More Hillary Clinton E-mails, Will Smith Suggests Anti-Trump 'Cleanse', Martin O'Malley Complains About DOJ Balitmore PD Report: P.M. Links

|

  • State Dept.

    More Hillary Clinton e-mails that reveal the relationship between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department. Will Smith says even though he is "embarrased" by Donald Trump it's "good" to hear him speak because "we get to cleanse it out of our country."

  • U.S. ground troops are in Libya, according to the Pentagon.
  • In the wake of a wide-ranging Department of Justice investigation that found systemic civil rights abuse in the police department in Baltimore, the police commissioner says six officers were fired this year. Martin O'Malley says the report doesn't take his "reforms" into account.
  • A cop in Florida fatally shot a woman while roleplaying a "bad guy" during a citizen police academy session.
  • The Syrian rebel alliance in Aleppo is shifting.
  • The Senate in Brazil voted to approve an impeachment trial for Dilma Rousseff.

Advertisement

NEXT: U.S. Ground Troops Now In Libya

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. [italics]A cop in Florida fatally shot a woman while roleplaying a “bad guy” during a citizen police academy session.[un-italics]

    Too much reality.

    1. You trolling me, Fisty?

      1. [slanty]You trolling me, Fisty?[straight]

        Never.

        1. An anti-Asian slur and straight privilege in the same post? Man, you libertarians are such shitlords.

        2. Well-played, lads.

      2. Worse than fuckin Hitler.

        1. Eva Braun begs to differ.

          1. I dunno, Ted. It wasn’t good enough to stop her from eating a bullet.

            1. I’ll bet she had a bit of sausage along the way.

              1. you’re The Wurst, sorry nicole.

          2. Eva never had to put up with this.

        2. I don’t know. I’ve never fucked Hitler.

    2. Hello.

      1. Greetings, Canadian Earthling.

        1. We pronounce it ‘Erfling’.

          1. The authorities are going to come after you for not pronouncing it “terrien”.

          2. You stole that from Will Smith in the hit film Independence Day.

            “Welcome to Erf.”

            1. Celebrities steal from ME.

    3. Dumb exercise.

      But there’s a best way to do insanely dangerous things: cops don’t bring ammo, third party loads the magazines and the guns.

      There’s this idea that won’t die: that quality can be inspected into a process. Our brains are too flexible and adaptive; we somehow drive over motorcycles we don’t see and we load live ammo…it’s the human condition.

      You might imagine how much I hate and dread quality projects led by idiots, annual performance reviews….anything where the person with power has no idea how random life is and how sneaky our brains are.

      1. “Quality projects led by idiots” is redundant.

        I was once told we had to start phase 2 of a ‘software development re-engineering’ process before phase 1 was complete — where phase 1 was the input to phase 2. I pointed out that this was problematic, got winced at, and told “but we have to.”
        So imagine how good the resulting process was.

        1. I haven’t fought over a timeline since 2001.

          No one cares; when you complain, you’re really just volunteering to work 100 hours per week until their failure to manage is cured.

        2. Stubs are a wonderful thing.

      2. And get a load of the passive voice.

        But when the officer’s gun was fired…

        Was fired. By a ghost, we can only assume.

        1. a ghost in the machine no less.

      3. They make bright blue plastic guns for just this purpose.

        And I have never seen a gun shop owner hand over a gun without first checking the chamber. EVERY TIME.

        1. Same here. I always wince at the number of people who take the gun and don’t check it again, though. And I wince again at the number of people who aim the gun randomly around the shop.

          1. but it’s so funny when they do that in the movies and everybody ducks, fucking killjoy.

      4. Violated the first two rules of firearms safety that every good father should teaches his children at an early age:

        1. Never point a loaded firearm at a target you do not intend to shoot.
        2. Treat every firearm as though it is loaded.

    4. The hosting officers chose two students to role-play a lethal force simulation, a scenario intended to demonstrate how and when officers decide to pull the trigger. Knowlton played the victim, Charlotte Sun photographer Sue Paquin told the newspaper, and a Punta Gorda police officer played a “bad guy.”

      How do you demonstrate LEO use of force criteria when no one in the scenario is playing the cop?

      1. I am pretty sure the little old lady was the “cop” and the cop was the bad guy kicking her ass so that she would better understand the fear of being a cop.

        1. Next time a cop tells you they’re too busy to investigate your annoying burglarized home, just remember that they spend time doing this crap.

          1. You’re lucky you got that response. The last time I made the mistake of reporting a burglary, the cop in charge of investigating it accused my girlfriend and I of perpetrating it.

      2. Knowlton played the victim,

        Oh, this just gets more perfect. He shot the victim in the scenario?

        1. Well, he was the ‘bad guy” Method acting!

    5. Play stupid games. Win stupid prizes.

    6. Has anyone seen my hat tip around?

      1. JUST the tip, sadly.

      2. That was my first thought when I saw the link

  2. howdy

    1. That makes you sound Canadian, you know.

  3. Will Smith says even though he is “embarrased” by Donald Trump it’s “good” to hear him speak because “we get to cleanse it out of our country.”

    You know who else was into cleansing?

    1. West Philadelphia will never be the same.

        1. “Have you seen this man?!”

      1. The Telemonian or the little one?

    2. Benson?

    3. Every New Age and “alternative medicine” person ever?

      1. +1 high colonic

    4. John Harvey Kellogg?

    5. Milosevic?

      1. Slobodan just thought the Kosovars’ ethnicity was a bit dusty.

    6. Radovan Karadzic?

      Also fuck you for oppressing my culture, Reason. ? is totally a legit letter. And so is ?!

      1. At least your culture has an alternative writing system. Mine doesn’t. I’m even more oppressed by Reason!

        1. Did they tighten up on non-Roman characters again? You used to be able to slip a few words in if you had enough text.

          1. I could put the two ‘funny’ characters as standalone above, but when I tried to use them in Karadzic’s last name, it said that it seems to be not written in English script. So I guess ratio of characters is important, as well.

            1. You probably could have left them in Karad?i?’s name; you just would have had to write enough other text that the server didn’t scream at you for it.

              I think I should have written enough in this post by now that those two letters shouldn’t be a problem.

            2. That’s so odd. I’d be really curious to know what the rules are for this. They seem to either be very random or in constant flux. Karad?i?

              1. Back when it was hitting everyone hard, I was able to post a long poem in Welsh.

                **shrug**

                1. Server: “technically English, next.”

          2. I can write ???????? if add enough text in English around it. Grr, and I’m forced to type in English some more.

            1. Interesting. Let me see if it’ll do proper Serbian Cyrillic if I throw enough crap around it:

              ???????

              Parenthetically, the last character I think doesn’t exist in Russian (nor English, for that matter) and is a distinct sound in Serbian from “?”.

              1. We are not truly free until we’re allowed to write exclusively in IPA!

                ??ts ?b?t?r

                1. That’s Better? IPA? Beer? I’m ignorant as you can tell

                  1. International Phonetics Alphabet. Just a bit of phonetics nerdery.

                    1. I think that dictionaries should not be permitted to be published if they use anything else but IPA for pronunciation. The 1st amendment is well and good, but all rights have limits.

                    2. I won’t be impressed until I see some clicks and glottal stops.

                2. You use a voiced dental fricative for the “th”* in that?

                  *Won’t let me use angle brackets, of course.

