Octopus Overlords

Two key senators said the decision by the Justice Department not to prosecute FBI agents who did not act on reports of abuse by former USA Gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar was "infuriating."

"FBI agents who knew of Larry Nassar’s abuse, did nothing, and then lied about it will face no legal consequences for their actions," Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Jerry Moran said in a news release. "Dozens of athletes would have been spared unimaginable abuse if these agents had just done their jobs."

Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut, and Moran, a Republican from Kansas, spent years investigating the pattern of abusive behavior in Olympic and amateur sports. That was headlined by Nassar, who was a team doctor for both the national gymnastics program and Michigan State University.

The concerns with the FBI helped lead to a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing featuring Team USA gymnasts.

The Justice Department announced late Thursday that, after a review, it would adhere to the prior decision not to bring charges against FBI agents identified in a DOJ inspector general review. That watchdog report included allegations that the agents lied to inspector general investigators.

dbt1949 wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 12:36 am Even I, probably the most fervent gun nut on the board thinks it time to do something. 40 years ago I had a Mini-14. I took it out and had a grand old time wasting ammo. I used 4-5 boxes of ammo each time I went out. I realized I couldn't afford to do this and couldn't control myself and sold it. The only reason (for practical reasons) to have this type of weapon is for warfare, either foreign invaders or the domestic type. Bored 18 years olds don't need it. Right wing militias don't need it. It's time to ban the damn things. We can't make the ones who owns these turn them in but we can start limiting their presence.
Nobody needs these things for self defense. Shotguns are the best for that. Ar-15s are an offensive weapon.

The verdict, coming after less than a full day of deliberations spread over parts of Friday and Tuesday, was not a close call or a hard decision, two jurors told The Washington Post.

“Politics were not a factor,” the jury forewoman said. “We felt really comfortable being able to share what we thought. We had concise notes, and we were able to address the questions together,” she said, declining to give her name as she left the courthouse.

“Personally, I don’t think it should have been prosecuted,” she added, saying the government “could have spent our time more wisely.” A second juror told The Post that in the jury room, “everyone pretty much saw it the same way.”['/quote]

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 11:02 pm As someone who spent most of their life as a starry-eyed optimist, I've really become a fatalistic, pessimistic asshole lately.

hepcat wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 1:12 pm For some reason, I thought you were Australian.

hepcat wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 1:12 pm For some reason, I thought you were Australian.

hepcat wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 7:54 pm I think it’s because I always envision you writing your posts while astride a giant koala.

But to be fair, I usually envision everyone riding some comically oversized animal while writing posts.

I liked lead paint chips a lot as a kid.

“The economic and cultural power of cities is so overwhelming,” says Jonathan Rodden, a professor of political science at Stanford, “that to people in rural areas, the resentment and the oppression ... feels quite intense.”

Indeed, things have gotten so uneven that, although there are nearly 20,000 towns and cities in America, the top 25 cities are responsible for more than half of our GDP (Boston is number nine).

Venture capital — used to finance startup companies — is even more lopsided. In 2018, more than 75 percent of VC investments went to just five places: San Francisco, New York, Boston, San Jose, and Los Angeles.

Sit with that for a minute. In this enormous country, a handful of cities are raking in almost all the venture capital. But, as it turns out, the financial power that cities like Boston have amassed may be causing them to shed a different kind of power: political power.

Why? At least two reasons.

First, the economic and cultural chasm has grown so enormous that urban Democrats have largely lost the ability to connect to folks in rural areas. Second, city dwellers provide so much money and support for Democrats that they drive messaging, making it more difficult for the party to compete in swing, suburban districts.
...
Cities occupy a strange spot in this internal division. They fund a great deal of the party’s operations but have very different leanings than the country at large.

In the 2020 election, for example, 83 percent of Boston voters went for Biden. That number is so high that many Bostonians (or folks in inner-ring suburbs) may not know anyone who voted for Trump, even though 47 percent of American voters did.

