
No wiggle room.
Posted by: D | June 24, 2019 at 05:45 PM
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-24/15000-mexican-troops-deployed-us-border
Looks like Mexico is stepping up to the plate.
Guess the threat of those tariffs worked.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 05:49 PM
I think as a country we are putting too much priority on the SCOTUS as if they are some kind of a supreme mentor of our society. I don't think the equal branches of the government meant they had the final decision
Posted by: Jim Eagle | June 24, 2019 at 05:50 PM
--The court invalidated the firearms convictions of two men prosecuted in Texas on a variety of charges for their roles in a series of 2014 gas station robberies in Texas. Although the robbers were armed, no shots were fired.
The law, the most recent version of which was passed by Congress in 1986, imposed additional penalties on anyone who committed certain violent crimes while in possession of a firearm.
Gorsuch, appointed by Trump in 2017, wrote that laws passed by Congress must give ordinary people notice of what kind of conduct can land them in prison.--
So the law said there was a possibility they might not land in prison if they robbed a series of gas stations with guns?
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | June 24, 2019 at 05:53 PM
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/06/lock-them-up-south-dakota-parade-float-with-crooked-hillary-and-obama-behind-bars-gets-democrats-hot-and-bothered-video/
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 05:54 PM
Jack, that's what Marbury v Madison put in motion and it's been downhill ever since.
Posted by: Captain Hate | June 24, 2019 at 05:55 PM
MM.
Average people are pissed. I see it everywhere in my slice of Florida.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | June 24, 2019 at 05:56 PM
Iggy, a better explanation from SCOTUS blog:Opinion analysis: Vagueness doctrine as a shield for criminal defendants
Today, as expected, the Supreme Court invalidated 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B). In United States v. Davis, the court declared that the categorical approach is dead, and with it Section 924(c)(3)(B). Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the opinion for a 5-4 majority (joined by the four more liberal justices), and Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the dissent.
This case involved the constitutionality of a federal criminal statute — Section 924(c). Section 924(c) makes it a crime to use a firearm during or in relation to a crime of violence, and Section 924(c)(3)(B) (now defunct) defined a crime of violence as “any other offense that is a felony and that, by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense.”
In Sessions v. Dimaya, the Supreme Court held that the identical language was unconstitutionally vague when it appeared in Section 16(b), the general federal definition of a crime of violence. Today in Davis, the court said what is good for the goose is good for the gander: Section 924(c)(3)(B) is unconstitutionally vague as well.
In Davis, the federal government had agreed that Section 924(c)(3)(B), as currently interpreted, is unconstitutionally vague. Courts interpret Section 924(c) using the so-called categorical approach, which requires courts to assess whether the “typical version” of the defendant’s offense, defined by its elements, involves a substantial risk of force.
The government had urged the Supreme Court to kill the categorical approach in order to save Section 924(c). In its place, the government would have had courts assess whether the defendant’s actual conduct involved a substantial risk of force. Gorsuch’s majority opinion begins by conceding that a statute requiring an inquiry into the defendant’s actual conduct would not be unconstitutionally vague.
But, the majority continues, Section 924(c) is not that statute. Rather, after engaging in a straightforward exercise of statutory interpretation, the majority concludes that the text, structure and context of 924(c) all suggest that the statute requires courts to look at a generic offense and assess the risk of that offense, rather than the defendant’s conduct. The “language in the statute before us,” the majority goes on to say, “isn’t the language posited in the dissent’s push poll.” After determining the proper interpretation of Section 924(c), there was not much left for the majority to decide, because the court had already found that interpretation to be unconstitutionally vague in Dimaya.
Gorsuch’s majority opinion contains an interesting passage on the relationship between the doctrine of constitutional avoidance and the rule of lenity, which requires ambiguous criminal laws to be read in a defendant’s favor — an issue that he had raised at oral argument. The government had urged the court to invoke the canon of constitutional avoidance and interpret Section 924(c) in a way that would make it constitutional. The majority opinion primarily rejects the application of the canon of constitutional avoidance because the (much) better reading of the statute is that it requires the categorical approach.