                  1. I heard Jesse is really skilled with them glottal stops.

                  2. Wait, what should I have used there? ?? That’s crazy man, what English do you speak?

                    1. ?’s a little l??pi in that context, is it not?

                    2. Have to be AFK for a bit…but in the meantime, read this.

                    3. Function words such as the, that, this, then, etc., are assumed to have begun with a voiceless dental fricative in Old English, but their Modern English counterparts have become voiced.

                      Or am I just missing a layer of jest?

      2. Rufus’s Edict.

        NO FUNNY SYMBOLS ABOVE LETTERS.

        It’s too confusing.

        1. How have you not been tarred, feathered and thrown out of Qu?bec yet?!

        2. What about funny symbols below letters, as in the ??

          Note also that the ? is not a funny symbol.

          1. “Note also that the ? is not a funny symbol.”

            ye? it i

          2. BAN IT ALL.

            1. If you ban the ?, how will you get your Schei?eporn?

              1. From jesse, apparently. I’m as surprised as you are.

              2. Ted knows how to stick with the theme.

    7. Turkey?

      1. No thanks. I just had ham.

        1. You mean Canadian bacon, eh?

    8. “You know who else was into cleansing?”

      Hillary Clinton

    9. You mean with like a towel or something?

    10. Tom Cruise?

  4. Martin O’Malley says the report doesn’t take his “reforms” into account.

    And, boy, is he grateful!

  5. EXCLUSIVE: Child rape victim comes forward for the first time in 40 years to call Hillary Clinton a ‘liar’ who defended her rapist by smearing her, blocking evidence and callously laughing that she knew he was guilty

    ‘Hillary Clinton is not for women and children,’ says Kathy Shelton, 54, who was 12 years old when she was raped by Thomas Alfred Taylor in Arkansas
    Clinton was the rapist’s defense lawyer, pleading him down to ‘unlawful fondling of a minor’
    The 41-year-old drifter served less than a year in prison
    The plea came after Clinton was able to block the admission of forensic evidence that linked her client to the crime
    Shelton says she’s furious that Clinton has been portraying herself as a lifelong advocate of women and girls on the campaign trail
    Clinton accused Shelton of ‘seeking out older men’ in the case and demanded that she undergo a grueling court-ordered psychiatric examination
    The presidential candidate later laughed while discussing aspects of the case in a recently-unearthed audiotaped interview from the 1980s

    1. Meh. I can’t get angry about this. He was allowed zealous representation. That’s what she provided. I hate the whole “well when it’s really bad, defendants don’t deserve representation!” narrative that pops up from time to time.

      1. And yet there is a very real ethical dilemma for an attorney to maintain the innocence of a client that they know to be guilty. In that instance, if the attorney can’t work a guilty plea from the defendant, they need to advise the judge that they cannot provide a defense.

        1. Not really. You can’t let your client say he’s innocent (suborning perjury), but you can still defend his rights and make the prosecution prove he’s guilty.

          1. I don’t think anyone would criticize her for doing her job properly.

            It’s all the other shit that had it been, say, Trump (if he was a lawyer)…well, I’ll let you do the math.

            1. It’s unethical as hell for a defense attorney to be telling a journalist that they ‘know” a client of theirs is guilty. Disbar worthy unethical.

              There’s also a difference between providing a zealous defense and laughing about it out of court the next day and mocking the victim.

              She also told the reporter that she got the plea bargain by blatantly lying to the prosecutor about having a star expert witness coming into town.

              The takeaway is that she’s a fucking sociopath. Which might be an ok quality in a defense attorney but definitely not for a president.

          2. Under the circumstances, the defense attorney can say to the prosecutor, “you have not proved X, Y and Z”, what the defense cannot say under the circumstances is “my client didn’t commit this crime.” This is the reason why lawyers are very hesitant to blatantly ask their client if they actually committed the crime, they don’t want to know too much so they won’t have to walk a tight rope to defend them. Clinton though, is on tape acknowledging that she believed he was guilty, she believed it so much that she said she lost all faith in polygraphs after her client passed one.

            And this is more about her hypocrisy of claiming to be the champion of women and girls while zealously defending a client that she herself to believed to be guilty of raping a little girl. It leaves little room to speculate about how she”ll handle moral dilemmas faced as El Presidente.

            1. And this is more about her hypocrisy of claiming to be the champion of women and girls while zealously defending a client that she herself to believed to be guilty of raping a little girl.

              Even rapists have rights, including the right to a fair trial and a fair trial involves a lawyer defending the accused even a person the lawyer knows to be guilty.

            2. Oh, she’d be far, FAR, worse than anything Trump could do.

              I firmly believe that.

              1. I have no doubt about it. It’s time to move to Canada!

            3. This is the reason why lawyers are very hesitant to blatantly ask their client if they actually committed the crime, they don’t want to know too much so they won’t have to walk a tight rope to defend them.

              +1 Better call Saul

      2. Agree about the representation thing. But this will further expose the hypocrisy of feminists who are all about suspending rules of evidence and due process for rape cases.

        1. I wonder how many #BelieveAllVictims will call her a liar?

      3. Agree but the optics would blow for a R candidate. Laughing on tape at a little girl being raped and getting the guy off. It would end any other person’s chances.

        1. of getting elected.

          1. ^This, this, a thousand times this.

        2. Using “optics” in that way is almost as bad as what Hillary did.

      4. The defendant does deserve zealous representation.

        But:
        a) Clinton can choose who her clients are.

        and

        b) She didn’t need to fucking laugh about it.

        1. a) Clinton can choose who her clients are.

          Until the head of the Public Defender office forces her to take the case.

          1. Aw, shit, I thought I closed the italics tag at the end of the first paragraph.

          2. You can choose to quit that.

        2. Oh, but she did. It’s in her nature.

          She’s black in her heart.

        3. a) According to both her and the prosecutor, she was appointed by the judge to represent the guy, and unsuccessfully tried to get out of it.

          b) She laughs about the case destroying her faith in polygraph tests.

          1. No. She laughs about making the victim look like a liar on the stand. Is there any subject you don’t either fuck up or lie about? Why don’t you go back to being your sock puppet? It was sad and pathetic but frankly an improvement over what you usually post.

            1. Uh-huh. Where in the audio does she laugh about that?

              I counted two instances: laughing about the polygraph, and laughing about bringing the forensic expert from NY if the prosecutor tried to use the underwear.

              1. You haven’t read anything. You read Snopes.com and are repeating their talking points. No everyone is as dumb as you are. She laughs all over the tape.

      5. That’s certainly a fair point, but whether you’d want that zealous representation in a position of massive political power is another question entirely.

      6. I don’t think that is the point. The lying and laughing about getting a guilty man off is the telling part. Yes, he should have zealous representation, but not necessarily by a sadistic, lying shitbag.

      7. I can and as someone who has been a defense attorney actually defended a couple of perverts, let me tell you why. The problem here is not what Clinton did to win the case. She was a defense attorney and being a defense attorney is nasty work. The problem is that she laughed about it and was proud of it. It is one thing to do the nasty work necessary to do your job. It is quite another thing to laugh about it and take pleasure in humiliating a young girl who has been raped. That is what Hillary did. And that is why this incident is so revealing of her awful character.

        1. And it sounds like she may have tampered with the evidence as well.

          The prosecution’s case centered around forensic evidence – a pair of blood-and-semen stained underwear worn by Taylor.

