“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Saturday, May 12, 2018

New York, New York

The Rise and Fall of Shakedown Schneiderman

So his antics finally caught up with him.

The other day, someone who was discussed in this space a couple times way back there in the primordial mists of 2013 suddenly resigned his job as Attorney General of New York. That would be one Eric Schneiderman, who was discussed here in a blog post from August, 2013 titled: “New Obama Scandal Erupts: Trump Targeted.” (In which a meeting between then-President Obama and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman — Trump haters both — was discussed.) Then there was this one, a column titled “Shakedown Schneiderman,” and also another, “The Malversation of Eric Schneiderman.” 

In all of which I had come to the thoroughgoing conclusion that Mr. Schneiderman’s conduct as Attorney General indicated he was, simply put, a fraud — and a dangerous fraud at that. This was no dedicated public servant of the liberal variety. This was someone who, as the words of a leftist columnist for the Village Voice described it, saw his job as being “transactional.” Which is to say — “You do something for me, and I will use the powers of my job as Attorney General to do something for you.”

Mr. Schneiderman had come to my attention as I was reading the public prints and learning that Schneiderman was suing a private citizen in New York named… Donald Trump. The lawsuit was over what was called in the day “Trump University,” a typical organization of motivational-style instructors who were experts in the real estate business. One paid to hear from the speakers and learn the how-to of real estate but then… horrors! — one had actually to go out and do the work. As is to be expected with such a venture, some people succeeded, others failed. So the grousings from the latter group, which was small, were quickly focused on by Schneiderman and suddenly Donald Trump’s name was giving Schneiderman lots of PR as the figurative defender of the little guy.

Having been around the political block, to me, something was, as they say, “rotten in Denmark.” Or Albany as the (frequent) case seems to be. Of all the things going on in New York State — why zero in on someone as hugely successful as Donald Trump? The idea that a billionaire ten times over was trying to defraud a handful of people out of a few thousand dollars made no sense. So, I began to look. In fact, Donald Trump took the time to speak with me directly on the issue. He was indignant. And what did I learn?

I learned that — yes, indeed — Schneiderman had been after Donald Trump for a campaign contribution. Receiving it, Schneiderman was not satisfied. Now the arm was being put on Trump family members — daughter Ivanka and son-in-law Jared specifically. Not satisfied there, Schneiderman was going to Trump Organization staff. And then… the hook.

Still not satisfied with what he was getting from the family Trump, he began to take another approach once elected and actually becoming the sitting attorney general. I wrote this:
Let’s begin specifically by thinking of Donald Trump’s multi-billion-dollar, resoundingly successful company — The Trump Organization — as Khartoum the race horse.
Khartoum the race horse?
You remember Khartoum the race horse. The scene is immortalized in the Oscar-winning film The Godfather.
The rich and famous Hollywood producer Jack Woltz, owner of the $600,000 Secretariat-like race horse Khartoum, refuses to put Mafia Don Vito Corleone’s favored godson Johnny Fontane in a movie. One fine morning, Woltz awakens, horrified, to find the severed head of his beloved race horse — whom he has lovingly described beforehand as “the greatest racehorse in the world” — in his blood-soaked bed. As seen here in the legendary scene from the film version of Mario Puzo’s bestselling novel. Message delivered, Don Corleone’s god son Johnny Fontane gets his movie part from the thoroughly terrified movie producer.
Think of Eric Schneiderman, the Attorney General of New York, supposed progressive “icon of the left” and a wannabe governor — as a dime store Godfather. Vicious, but Vito Corleone without the gravitas.
I went on:
The core of Shakedown Schneiderman’s Don Corleone-style method of operation is captured by the famous line from the Don himself. As Puzo immortalized the line in The Godfather, the Don would get Johnny Fontane the desired movie part in unique fashion, saying of producer Woltz“He’s a businessman. I’ll make him an offer he can’t refuse.”
The offer, of course, was Khartoum’s severed head. The blunt message? Next time it would be Woltz’s head.
What was Schneiderman’s “offer he can’t refuse” to businessman Donald Trump?
In Schneiderman’s own words to Trump’s counsel, as documented in the Trump filing, Donald Trump would be forced to settle the lawsuit Schneiderman was threatening because Trump would not “want all of the bad press.”
As in: Nice business ya got there Mr. Trump. Be a shame if anything happened to it.
To say the least, this kind of thing does not speak well of an Attorney General. I looked further into Schneiderman’s past to discover this:
The AG’s career also depends on Schneiderman keeping his coattails free of corruption charges, which thus far has been dicey. A federal sentencing memorandum on Schneiderman’s ex-State Senate colleague Shirley Huntley prompted Huntley’s attorney, according to the New York Daily News, to allege her client had information “about corruption involving Eric Schneiderman.”
This doesn’t even count the murmurs from Schneiderman’s political base of New York’s hard left that he is, among other things, a “water boy” and “transactional.”
A few weeks later I followed up with another column, “The Malversation of Eric Schneiderman.” In which I reported this:
New York Attorney General Eric “Shakedown” Schneiderman has just been walloped with an ethics complaint.
A long and meticulously detailed 228-page ethics complaint.
Filed by… Donald Trump.
Suffice to say, that ethics complaint was detailed to the max. It was chapter and verse what I suspected — that the transactional Mr. Schneiderman was unhappy he had not gotten the Trump campaign contributions he thought were his due. And so I ended the column this way:
The fix was in for Donald Trump.
And according to the Constitution of New York State?
That is malversation — cause for removal from office.
Your move, Governor Cuomo.
Well, finally, Governor Cuomo moved. Five years late, but he finally did something. Cuomo acted after a major assist from the New Yorker and reporters Jane Mayer and Ronan Farrow, the latter the journalist who uncovered the massive Harvey Weinstein story. Their story is remarkable in the detailed portrait of an abuser of women who was frequently so drunk he couldn’t stand up. The ultimate of empty vessels. Amazing. Yet, it must be said, so terribly predictable to me and certainly to President Trump. 