But Gorsuch’s majority opinion suggests that the canon of constitutional avoidance is inapplicable for another reason as well. The opinion reasons:
[N]o one before us has identified a case in which this Court has invoked the canon to expand the reach of a criminal statute in order to save it… Employing the avoidance canon to expand a criminal statute’s scope would risk offending the very same due process and separation-of-powers principles on which the vagueness doctrine itself rests.
The majority opinion thus ensures that the canon of constitutional avoidance can function as a sword for criminal defendants. But it also declares that the vagueness doctrine operates as a shield to protect criminal defendants from attempts by the government to wield the constitutional-avoidance canon against them.
Posted by: clarice | June 24, 2019 at 05:57 PM
Ig @ 5:53
Here’s my question: why are the feds prosecuting people for sticking up gas stations in Texas?
Posted by: James D. | June 24, 2019 at 05:59 PM
Kavanaugh, again.
Can we re-hold the hearings?
Posted by: Jim Eagle | June 24, 2019 at 06:02 PM
My Twitter feed is full of people I don't follow and are not promoted.
People I DO follow don't show up.
Obviously Twitter is attacking conservatives.
Bah.
Going to cook supper.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 06:06 PM
Twitter and Facebook are not a part of my life and I am grateful for the privacy.
That they are now found to be anti conservative and deleting and hiding posts does not surprise me.
Posted by: D | June 24, 2019 at 06:12 PM
Kavanaugh was with Alito, Thomas and Roberts on this one JiB.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | June 24, 2019 at 06:20 PM
Coongratulations to JOMer Tonto, whose husband Harry Stein, who is getting a major shout-out from Ol' Yeller, reading his excellent article in City Journal over the airways. I met Harry at a JOM meet-up, and it was quite a privilege.
Posted by: peter | June 24, 2019 at 06:23 PM
So if we find that Omar is lying about her marriage and a hundred different things, what difference does it make if Pelosi does nothing?
Posted by: Jane | June 24, 2019 at 06:24 PM
Jane, can she remain in the country if she immigrated via fraud?
Posted by: henry | June 24, 2019 at 06:28 PM
A skirt is not kilts. QED.
@WSJ
Why is the skirt still so heavily gendered? Our men's fashion editor @jacobwgallagher tries one on to find out
Posted by: henry | June 24, 2019 at 06:30 PM
Wow, so the WSJ is completely worthless now, I guess.
Posted by: James D. | June 24, 2019 at 06:33 PM
Video of President Trump at the link.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 06:36 PM
Harry quoted me (from here) in a prelude to one of his books. Janet sent me a copy. The book was at last partly about race, published fairly soon after Obama's ascension.
Dude can write.
Posted by: Extraneus | June 24, 2019 at 06:37 PM
Cool, Extraneus. What was the quote?
Wonderful, Lili-Beth. We’ve been missing you.
Posted by: caro | June 24, 2019 at 06:41 PM
so the WSJ is completely worthless now
Its worthlessness started at least three years ago, IMO.
Posted by: lyle | June 24, 2019 at 06:44 PM
I found it in the much reduced stacks.
"no matter what... they'll call this book racist"
p.14, the end of the Introduction:
Posted by: Extraneus | June 24, 2019 at 06:46 PM
Short video of the President at the link.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 06:47 PM
“relax you to the point you stop breathing”
Yeah Ig, knew that too. Had the respiratory depression issue driven home when the MIL, who has crippling OA and a long history with Vicodin, completed an incomplete stress fracture of her femur. ER doc had a helluva time knocking down the pain enough to straighten the leg. Fentanyl was our friend, but the doc earned the money.
Surgeon who did the rodding surgery didn’t bother with anything else post-op.
I understand the problems, but I’m pissed that life is made difficult and more painful because of a minority.
Posted by: Another Bob | June 24, 2019 at 06:47 PM
Still no power.
Duke Energy--not getting 'er done
Posted by: anonamom | June 24, 2019 at 06:56 PM
I think Ext. ripped that off from one of my comments!