          ‘The sad thing was,’ said Clinton, ‘The prosecutor had evidence. A pair of underpants, which was bloody.’

          But, Clinton explained, the crime lab had accidentally thrown away the soiled section of cloth after testing it.

          She took the remnants of the underwear to a renowned forensic expert in New York City.

          He told Clinton there was not enough blood left on the clothing for the defense team to conduct its own independent testing.

          Clinton returned to Arkansas and presented the prosecutor with the famed forensic expert’s biography.

          The story is just too ‘good’ to be true.

          1. To be fair, cops destroy evidence all the time.

            1. So because cops frame innocent people a guilty child rapist should go free?

          2. That isn’t tampering. That’s the client’s right to test the evidence. There have been a lot of cases of the crime labs fcking things up.

            1. An incredibly convenient ‘accident.’

              What is the f-up rate? 5% Sorry, too convenient

      8. I don’t really care about the fact she did her job so much as her laughing about doing her job.

        If you do something horrible but necessary, so be it, you’ve provided a valuable service.

        But if you take GLEE in that necessary evil?? Well, I don’t think you’re fit to have a leadership position.

        1. ^^THIS^^

          It is her attitude about it that is so horrifying. If you have ever been around one of these cases, it just unimaginable how someone on either side could be that callous. That tape of her laughing makes my hair stand on end. That bitch is fucking evil.

        2. “We came, we saw, he died,” she cackled in glee, proud of her role in the brutal murder of the Libyan despot.

          Seriously, she cackled in GLEE. Even more than when she described getting a pedophile rapist off for time served.

          1. Yep. She has a black heart.

            I will be embarrassed to be an American if she is President. Yes, even more embarrassed than if we end up with President Trump.

            She is a contemptible human being.

      9. Yes, she did her job and I have no problem with that. To me, although I haven’t listened to the audio, it’s the laughing afterward that is telling. Why would you sit around after the trial and laugh? Wouldn’t a normal response be (even for a lawyer) to go home and take a shower?

          1. Thanks, I’m glad I listened to that (thanks, too, to Pay Up). It’s not what I was lead to believe. Whatever the anti-Hillalrys say about her, this particular interview is a non issue as far as I’m concerned.

            1. I’d categorize it as one of the few human moments I’ve seen (heard) from her. She’s laughing at the absurdity of the case. Yes, the absurdity does rely on her knowing that the guy was likely guilty, but thinking back on it several years later and how fucked up it was? Everyone here would laugh a couple times in retelling it, even if it was a “terrible case” as she called it.

        1. although I haven’t listened to the audio

          Here you go!

        2. Wouldn’t a normal response be (even for a lawyer) to go home and take a shower?

          Wouldn’t the normal response for, even a dimwitted lawyer, be a flat and toneless recounting of the facts? You know, in case you run for public office or shit gets overturned on appeal or some part of a case otherwise gets swept up in some larger issue?

          1. I finally listened to the audio (see above). I thought this recording took place like a day after the trial — I didn’t know it was just an interview and I didn’t know that the laughter was about the integrity of lie detector tests (which deserve a lot of derision) and an expert witness. I’m against Hillary 100%, but this interview is not the reason for that.

            Question: the interview was in the mid 1980s according to the youtube I listened to. When was the actual trial?

      10. Ok, but in the context of a woman who also zealously defended her predatory husband, it boggles the mind to think she is somehow a defender of women.

        1. This is the better angle, especially if you’re trying to use feminists’ rhetoric against them. If there’s a presumption of trust in a rape victim’s story, then they have to trust Juanita Broaddrick, whose telling implicates Hillary in Bill’s rape.

      11. Meh. I can’t get angry about this. He was allowed zealous representation.

        I can agree on that.

        But, its the whole laughing about it that sticks in my craw. Sure, it’s something that needs doing. Maybe its even your duty as a lawyer to do it. But, I can’t see what kind of person would take any joy in getting a rapist off by smearing the little girl who was his victim.

        There are people out there whose job it is to put family dogs down. But, I can’t muster much respect for someone who would actually like it.

      12. Zealous representation within ethical bounds. If your client is guilty you need to make sure the prosecution actually proves that. You are not ethically obligated to misrepresent the truth in defense of your client. Faking having an expert you don’t have and getting evidence you know is valid thrown out is not ethical.

    2. Oh, this is going to be interesting. [starts popping corn in pot normally used for crab boil]

      1. Add a touch of Ole Bay and share !

    3. She’s a vile, foul woman.

      But it’s better to play holier than thou and go after Trump 24/7 over some stupid comments he makes.

      1. I love how what Trump said about the second amendment is soooo bad. These pearl clutchers should have heard what Thomas Jefferson said about the second amendment!

    4. I’m trying to think of a way to experience schadenfreude, but I don’t want to find myself one day charged with a crime I didn’t commit, only to get a politically-ambitious lawyer soft-pedal my defense.

      So I suppose I’ll have to go with Hillary on this one. If she’s paid to defend the guy, she should defend him.

      1. No. The issue isn’t that she defended a kiddie rapist. Plenty of lawyers defend scum bags and innocent alike. It is the fact that she later laughed about getting a kiddie rapist a slap on the wrist, and now she tries to claim she’s a champion of of women and children.

        1. She didn’t laugh about getting the guy off. She laughed at her epiphany at the stupidity of lie detector tests.

    5. She better be careful, she might shoot herself in the back of the head twice with a rifle.

    6. Meh. I can’t get angry about this. He was allowed zealous representation. That’s what she provided.

      Up to a point, I suppose. The laughing at the re-victim is a little disturbing.

      But mostly, if this got any play, it would throw a wrench into the War on Women and the “believe every woman” tropes.

  6. In the wake of a wide-ranging Department of Justice investigation that found systemic civil rights abuse in the police department in Baltimore, the police commissioner says six officers were fired this year.

    Systemic problems don’t solved with six scapegoats.

    1. Don’t worry, as soon as the union mandated arbitration is complete, they’ll be back on duty.

    2. Systemic problems don’t solved

      Do you smell almonds? Is half your face drooping?

      1. Dammit, Boabain, I raed that corrcetly the frist time, and now yuo’ve riuned it for me.

      2. That was for the speed readers.

  7. So this morning’s lynx brought a story of a Punta Gorda, Florida cop shooting a 72 year old woman during a “training exercise”. It turns out this is the same cop that was sued after allowing his K-9 to maul a man for riding his bicycle without lights. He was also fired from another police force in 2014 for use of excessive force and of course immediately got a job with a new agency.

    1. Don’t let anyone tell you there’s a double standard with cops.

      1. In this case, it’s a very clear cut case of negligent homicide. We’ll see.

        1. I believe the cop was wearing a magical costume at the time. A costume that frees it’s wearer of any ethical obligations to all the non-cop humans.

          1. Well, the cop didn’t shoot anyone. His gun did. And his gun is owned by the government. So this is basically no different than if she tripped and fell at a National Park.

            1. Government is all the old ladies we shoot together.

          2. One uniform to bind them.

        2. it’s a very clear cut case of negligent homicide.

          Crystal clear. Prediction: no charges will be brought.

      2. You have to have a single standard before you can have a double.

    2. And apparently the PM lynx brought that link too. Man I’m slow.

      1. It’s ok, JB. We should link the fuck out of that to keep the outage going.

        1. If the shooting an unarmed guy and then blaming it on shooting at the other, also unarmed, mentally ill guy playing with a toy truck in the street didn’t have any traction why will this? She was practically asking for it by volunteering!