“The geographic core of the party,” Rodden says, “starts to dominate some of the party’s decision making and thinking. And things that seem perfectly reasonable to the majority of folks in the party are not necessarily the things that are going to get the job done in the pivotal districts.”

In 2022, the potential overturn of Roe v. Wade might change the landscape, causing some Republican women to vote for Democrats. Or anger about the availability of guns could last into the fall. But given consumers’ deep concerns about inflation, and the general inclination to blame the party in power for economic turmoil, social issues may not feel most pressing to voters on Election Day.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 11:41 pm The areas occupied by 83% of the population have had more oomph than the other 17%? What injustice!

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 9:51 am Not that this takes anything away from your sarcastic conclusion, I just didn’t understand your numbers.

Unagi wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 8:12 am Yeah, as I said....

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 9:51 am Not that this takes anything away from your sarcastic conclusion, I just didn’t understand your numbers.

And more to my point: I really wasn't talking about the accuracy of the 83%, I was saying that the 17% number (or 20%) needs to be divided between the suburban and rural. So it's like 80 / 10 / 10 or something.

LordMortis wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 9:00 am

Unagi wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 8:12 am Yeah, as I said....

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 9:51 am Not that this takes anything away from your sarcastic conclusion, I just didn’t understand your numbers.

And more to my point: I really wasn't talking about the accuracy of the 83%, I was saying that the 17% number (or 20%) needs to be divided between the suburban and rural. So it's like 80 / 10 / 10 or something.

Suburban seems to be urban for the purpose of those numbers. The alternative was rural "Rural 59,492,267 19.3%"

The link suggests only 10% actually live in clustered cities proper "Urban Clusters 3,087 30,036,715 9.5%"

gbasden wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 3:27 am OK, slightly different numbers, but if 80% of the people live in cities then we shouldn't be surprised when they wield greater economic power. Right? Which I believe is BH's point.

Unagi wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 9:13 am

LordMortis wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 9:00 am

Unagi wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 8:12 am Yeah, as I said....

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 9:51 am Not that this takes anything away from your sarcastic conclusion, I just didn’t understand your numbers.

And more to my point: I really wasn't talking about the accuracy of the 83%, I was saying that the 17% number (or 20%) needs to be divided between the suburban and rural. So it's like 80 / 10 / 10 or something.

Suburban seems to be urban for the purpose of those numbers. The alternative was rural "Rural 59,492,267 19.3%"

The link suggests only 10% actually live in clustered cities proper "Urban Clusters 3,087 30,036,715 9.5%"

Aha, there we go.

OK, so the numbers we are really wondering about is "% of Dems in suburban" vs "% of Dems in urban"... and that has absolutely nothing to do with the 80/20 split. Urban/Rural.

gbasden wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 3:27 am OK, slightly different numbers, but if 80% of the people live in cities then we shouldn't be surprised when they wield greater economic power. Right? Which I believe is BH's point.

So the revised number is 10% live in urban. 19% rural... leaving about 71% living in suburban.

Now that takes BH's original sarcastic conclusion and puts it on its head. Now we have 10% of the population dictating the messaging for the other 71% that live in suburban. (never mind the rural)

An urbanized area (UA) is an urban area with population over 50,000; an urban cluster (UC) has population less than 50,000. An urbanized area may serve as the core of a metropolitan statistical area, while an urban cluster may be the core of a micropolitan statistical area.

United States
3,573: Total number of 2010 Census urban areas in the United States
486: Number of urbanized areas (UAs)
3,087: Number of urban clusters (UCs)

249,253,271: Total urban population in the United States
219,922,123: Urbanized area (UA) population
29,331,148: Urban cluster (UC) population

59,492,276: Total rural population in the United States
80.7%: Percent of the U.S. population that is urban

2,534.4 persons per square mile: Overall urbanized area population density in the U.S.

71.2%: Percent of U.S. population living within urbanized areas

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 9:54 amhttps://www.census.gov/programs-surveys ... facts.html

Urban Clusters would probably be the "suburbs."