😬
Posted by: lyle | June 24, 2019 at 06:59 PM
Video at link. (MY mice aren't like that!)
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 07:01 PM
From the book I’m currently reading, Wine & War:
God made man—
Frail as a bubble;
God made love—
Love made trouble
God made the vine—
Was it a sin
That man made wine
To drown trouble in?
🍷❤️
Posted by: lyle | June 24, 2019 at 07:05 PM
Mark Knoller
Verified account @markknoller
2m2 minutes ago
Tuesday at the WH: Pres Trump presents the Medal of Honor to retired Staff Sergeant David G. Bellavia, for conspicuous gallantry under enemy fire in Fallujah, Iraq in November 2004. He's the first living recipient of the Medal for actions during Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 07:05 PM
I credit you, lyle, except for the ending where I said his black half was fine.
From the AMZN link, that book was published in 2012, so not soon after the ascension.
Pretty good reviews, too.
Posted by: Extraneus | June 24, 2019 at 07:06 PM
Hi, Caro!
Posted by: Extraneus | June 24, 2019 at 07:06 PM
😙 caro!
Posted by: lyle | June 24, 2019 at 07:13 PM
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/450079-former-fox-news-reporter-says-he-left-because-of-partisan-misinformation
Carl Cameron, who was almost as bad as Shep Smith.
He's obviously sucking up to the leftist press and looking for a job.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 07:13 PM
the other part is opiates are muscle relaxants as is alcohol
Not muscle relaxants, but respiratory depressants--they decrease the brain's response to CO2 and low O2, so we don't breath as much each minute as we need to if taken in excess.
Posted by: anonamom | June 24, 2019 at 07:17 PM
Morgan Ortagus
Verified account @statedeptspox
5m5 minutes ago
Today, @SecPompeo met with Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and discussed Libya, Sudan, Iran, tensions in the region, and the need for more robust maritime security in order to promote freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 07:19 PM
Justice Gorsuch tells Congress to shape up on writing laws:
https://twitter.com/Rafa_Mangual/status/1143160456992952320
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 07:39 PM
MM, look who Cameron is partnering with: Joseph Romm of “Climate Progress”
Posted by: James D. | June 24, 2019 at 07:39 PM
--I think Ext. ripped that off from one of my comments!--
And pretty sure you ripped it off from me, lyle.
I'm a little foggy on where I got it though.
Probably Harry Stein. :)
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | June 24, 2019 at 07:40 PM
Congrats Ext and lyle, 6:46
Posted by: President-Elect Jim,SunnyvaleCA | June 24, 2019 at 07:41 PM
Ah! And Ig
Posted by: President-Elect Jim,SunnyvaleCA | June 24, 2019 at 07:42 PM
"Success has a thousand fathers ...
Failure is an orphan. "
Posted by: President-Elect Jim,SunnyvaleCA | June 24, 2019 at 07:43 PM
--Not muscle relaxants, but respiratory depressants---
Darn it. I had added "depressant" just to cover my rear but took it out.
The benzos my son takes are muscle relaxants.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | June 24, 2019 at 07:44 PM
Well we now where Jeff Stein migrated over to, the Bezos post.
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 07:48 PM
Love your quote, Ex.
Love your quote, too, lyle.
Posted by: caro | June 24, 2019 at 07:48 PM
The Texas Tribune, the daily basilisk just the usual gunk.
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 07:50 PM
Hey caro, how have you been?
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 07:52 PM
Video at link. This guy was one of the horse soldiers of Afghanistan.
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 07:53 PM
Oh Marlene Maine House Spesker Sarah gideon is challenging Susan collins
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 07:54 PM
Alex p Keaton would burn today's journal
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 07:55 PM
I still occasionally pick up the weekend WSJ, narc. What a waste of $5.
Posted by: lyle | June 24, 2019 at 07:58 PM
Would we have started Normandy before ending north africa?
https://www.militarytimes.com/opinion/2019/06/22/opinion-americas-three-big-mistakes-in-afghanistan/
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 07:58 PM
Yes the news had gone zombie.