      2. Blame Robby for repeating the lynx.

        [looks up]

        Oh wait, Ed wrote today’s Lynx. I’m sure there’s something to blame Robby for.

          1. I blame Robby for not doing the links.

    3. Procedures…totalities…cop haterz…MORGAN FAIRCHILD!!1!

        1. Powerlifting accident while surfing. His fans, of which there are many since everyone supports the police, are currently nursing him back to health.

          1. nursing him back to health

            Like, “nursing”, nursing?

            1. Women throw themselves at him all the time. He has an understanding with Morgan Fairchild.

            2. Sorry, that was supposed to be:

              Like, “nursing“, nursing?

              I don’t want anyone to miss out misunderstand.

              1. “It’s a bond that no one can come between.”

                I think Warty might have a thing or two to say about that!

            1. There’s only one professional beach bum here.

              1. Nope… I do have the OBX for weekends and longer stays, and Topsail Island for day trips. Been flat most of the summer though.

    4. Punta Gorda

      I know spanish — that means “fat whore”.

      1. It actually is closer to “choad.”

        1. Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers?

    5. So this morning’s lynx brought a story of a Punta Gorda, Florida cop shooting a 72 year old woman

      You’re welcome.

  8. “Will Smith says even though he is “embarrased” by Donald Trump it’s “good” to hear him speak because “we get to cleanse it out of our country.”

    Through scientology?

        1. Jeez that makes me sound like a pregnant manatee.

          1. Don’t know why that made me chuckle so much, but it did.

            +1 water mammal

    1. Donald’s e-meter readings could be interesting given the potential Van de Graaff properties of the hair.

  9. The Clinton link is to CNN. Does that show “intent”?

    1. CNN running the story constitutes permission for the CosmoOp Media to not ignore the story.

      /ducks, runs

  10. Martin O’Malley says the report doesn’t take his “reforms” into account.

    Intentions matter more than results.

    1. His “reforms” are similar to Comp Stat in New York City. You’re not allowed to report anything, so it didn’t happen.

      1. You, Manhattan, are a gaping asshole. We both know this.

        1. Yeah, but you can’t report it.

      2. The Wire covered it pretty accurately.

    2. Do people suddenly give a shit what Martin O’Malley says?

    3. When your intention was to secure a position in Hillary Clinton’s cabinet, they sure do matter!

  11. U.S. ground troops are in Libya, according to the Pentagon.

    But they are wearing combat Crocs, so it’s all good.

      1. I remember reading World War Z a few years back and thinking that the prediction that the US would get bogged down in “brush fire wars” was stupid — no way would the electorate tolerate more of that stuff with what was happening in Iraq.

        Boy was I an idiot.

    1. Ha!

      Obama (cryptically): They’re *technically* not on the ground but walking around on the – how do say? – earth.

      1. Zero boots on the ground. Maybe light steps on some regolith.

    2. Will Smith says even though he is “embarrased” by Donald Trump it’s “good” to hear him speak because “we get to cleanse it out of our country.”

      U.S. ground troops are in Libya, according to the Pentagon.

      Vote Clinton if you want more of the latter.

  12. More Hillary Clinton e-mails that reveal the relationship between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department

    In one instance, top Clinton Foundation official Doug Band lobbied Clinton aides for a job for someone else in the State Department. In the email, Band tells Hillary Clinton’s former aides at the department — Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin — that it is “important to take care of (redacted).” Band is reassured by Abedin that “Personnel has been sending him options.”

    Why the redaction? IS IT PUTIN?!?!?!?!?!

    1. “We need Gilbert Chagoury to speak to the substance person re Lebanon,” Band wrote. “As you know, he’s a key guy there and to us and is loved in Lebanon. Very imp.”

      “It’s jeff feltman,” Abedin responded, referring to Jeffrey Feltman, who was the US ambassador to Lebanon at the time. “I’m sure he knows him. I’ll talk to jeff.”

      Can’t capitalize names, huma?

      The Clinton campaign said Wednesday that Chagoury only wanted to offer insights on the then-upcoming Lebanese election and was not looking for any specific action from the State Department.

      1. Very imp

        Um…HEIGHTIST!!!….?

      2. Can’t capitalize names, huma?

        She’s probably typing it on a (unauthorized, unsecured) Blackberry

    2. Nah, it was Trump. All part of the false flag op.

    1. I’m allergic to monkeys.

        1. What do you give an ape with an AK-47? Whatever it wants.

        2. Youtube posts never disappoint:

          Hector Luna4 weeks ago
          He walked off with the gun like bitch Imma go kill that zookeeper that shot my nigga harambe?
          Reply 73

        3. Monkey see monkey do.even the part about raising one’s arms ( all three of them) in victory.

          I’ve spanked my own monkey a few times but I think I will would give that one some space.

    2. If monkey had gotten control of aircraft and augured in, NTSB would’ve been ‘WTF…?’ listening to the black box.

      Dang it.

      1. Oh, and ISIS would still ‘claim’ it.

    3. I saw a guy in downtown Fort Lauderdale a few weeks back with an emotional support parakeet on his shoulder, does that count?

      1. Was his shoulder lined with the paperwork?

  13. Will Smith says even though he is “embarrased” by Donald Trump it’s “good” to hear him speak because “we get to cleanse it out of our country.”

    You know, when I really want to hear intelligent and well-informed criticism of politicians or the political class, I go to celebrities who are, by their very nature, fundamentally out of touch with reality, trapped in an odorous little bubble called Hollywood where the law, decency, and economics goes to die.

    I will never understand people’s fascination with the New Aristocrat called the celebrity and their vapid insights (and this includes libertarian ‘celebrities’ like Penn).

    1. I will never understand people’s fascination with the New Aristocrat called the celebrity and their vapid insights (and this includes libertarian ‘celebrities’ like Penn).

      Because their insights are (a) usually more intelligible than the “insights” of politicians; (b) they tend to be better trained at delivering their lines (and therefore their insights) more effectively; (c) they tend to be better looking than politicians and normal people, so if somebody is going to be on TV imparting their vapid insights, it might as well be them; and (d) they are familiar.

      Haven’t there always been celebrities?

      1. “(a) usually more intelligible than the “insights” of politicians;”

        That’s not saying anything. It’d be like declaring “I’m a more moral person than Stalin!!” or “I’ve taken less bribes than Hillary Clinton!!”

      2. Because their insights are (a) usually more intelligible than the “insights” of politicians;

        What? Have you hear someone like Gwyneth Paltrow or Samuel L. Jackson talk politics? They’re either completely empty-headed, out of touch or insane.

        Haven’t there always been celebrities?

        Not to the same extent, and not in a manner where you’d ask an actor what their views on politics and treat them seriously. For most of English history the role of ‘actor’ was not something that gave you social standing on matters outside of your profession. Romans viewed actors on the same social level as prostitutes.

        1. Yeh. I highly doubt they can tell the difference between Weber and a Weber.

        2. +1 Sean Penn

      3. Haven’t there always been celebrities?

        Yeah, but until fairly recently musicians and actors were generally regarded as disreputable people in disreputable professions, not intellectual role models.

        Once again, I commend our ignorant and bigoted ancestors for being a lot smarter than our Enllightened? Moderns.