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 11:07 am Schaumburg is a "village" and it has 4K/sq mi. I'd consider that urban. Though their bars close at like 11pm so maybe not....

malchior wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 11:26 am

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 9:54 amhttps://www.census.gov/programs-surveys ... facts.html

Urban Clusters would probably be the "suburbs."

Definitely. Most of NJ lives in areas with urban density. Most people would think I live in the suburbs. I live 3 miles in one direction from 20 story buildings and 1 mile in the other direction from apple orchards and a nature preserve. Much of the megalopolis between DC and Boston live in areas like this.

Ken wrote:For the last six months I’ve been fielding questions about when Josh Barro and I would be launching a new podcast to replace “All the Presidents’ Lawyers,” the show we hosted for three years. I’m very happy that I finally have an answer.

“Serious Trouble” launches today with its first episode. Fans of “All The President’s Lawyers” will find it familiar but expanded. Josh and I (with the help of our exceptional producer Sara Fay) will be addressing a wide array of legal controversies and dilemmas, each week asking “is this person in Serious Trouble?” We’re moving away from a strict focus on presidential lawyers and their politics to a broader array of legal trash fires. Of course, the show will still cover the fallout from the Trump Administration’s controversies —this week we look at the criminal implications of the January 6 Committee’s presentation. But we’ll also be covering a wide array of civil and criminal cases and trying to explain what’s going on and how media coverage gets things wrong and right. For instance, this week we delve into the Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard defamation trial and discuss reality vs. public perception.

Our new format will permit deeper dives into legal issues and less breaking-news focus. Moreover, we’ll be able to enjoy more audience engagement, both through more listener questions and discussion threads at the Serious Trouble site. The main show will be available wherever you get your podcasts, and subscribers will have access to extra content and engagement. Learn all about it over at the show’s site,

I’m very excited to be working with Josh and Sara again, and to be lawsplaining once again. You’re going to hear a lot of the same questions: did the media get it right in covering this case? What’s the legal standard? Does that standard make sense? How does it work in the real world, as opposed to in the pages of a book? How loudly would you groan if your client did that? Is it RICO (no)? Questions, suggestions, and abuse are welcome as always.

stessier wrote: ↑Thu Jun 16, 2022 1:52 pm The hiatus is over! Ken and Josh from All the Presidents' Lawyers are back with a new pod - Serious Trouble!

Tuesday, state senators removed South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg from office after he struck and killed pedestrian Joe Boever while driving.
...
Attorney General Ravnsborg is the first statewide official to be impeached, removed from office and barred from holding a future office in the state.

The votes came at the end of the first day of Ravnsborg's impeachment trial at the Capitol in Pierre. Ravnsborg attended the proceedings but chose not to testify before the Senate.

gbasden wrote: ↑Sat Jun 18, 2022 11:52 pm

stessier wrote: ↑Thu Jun 16, 2022 1:52 pm The hiatus is over! Ken and Josh from All the Presidents' Lawyers are back with a new pod - Serious Trouble!

I listened to the first episode this week and it was really good. Not a huge surprise given that they were also really good on All the President's Lawyers, but I like the broader focus of the new show.

Jaymann wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 2:13 pm
Second episode is up. I signed up for a free subscription and got notified. They said next ep is pay only.

Isgrimnur wrote:NPR

Tuesday, state senators removed South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg from office after he struck and killed pedestrian Joe Boever while driving.
...
Attorney General Ravnsborg is the first statewide official to be impeached, removed from office and barred from holding a future office in the state.

The votes came at the end of the first day of Ravnsborg's impeachment trial at the Capitol in Pierre. Ravnsborg attended the proceedings but chose not to testify before the Senate.

In a chaotic scene earlier tonight, @ripolcoop's Jennifer Rourke said she was punched in the face at least twice by her senate race opponent and police officer Jeann Lugo. Lugo tells me Rourke became physical with him -- which Rourke flatly denies -- but did not deny punching her

malchior wrote: ↑Sat Jun 25, 2022 6:15 pm I really needed someone to say this. It's sad that it took this level of meltdown to get very serious people to wake up and smell the coffee. Unfortunately, it appears it is likely too late to stop the disaster we were warning about.