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 07:59 PM
Thanks, everyone. I had a big fight with typepad. It knocked the funny right outta me.
Caro 👋!
Posted by: Lili-beth | June 24, 2019 at 08:05 PM
Henry,
Can you imagine deploring her? I would cheer, but boy would it upend the elites!
Posted by: Jane | June 24, 2019 at 08:05 PM
I think he hasn't been fully appraised on general flynn
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/06/a_jihad_basis_for_the_coup.html
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 08:05 PM
WSJ is just a FusionGPS billboard now. All paid placements.
Posted by: Melinda | June 24, 2019 at 08:06 PM
Video of Jesse Smollett with a rope still around his neck as police enter his apt. What a joke!
https://twitter.com/MeganHickeyTV/status/1143281064913375232
Posted by: Momto2 | June 24, 2019 at 08:06 PM
Been very well, thanks, Narciso. Enjoying learning golf, difficult at any age.
Posted by: caro | June 24, 2019 at 08:07 PM
Anonamom,
Are you without power?
Posted by: Jane | June 24, 2019 at 08:08 PM
The Communist Party USA recognizes kindred spirits in the men, women and fluid beings in between of the modern Democratic Party.
When are the Dems gonna end the facade and just admit the embrace goes both ways?
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | June 24, 2019 at 08:09 PM
Henry,
‘Deporting” her. We already deploy her.
Posted by: Jane | June 24, 2019 at 08:09 PM
I give up.
‘Deplore” her.
Posted by: Jane | June 24, 2019 at 08:09 PM
Looks like they’re getting closer with each passing day, Ig.
Posted by: lyle | June 24, 2019 at 08:13 PM
Deporting Omar would be entertaining. Her district would send a clone in her place.
Posted by: henry | June 24, 2019 at 08:14 PM
We need to deport probably 3/4 of the people in Omar’s district.
If we had a sane government, they’d never have been allowed in in the first place.
Posted by: James D. | June 24, 2019 at 08:20 PM
I missed this exercise in category error:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/21/unemployment-rising-in-8-states-that-voted-for-trump.html
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 08:25 PM
My brother regularly travels to Omar’s district. Mogadishu, MN.
Posted by: lyle | June 24, 2019 at 08:27 PM
Looks like clockwork orsnge:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-3412616/How-Labour-turned-London-foreign-city.html?fbclid=IwAR1f_9KKtMzZ4-tsPFqoxGgEL3NuxgvvYwnsQWc0FSMBZ4NrQLngt5TRCjs
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 08:32 PM
This is a good article:
https://www.amgreatness.com/2019/06/23/to-hell-with-the-naysayers-hawley-is-right-about-big-tech/
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 08:39 PM
Anyone know anything about this?
Kim Dotcom
Verified account @KimDotcom
27s28 seconds ago
There are unconfirmed rumors that @hrhprincesshaya has fled from Dubai to Germany with the help of a German diplomat.
If true Haya can finally speak about what happened to Princess Latifa.
Anyone who has any information please contact me via Twitter dm.
@DerSPIEGEL, @BILD, @SZ
Posted by: MissMarple2 | June 24, 2019 at 08:40 PM
Did she take her droids with her?
Posted by: henry | June 24, 2019 at 08:43 PM
That seems unlikely
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.harpersbazaararabia.com/amp/article_listing/harpers/people/the-a-list/times-princess-haya-inspired-us-birthday
When is the last time Kim.com has planned out?
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 08:46 PM
What if they aren’t the droids you’re looking for, henry?
Posted by: lyle | June 24, 2019 at 08:47 PM
I still occasionally pick up the weekend WSJ
I did the same for a while. One thing Rupert improved was the entertainment coverage. Unfortunately that was a tertiary reason for subscribing. It was nice to read it after being well informed about news but when that went south...
Posted by: Captain Hate | June 24, 2019 at 08:48 PM
Thus ends my less than perfunctory SW allusions.