    2. Everyone rants. Some peeps have a better soapbox to rant from than others.

      Besides, without the overexposed Will Smith’s nepotistic narcissism where would be have gotten his hapless clown of an overexposed kid to watch Will Smith’s narcissism crash against that makes me laugh? Laugh like I haven’t since that fat kid fell down back when.

      And that sad scenario looks to have the money and false hope for a decade more of reality-comedy.

      So, like, conservation laws are everywhere, man.

  14. “A cop in Florida fatally shot a woman while roleplaying a “bad guy” during a citizen police academy session.”

    Anyone who brings a gun into a setting where people are training to use weaponry where they actually need to point that weaponry at a person should be horsewhipped. In this case where someone actually died, jail time. It is manslaughter, straight-up.

    1. “It seemed like a good idea at the time.”

    2. Like I said this morning, I’m pretty sure the two most basic rules of handling a gun (please correct me if I’m wrong) are:

      1. Always assume the gun is loaded.
      2. Never point the gun at anything you don’t want to destroy/kill.

      Apparently they *always* use a real gun for this exercise. But it’s usually blanks! The Chief didn’t comment on whether the chamber was actually checked beforehand.

      1. For very young children, the NRA suggests that the three rules are:

        1. Do not touch the gun.
        2. Leave the area.
        3. Tell your parent or a responsible adult.

        Only when the children are older is is appropriate to teach the two basic rules that you suggest.

        Obviously the cop should have stuck with the first three rules.

        1. Why are we letting young children be cops?!?!?!!???!!??!!111!??!

    3. But followed procedure/training. So fix is to futz with procedure/training manual. So the procedures and manual doesn’t do it again.

  15. Ed,
    Great job on the links and the alt-text is freaking awesome. We love you.

      1. DAMN HTML TAGS!

        1. See? We it is. Thanks Lynchpin!

    1. It was a good try, but at most 0.6 Shackfords.

      1. I’m giving him props on account of the Trumpacolypse thread. I like most all of the writers(and Robby) here except for a few.

        1. Yeah, I don’t comment on TrumpThreads, them not being my business in any way, but it was good to see Ed jump in and wrestle with the commenters. Even if I think GILMORE (fuck this Dennis shit) was in the right.

          1. Agreed on both points, Pan.

        2. I like most all of the writers(and Robby) here except for a few.

          I also like everyone except for some people.

          1. You leave my word salad alone mister! *stamps foot petulantly(and causes tremor in surrounding area due my large mass of bacon-ness)

    1. Now we know why the diving pool turned green.

    2. Insisting the algae poses no risk to the athletes, he added: ‘This was because of heat and a lack of wind. We did all the chemical tests,’ and promised, ‘The pool will be blue today.’

      Then he flipped the switch on a giant fan, hoping for electrical power.

    3. I get out of the pool to pee in the pool.

    4. Not me, I like to get out and pee on a bush.

      1. Big fan of ’70s German porn then?

        1. I uh, don’t know what you’re talking about.

          *deletes internet history*

  16. Just finished seaon one of “Stranger Things”. It was quite enjoyable.

    1. On a related note, the entire BECMI series is now available in pdf form over at dndclassics.com

    2. No spoilers. I’m at 8.

    3. It’s excellent. It definitely gets the 80’s setting down pat.

  17. I don’t know if this is BS or not, but I *do* know that y’all will be interested:

    Solar physicist sees global cooling ahead

    1. Heretic! (Him, not you Eddie)

    2. Sounds like a certain SP1.1 non-scientist accidentally becomes carbon credit, and soon.

      -Church of Carbontology

    3. Ahead? Don’t we have increased arctic and antarctic ice this year? We probably have cooling but I wouldn’t advise bracing for a new ice age.

      1. Don’t we have increased arctic and antarctic ice this year?

        I guess you didn’t watch the Olympics Opening Ceremony.
        According to their video presentation (!) in the middle of the choreography and fireworks,
        the Arctic ice is almost all melted away.

        Don’t worry, though, they’re going to solve it all. Each athlete planted a tree seed.

  18. Ready yourselves, Team Bitchy Trump Defenders Who Incessantly Defend His Buffoonery:* Secret Service spoke to Trump about ‘Second Amendment’ remark: report

    The agency has had “more than one conversation” with Trump aides about his rhetoric, the network reported Wednesday.

    Trump aides reportedly told the Secret Service that the GOP nominee did not intend to incite violence.

    The conversation is an unprecedented step for the agency to take with one of its own protectees

    *This is a working title

    1. Did the Secret Service talk to Malia about sparking up a doobie in public?

      1. No, because that was not extremely reckle, uh — never mind.

      2. You know, this is the first I’ve heard of that story. But, given it involves skipping out on Cankles’ ranting at the DNC to smoke at a concert, I say give the girl a pass.

      3. Who do you think she got it from in the first place?

        1. I LEARNED IT FROM WATCHING YOU!

    2. This has to be the most retarded media created gaffe ever. I know they will invent something worse next week. But this one for the moment holds the record.

    3. Its not “defending trump” to point out how facile and stupid the press is in regards to turning every brainfart he emits into CALLS FOR VIOLENCE, etc.

      in this particular angle you’re mentioning…. it seems completely implausible from the very concept of it, and the ‘reporting’ amounts to “CNN Spinning the Fuck out of a random ‘denial‘”

      Elizabeth Landers
      ?@ElizLanders

      MORE: The campaign told US Secret Service that Trump did not intend to incite violence.

      Also = the Secret Service doesn’t police the candidates for their behavior. they don’t comment on things they say nor should they. the provide security. if they thought someone else might over-react and *attack trump* based on some statement, maybe they might note risks, but its not their job to recommend what people should or shouldn’t say.

      this whole setup also reads like an opportunity to simply repeat bullshit claims they made the first time around about how these comments were so unbelievably awful (*because a media over-reaction is self-validating)

      1. Their comments would be in the context of protecting Hillary.

        1. I’m sure time spent with Trump did nothing to actually protect Hillary from anything, so, nope.

      2. Why would you take the bait? Everything surrounding the forced Trump-troversies should be incessantly mocked and ignored. Debating them ad nauseam gives them legitimacy. I think every aspect of the past year has been a depressing joke.

        1. Trump-troversies should be incessantly mocked and ignored

          Isn’t that sort of an either/or proposal?

          1. Yeah, you can either mock it or ignore it, but not both at the same time.

            1. Mocked or ignored, yes. Even the great ones make mistakes.

    4. Did they have a talk with the other candidate back when she tossed a vase at the then-sitting POTUS?

  19. “””””More Hillary Clinton e-mails that reveal the relationship between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department. Will Smith says even though he is “embarrased” by Donald Trump it’s “good” to hear him speak because “we get to cleanse it out of our country.””””

    Now Reason is mega trolling us, they start with a story about Clinton e-mails and then in the same paragraph they bury it with what some actor thinks about Trump.

    1. THAT’S “BALANCE” YOU TRUMPKIN WHINER

    2. How long have you been here? The trolling has been going on for a while. On both sides.

    3. Reverse the order, and there’d be screaming that Trump got top-billing over Clinton.

  20. re: the Somali-American cop reformer running for the Minnesota legislature reported earlier:

    After Philando Castile’s death at the hands of police in the nearby suburb of Falcon Heights, Omar called for a statewide ban on traffic stops for vehicle violations like expired registrations and broken taillights?Castile had been pulled over for a busted taillight before he was shot and killed while reaching for his identification?which she argues give police too much discretion and can be abused to target certain communities.