Posted by: lyle | June 24, 2019 at 08:48 PM
Hi, Caro
Yea lili-beth
Congrats to Tonto and Extraneus. Tough time today keeping up..Hope I missed no one.
Posted by: clarice | June 24, 2019 at 08:49 PM
Apparently it's about this:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.harpersbazaararabia.com/amp/article_listing/harpers/people/the-a-list/times-princess-haya-inspired-us-birthday
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 08:50 PM
Shes more like padme in the naboo palace.
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 08:51 PM
Que sorpresa:
https://babalublog.com/2019/06/24/cursory-visit-by-uns-bachelet-to-socialist-venezuela-did-nothing-for-the-cause-of-freedom/
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 08:53 PM
Enjoying learning golf
I trust you know the perils to a marriage should you rely on your spouse as your swing coach, my dear. 😉
Posted by: lyle | June 24, 2019 at 08:53 PM
But it's a humid heat.
Posted by: matt - deplore me if you must | June 24, 2019 at 08:57 PM
If we had a sane government
This conditional clause requires no further explication.
Posted by: lyle | June 24, 2019 at 09:02 PM
In the Frank Miller dystopian version they would be terrified to do this;
https://deadline.com/2019/06/mark-hamill-julia-louis-dreyfus-zachary-quinto-all-star-live-stream-mueller-report-reading-1202636984/
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 09:03 PM
MM @ 8:39
That’s a great article, thanks for posting it.
Posted by: James D. | June 24, 2019 at 09:04 PM
Jake Gyllenhaal has always rubbed the wrong way since day after tomorrow, he has the personality of Luke warm tapioca.
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 09:07 PM
Ribert shenkkan did a fairly good job with hacksaw ridge but hes darn nese lost hid mind.
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 09:11 PM
The last place I would have looked...
Fresh water offshore of New England.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevornace/2019/06/24/a-massive-reservoir-of-freshwater-was-just-discovered-offshore-new-england/
Posted by: henry | June 24, 2019 at 09:14 PM
Mrs. Buckeye's father was a scratch golfer. The pros in both Columbus and in Florida pushed him to consider the Senior Tour. He was that good.
He did a great job coaching Jr. and Buckeyette who both are very good golfers.
But neither Mrs. Buckeye or her sister ever learned to play or had any interest. Go figure.
Posted by: Buckeye | June 24, 2019 at 09:14 PM
I may have linked this before but it's pretty fun;
Maria Bartiromo and Joey Ramone became buds.
Then Joey wrote a song about/for her;
Joey Ramone; Maria Bartiromo.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | June 24, 2019 at 09:16 PM
NB: my 8:53 was tease to caro’s hubby whom I had the pleasure of meeting with her last July. 😉
Posted by: lyle | June 24, 2019 at 09:16 PM
I love my new cold oven chicken recipes and results but I did discover this evening that it is possible to put too much cayenne pepper on.
Chihuahuas!
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | June 24, 2019 at 09:23 PM
Ay chihuahua, and other peppers are magnitude stronger.
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 09:31 PM
Vid at link.
Saavedra:
E. Jean Carroll on her allegation against Trump: “The word rape carries so many sexual connotations. This was not sexual. ... I think most people think of rape as being sexy. They think of the fantasies”
https://twitter.com/realsaavedra/status/1143329101052170241?s=21
Posted by: henry | June 24, 2019 at 09:31 PM
If avenatti was a abusive embezzling moutebank who knows what vein of raw crazy she'll let out
We already have psychos marrying themselves at the White House gates
Posted by: Narciso79 | June 24, 2019 at 09:37 PM
Hi caro.
Lilli-Beth great post!
Henry:
Love the hashtag-2 weeks!
Posted by: D | June 24, 2019 at 09:38 PM
Maryrose, I didn’t start the hashtag.
Posted by: henry | June 24, 2019 at 09:41 PM
henry - the end of that video when she stares at him and says, "You are really fascinating to talk to..." is SO creepy!
Posted by: Momto2 | June 24, 2019 at 09:45 PM