    This seems imminently reasonable. If you haven’t committed a moving violation and your vehicle does not present a danger, what business do the cops have to stop you?

    1. Especially since they can simply mail you a summons and come into court with the video evidence.

      1. Especially since they can simply mail you a summons and come into court with the video evidence

        What do they do when you don’t show up? If “failure to register your vehicle” is such a minor crime, so is “failure to appear”…

    2. It’s reasonable if you’re aiming only to enforce those particular laws. But pretextual stops are a vital component of the drug war, so that is not a “reasonable” change for drug warrior law enforcement and legislators.

    1. The question is whether this will haunt her in 2036, when (according to my calculations) she’ll be old enough to be elected President.

      1. Won’t that interfere with Michelle’s inevitable bid?

        1. By 2036, Chief Justice Michelle Obama won’t want to run for President.

    2. Leave the childrens out of politics.

      1. But…the voters keep electing them!

      2. Normally, I’d agree with you.

        But here you have someone in the privileged class smoking weed while surrounded by federal agents, and that person’s father enthusiastically locks other people in cages for doing the exact same thing.

        I have a big fucking problem with that.

        This is fair game.

        1. I see your point. Still wouldn’t do it myself and I think it taints the air like Winston’s Mom’s uterus when the media does it.

        2. Bingo. I don’t see her dad doing much about drug laws. And a lot of other kids her age have had their lives ruined for that. This is totally fair game.

        3. Yes, but the counterpoint is that those agents are assigned to protect her, and you don’t need her trying to ditch them.

          Sucks to be them.

          1. They have jobs where they can do whatever they want and not receive punishment or lose their jobs, so it is not that bad.

        4. I vaguely recall a big kerfuffle over one of W’s daughters drinking underage or somesuch.

          Dunno why that would be fair game, and this wouldn’t.

    3. She didn’t inhale!

    4. Malia had an asthma attack when she was a toddler, which President Obama claims is one of the reasons why he champions climate change.

      WTF. That makes no sense.

      1. Someone doesn’t fucking love science.

  21. Nothing sinks that twat. Not emails. Not crooked foundations. Not laughing at rape victims. Not Benghazi. Not…I’ll stop here.

    She’s a virus; a Plantar Wart.

    1. So we need to freeze her to death.

      1. Metaphorically speaking, of course. Freeze her out of politics, put her political career to death.

    2. Have you tried vinegar?

      1. OREGANO OIL.

        I put that shit on everything!

        /Prog.

    3. I know there’s a Warty joke in there, but my brain just can’t complete it. Something about…cure worse than disease?

    4. She’s political AIDS.

  22. Because losing $700 million on the Ghostbusters remake just didn’t signal their virtue hard enough, Hollywood to do an all girl Oceans 11 remake.

    http://ace.mu.nu/archives/365238.php

    1. I know I bitched about it already, but the Ghostbusters remake was really awful.

      At least I only paid $6 for my movie ticket.

      1. Why would you do that? $6 buys you a meal at Chick fil-A.

        1. They are dead to me until they bring back the spicy chicken biscuit for breakfast.

          1. I loved the spicy chicken burrito but Chick Fil-A has determined that Americans don’t want spicy food for breakfast. Spicy food + coffee for breakfast is awesome.

            1. The spicy chicken breakfast burrito was the only item on their menu that I really liked. I’ll shovel some chicken strips in my maw if I need a quick lunch (it’s next door to work), but the spicy chicken breakfast burrito was one of the better fast food breakfasts I’ve had.

              1. You had to light the Playa signal, didn’t you?

              2. Agreed. Sonic has a burrito that’s OK as well (pickled jalapenos make it a little spicy).

            2. I believe they still do the spicy burrito? Or no?

              If not, truly dead to me.

              1. It was a pretty recent change. I think it happened while I was out of town in May.

        2. You failed to calculate the cost of the hood and robe that Chik Fil A customers have to wear.

          1. Yeah, but that pays for itself over time.

          2. All their customers are moslems?

    2. Wait until they tell us how sexist we all are for not going to watch these movies…

      1. I remember the atmosphere around the time I saw “The Hand That Rocks the Cradle” and “Fatal Attraction” and the SJWs (not going by that label back then) criticizing the lack of movie roles for women. I’ll never forget the piece I read that mentioned these two movies, and pooh-poohing the fact that the major roles in these movies were “crazy women.” SO WHAT? The criticism was extra silly because both movies ended with the wives almost gratuitously being the muscle at the end that succeeded in conquering the crazy antagonists.

        1. People and writers HAVE to find something to bitch and moan about. A few years ago a women NY sports writer was calling the NHL to do something about the long OTs because, well, because it was too long for HER. Never mind these things are random and there was no need for any tinkering of any kind statistically speaking. Plus, people DO like long OT’s. Guess what happened? The number of triple and over OT’s dropped.

    3. They may have lost money, but have they gained credibility?

      Imagine the credibility Hollywood would get if they remade Birth of a Nation with an all-black cast?

      1. Make the nation in question Haiti, and the ‘birth’ the slave revolt of 1800s, and I’ll be there opening night!

        I’m serious, Hollywood, you want some good SJW material, it’s sitting right there and you can make whatever the fuck you want out of it. Romance, gritty war movie, torture porn, complex political thriller…

        1. Armed black people, Hollywood says “no thank you.”

          1. Holy Mother of God, there’s actually a new Birth of a Nation

            The Birth of a Nation is a 2016 American period drama film about Nat Turner, the slave who led a slave rebellion in Southampton County, Virginia in 1831. The film is written, produced, and directed by Nate Parker (as his directorial debut), who also stars as Nat Turner. Parker wrote the screenplay and petitioned financiers to invest in the film. It ultimately had a $10 million production budget and started filming in May 2015 in the U.S. state of Georgia. Along with Parker, the film features Armie Hammer, Aja Naomi King, Jackie Earle Haley, Penelope Ann Miller, and Gabrielle Union all in supporting roles. The location used was Savannah, Georgia.

            Fuck yeah, armed black people! I don’t care if it’s preachiest, most woodenly-acted and incompetently directed studio release since Showgirls, I’ll go see it!

            1. I think we’ve talked about this on here before. I really want to see if Nate Parker has the balls to show Nat Turner’s rebels massacring women and children, but somehow I think that’ll go down the memory hole.

              1. From the Vulture review

                Parker doesn’t shy away from the sheer, unquestioning nature of the violence ? he even shows women being slaughtered in their beds. This is discomfiting, grisly stuff, and it’s to the writer-director’s credit that he allows it to remain so without leading us along toward one interpretation or another.

                Now that Fox paid $17.5 million for the rights, hopefully it’ll get wide distribution.

                1. Well I’m sold, I was worried it would be a hagiography that would kick off a stupid culture war argument in the media. Nuance is good.

      2. I don’t think they can afford the rights to Hamilton.

    4. You leave Sandra Bullock alone, you son of a bitch.

    5. You know, I’m OK with that. Ocean’s 11 is a bog-standard heist movie whose big schtick is to get a bunch of celebrities and the let them play off each other for 100+ minutes. Throw in couple plot twists and a double-tripple-cross and you’re done. Unlike Ghostbuster, it’s not like it’s that good that you’ll have hard time matching the original.

      1. Then just make a chick heist film. Can’t these idiots just rip off a movie instead of remaking the same shit?

        1. Done.

          All BLACK-women. Boom. Double points.

          1. My very first, thought, before even clicking the link, was “Queen Latifah is probably in this”. I was not disappointed.

        2. Oh, for sure, but franchising makes things easier.

          Of course it sometimes backfires (hello, I, Robot), but I’m hopeful that actual heist mechanics will be different than Ocean’s 11/12/13.

        3. That’s not how it works in Hollywood nowadays. Everyone’s severely risk-averse after the past couple massive flops of ‘new’ IPs, and the international market is now being heavily influential because movies can now turn a profit even if they fail in the United States. Comic book movies and brand recognition are doing particularly well in this environment.

          New projects either have to be Oscar bait, fairly low budget or have at least one A-list actor. Hence why you get stuff like Ghost in the Shell with Scarlett Johansson, people are whining about her playing an Asian role but that movie wouldn’t even be made without some A-list actress justifying the cost. You want to write a chick heist film? Sure, but good luck getting the studios actually interested in it unless you can make it some actress’ pet project.

          1. As long as Hollywood stays away from Moon Knight. They haven’t reached that level of enlightenment yet.

            1. You can bet that he will be showing up on Netflix soon. If Iron Fist can get a show, anybody can. I’m just waiting for Squirrel Girl to get her inevitable spin off.

    6. That they can only find 8 women to participate in? At least tell me Julia Roberts is playing Ocean.

    7. That they can only find 8 women to participate in? At least tell me Julia Roberts is playing Ocean.

    8. Splash with Channing Tatum as the merman.

      Dirty Rotten Scoundrels with Rebel Wilson in the Steve Martin role.

      1. Dirty Rotten Scoundrels with Rebel Wilson in the Steve Martin role.

        As long as they keep the “testicles just dropped” line.

        1. I wonder if they’ll keep the twist that the ostensible naive target of our experienced conwomen is twice as good as they are and leading them on.

    9. Wait, Ghostbusters cost them $700 million to make and advertise. Jeeze, how is Sony staying in business with a loss like that. The sales so far have only been $150 million for that movie.

      Also, I have no desire to watch a Oceans 11 remake with an all female cast. I like the movies, but not so terribly much that I want to watch a crappy version of them.

      1. Nope. It cost $144 million and it’s said to lose about $70 million. John added an extra 0 by mistake.

  23. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry had been trying to negotiate a ceasefire with Russia that might have broken the siege on eastern Aleppo, but the talks failed. “The end result is American credibility suffers a blow,” Ford said, “the credibility of extremists that we don’t like in Fateh al-Sham goes up, and the Americans ultimately are in control of nothing.”

    Obama should make an Historic deal.

    1. Oh, he did.

  24. Welp. I got a job offer from the interview I went on last week but the salary offered was so low as to not be worth countering. 😐

    1. Lower/higher than $15 min. wage?

      /Cuomo.

      1. A lot more than that but a lot less than what I make now, so I am probably overpaid. Someone bring me an orphan to polish my monocle!

        1. I can offer you one of my spare ones. I’ll trade it to you for a few cartons of monocle polish.

        2. It never hurts to counter. Some companies are just trying to see what they can get away with.

          1. And counter as high as they lowballed low + 10%.

            Im’ drinking so, if they offered 50 and realistic is 100 reply that you were looking for 165 range.

            Nothing to lose if they are serious at 50 and everything to gain if what Playa said they are doing.

    2. “You call *that* a ‘living wage’?!”

    3. Just tell them honestly what you make now and how much would make it worth it to take the risk of switching jobs.

      1. I did that before they low-balled me. I think they thought I was bluffing…

        1. Tell them you’d be willing to accept an offer that’s a dollar more per hour than they first number you gave them. See if they take the hint.

      2. Yes because they are obviously negotiating in good faith.

        /sarc

  25. Stossel to host Libertarian townhall on August 26

    Fox Business’s John Stossel will be hosting a Libertarian Town Hall on Friday, August 26 at 9pm ET. Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson and vice presidential nominee William Weld will be featured in the hour-long town hall.

    The town hall will focus on the differences between the Democratic, Libertarian, and Republican platforms. It will also focus on economic, social, and defense issues.

    1. I’ll be waiting to hear “The Democratic Party’s platform is absolutely wonderful”.

    2. Are they going to invite any libertarians to answer questions? Or is it just going to be the mild-mannered watered down Rockefeller republicans the LP is running this election? 😉

    3. Will Stossel man up and toss a few “Give me a break!” Johnson and Weld’s way?

  26. Mr. Krayewski – Just a quick question, why didn’t you just add another bullet point for the Will Smith / Donald Trump story? Having the story combined (attached) with the ongoing Hillary email scandal story, once again, makes it appear as a “…yes, but…” cop out.

    Hillary does something bad … full stop.

    1. Whaaaat? That’s Kray Kray!

    2. And have 7 bullets in the magazine? What is this, Somalia?

    3. I always put the 2016 election stories in one bullet. The Will Smith story isn’t a Donald Trump scandal, either.

      1. Not that it matters, but I think it’s a very useful thing to have such detailed rules to follow to prevent biases from unnecessarily affecting your writing. Also think it’s very good of you to follow them.

        However, when you decided on this rule versus splitting Clinton and Trump stories, you likely never envisioned two similar headlines sharing the same space.

        I’m not saying you should’ve foreseen this, as no one else would’ve been able to predict this either.

        But, if you can back up to before the decision and envision this scenario, I think you’d agree that the reaction you received is rational and that maybe changing the policy to avoid this might be best.

        Of course you may have other, stronger reasons, for doing it the way you are and if I knew them I might be suggesting to stay as is.

        It’s also completely possible that even if you had split the two, a large percentage of the objections to the way it is now would still exist and be exactly the same.

        Point is only I think the way many are reading this is a logical and foreseeable interpretation and assuming that wasn’t your goal, maybe changing the policy isn’t a bad idea. But with the caveat that I could easily be wrong given my lack of experience doing what you do.

  27. A Long Island Bar’s Age Policy Differs for Men and Women. Is It Legal?

    It is a nightly ritual. Men and women head to the rooftop bar at Kasey’s Kitchen and Cocktails here on Long Island, only to be turned away because they are not old enough. But there is a quirk in the establishment’s policy for its rooftop bar, which states men must be at least 30 and women, just 25.

    The motivation behind the disparity might be fairly transparent to the average bar patron. But is it legal?

    A co-owner of Kasey’s, Anthony Geraci, said that in his bar he could set whatever policy he liked.

    “If you build a house, you decorate it the way you want,” said Mr. Geraci, who opened Kasey’s with Tom McNicholas in 1999. “I could open a bar tomorrow and it could be an over-40s bar.”

    1. Mr. Geraci was partly right, according to Donna Lieberman, the executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, but she said separate policies for men and women amounted to gender discrimination. Mr. Geraci could open an over-40s bar, Ms. Lieberman said, as long as everyone, man or woman, was allowed in at the same age.

      “What we have here is a classic case of gender discrimination that is built on and perpetuates stereotypes from a bygone era,” she said. “And it’s unlawful.”

      1. Donna wants a bar that allows 18 year old boys.

        1. Cougar for the win.

      2. I’m sure the New York Civil Liberties union is all over Curves.

      3. What we have here is a classic case of gender discrimination that is built on and perpetuates stereotypes from a bygone era

        “Drunk 25-year-old men are dicks” is a “stereotype from a bygone era”?

      4. But, erm, isn’t an over-40’s bar ageism in Nazi cake land?

    2. A co-owner of Kasey’s, Anthony Geraci, said that in his bar he could set whatever policy he liked.

      How quaint.

    3. Why would anyone open a bar just for old people?

      1. Because looking at all those attractive young things is hard on the old ticker.

      2. To keep out as many Strong Island meatheads as possible? To keep the university set away from normal folk? It is Long Island, though, so it is not like there is an age limit on heavily tanned douchebags.

        1. If you’re going for a pun, shouldn’t you say Lung Island?

          1. Lawn Guyland.

        2. so it is not like there is an age limit on heavily tanned douchebags.

          +1 gold pinky ring.

      3. To keep attractive young males away so us old farts can try to score without them interfering?

        Same idea as Mormon missionaries I guess.

    4. Since when are 25 year old men a protected class?

      1. Ugh. I’m in the middle of having to do the company annual ‘sexual harassment panda” online training, and just finished the module on protected classes.

        Everyone is in a protected class except 25-year-old males, actually (and even those guys can be protected if they are LGBTQ, handicapped, other races/ethnicities besides european-origin whites, certain religions, etc)

        1. 25-year-old, white, straight, heterosexual males have ages, sexes, sexual orientations, gender identities and ethnic origins…

          Lawsuits are starting to bubble up, and some of them have even been successful under EEOC rules.

          Now whether the sexual harassment speechifier gave a shit that a male employee could be sexually harassed or discriminated against in the workplace is a totally separate matter.

    5. The motivation behind the disparity might be fairly transparent to the average bar patron. But is it legal?

      I thought it was pretty well established that “Ladies’ Night” chicks-only discounts were legal. If so, this ought to fall into the same bucket.

      1. Different impacts. The “ladies night” concept benefits women directly (spend less money). “No men under 25” harms women (fewer bangable dudes around).

      2. If ladies nights are legal, couldn’t those Xtian bakeries have ‘Hetero Days’ 7 days a week where $5,000 cakes were 99% off to keep the gaze away?

    6. The motivation behind the disparity might be fairly transparent to the average bar patron. But is it legal?

      I thought it was pretty well established that “Ladies’ Night” chicks-only discounts were legal. If so, this ought to fall into the same bucket.

  28. A quote from Will Smith in the linked article:

    “In terms of Islamophobia in America, for me, that’s why it’s important to show up,” he said. “I’m in Dubai and I’m having fun and I’m tweeting and I’m showing pictures. Hey, doesn’t look like they hate me does it?”

    What a fucking douche. Last time I looked Will Smith wasn’t poor, wasn’t gay, and wasn’t a women. And Dubai caters to rich westerners. Celebrity liberals are such dishonest loathsome creatures.

    1. I agree. He should send his wife into Iran without a burka and see what happens.

      1. She wears thongs at the beach (which I totally encourage). She should try that in Dubai.

        1. http://www.worldnomads.com/travel-saf…..i-wear-uae

          Apparently they have a dress code that no one enforces on the tourists. Some people are butthurt about it.

          Regardless, bikinis aren’t even banned by the unenforced dress code for women on beaches in the UAE.

          In Dubai she’d be fine, don’t be a fool.

          1. Dubai? The Dubai where a Norwegian woman was sentenced to 16 months in prison for reporting her own rape? The Dubai where the only thing that saved that woman from serving more than a year in prison for the crime of having her vagina be forcefully penetrated by a stranger’s penis was a vocal and unrelenting media campaign until the Emir pardoned her?

            That Dubai?

            1. Do they regularly sf links in Dubai, too?

              1. Yes. They’re that bad.

          2. From your own link:
            “Thongs, Brazillian-style itsy-bitsy bikinis and going topless are not ok.”

    2. He may honestly be unaware that he lives in a bubble.

          1. Lots of time spent at the playground?

            Was there a promise to exchange pheromones in the near future?

            1. There was. But then a couple a guys started to make trouble in my neighborhood. I ended up getting into a fight with them and I spent the rest of my formative years growing up in California. Rough times.

    3. “I’m in Dubai and I’m having fun and I’m tweeting and I’m showing pictures. Hey, doesn’t look like they hate me does it?”

      Try Sadr City, Will.

      That’s like a Saudi Prince going to Beverly Hills instead of Huntsville, Alabama, and saying that he was warmly received.

      1. Huntsville, Alabama

        Of all the southern cities to choose from, you go with Rocket City?

        1. Someone went to Space Camp.

        2. I used to rock climb @ sand rock and drive through Huntsville. People i ran into tended to strike me as patriotic types who would probably share their opinions to any Saudis they ran into. I confess, i could probably have picked a better example for illustration purposes.

          1. Personal experience, but I trained in the Army at Redstone Arsenal @Huntsville, AL and two students in our small class were Saudi. They spent a fair amount of time in town at bars and what not and never reported and serious problems.

            And even though this was pre-9/11, I doubt they would have any problems there today either.

      2. Nangarhar is so pretty, like the people, this time of year..

      3. Wouldn’t Bel Air be a better analogy in this case than Beverly Hills?

  29. One of my parents from China just came in with those suction cup marks on their skin like Phelps.

    Stupidity spreads fast!

    1. Amend that. Pseud-science spreads fast!

    2. You’re half Chinese? *faints*

      1. So I guess this wouldn’t be the right time for my soft-drink-related joke?

      2. He’s half-Chinese, half-Italian, and half-Canadian.

        1. You forgot half-GOD!

      3. Half Chinese Half Irish

        he must drive a HUGE truck

      4. You’re half Chinese? *faints*

        Wouldn’t the wording ‘One of my parents from China’ imply plural parents-from-China?

        Therefore, he must be a third Chinese.

        1. What’s the Chinese symbol for quadroon?

    3. like Phelps

      Can’t tell if joking

    4. I thought cupping was a Chinese thing originally?

      1. Yeah. Phelps is culturally appropriating. So woke. Or not woke… maybe? I have a hard time remembering the meaning of dumbfuck words.

  30. A late entry for today in “Shit JB’s Prog Friends Post”.

    A image from the always wonderful Occupy Democrats (I have them blocked, but it was shared through another manner) talking about how horrible Trump’s statement yesterday was, as follows:

    “Think Trump’s Second Amendment Comment is a Harmless Joke?

    THINK AGAIN. In 2010, Sarah Palin published a “target list”, putting Rep. Gabby Giffords in *crosshairs* for supporting Obamacare. A year later, she was *shot in the head* and six others were killed in a political mass shooting.

    Trump shouldn’t even JOKE about political assassination, PERIOD”

    With the additional text “Political words CAN have deadly consequences, Mr. Trump”

    1. Send them a link to one of those Clinton Body Count websites.

    2. You should have gotten in their face and punched back twice as hard. And if they bring a knife to the fight, you should bring a gun.

      1. +1 get in their face

  31. OK, I listened to part of an NPR article just now where they were talking about voting your conscience. Predictably, neither Stein nor Johnson was mentioned, but lots of hints about writing in candidates. Disclaimer – I missed the first part of the article, but from what I heard it sounded like NPR is all-in for the duopoly.

    1. Laugh line: It’s ok to vote your consience.

  32. it’s not about Clinton’s emails. It’s about her crimes.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.