In fact, the future president had tweeted this in 2013: “Weiner is gone, Spitzer is gone — next will be lightweight A.G. Eric Schneiderman. Is he a crook? Wait and see, worse than Spitzer or Weiner”

As it happens, as I well recall, this tweet came a matter of days after I had spoken with Mr. Trump about this very subject. He was clearly of the view that Schneiderman was a crook and especially angry at the Attorney General for the slimy game being played with Ivanka, Jared, and his staff. And as is so often the case, Donald Trump was unerringly right.

Here we are five years later and there is this as written by Mayer and Farrow, writing about Michelle Manning Barish, one of the women who has come forward with her accusations. Bold print for emphasis is supplied:
Since the #MeToo movement began, Manning Barish has been active on social-media platforms, cheering on women who have spoken out, including those whose accusations prompted the resignation of the Minnesota senator Al Franken, a widely admired Democrat. Once, she made an oblique reference to Schneiderman on social media, in connection with a political issue. He called her and, in a tone that she describes as “nasty,” said, “Don’t ever write about me. You don’t want to do that.” Manning Barish says that she took his remarks as a threat, just as she took seriously a comment that he’d once made after she objected to him “yanking” her across a street. She recalls saying to him, “Jaywalking is against the law,” and him responding, “I am the law.” Manning Barish says, “If there is a sentence that sums him up, it’s that.”
In other words? In other words this was the pattern of Schneiderman’s transactional approach to his job as Attorney General. He was the law, and he would use the law to get what he wanted. What did he want from Donald Trump? Money — and if not enough money he would use Trump and the Trump family to get publicity by going after Trump with the powers of the New York Attorney General. What did he want with Ms. Manning Barish and the other women? Sex. And if they stood up to him — as did Donald Trump — they would be reminded by Schneiderman: “I am the law.”

This was a person seriously unfit for public office of any kind. He abused his office and the public trust just as he abused women.

The real question here? As with Harvey Weinstein, it simply isn’t possible that Schneiderman was conducting himself in this fashion and people did not know. In the Schneiderman case, Albany was Hollywood. The idea that Governor Cuomo, the leaders of the State Legislature, New York City Mayor de Blasio and others (where was the New York media???) were clueless about Schneiderman’s problems doesn’t even come close to passing the smell test. Cuomo is frequently mentioned as a possible candidate for president. If that comes to pass, the Schneiderman episode is surely going to cause him a problem of the “what did you know and when did you know it” variety.

Is this a tragedy for Eric Schneiderman the human being, and his family? Of course. He will spend one very long time dealing with this — possibly the rest of his life — with no small irony being that he will find out that no, actually, he is not the law.

In the world of cosmic justice? Eric Schneiderman may be going to jail.
And Donald Trump is President of the United States.


  1. If nothing else, listen to the last 30 seconds of the video.

  2. Wonderful name, Schneiderman.

    He should spell it with two n's though - Schneidermann.

  3. Trump U is right up there with Harvard Business School.

    1. The Donald was right about the housing market.

      The students would have made a bundle if they had listened to The Donald.

  4. Pretty Woman was a Hollywood fantasy. Whores rising above their status in life happens once in a while. Pamela Harriman was the latest in a long line of democRAT whores and Hillary Clinton mentioned that she wanted "to be the next Pamela Harriman." I wonder what she meant?

    It's a given that whores are illogical and Kamala Harris is nothing more than an ideological, democRAT whore. Her 'sugar-daddy', mentor and guiding hand since high school has been the octogenarian, Willie Brown, former Mexifornia Assembly Speaker and San Francisco Mayor.

    Allegedly being a Berkeley bottom-feeder graduate is all one needs to know about Kamala Harris' claim to fame. Two other 'glittering jewels of colossal ignorance' who graduated from Berkeley Law are Lance Ito (OJ infamy) and Mexifornia's current governor, Moonbeam. Does that tell you anything about Berkeley's status as a 'law school?'

    Waterboarding is something every politician should undergo so that they know what it is and what it isn't. It isn't torture.

    Mary Jo Kopechne is the only person known to have died from waterboarding and that was in the back seat of Ted Kennedy's car.

    1. .

      aterboarding is something every politician should undergo so that they know what it is and what it isn't. It isn't torture.



  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

  6. The insinuation that President Obama might have in any way considered acting on his animus toward Donald Trump leaves me feeling slightly more nauseous than James Comey felt.


    VIP packages for the Clinton Foundation's upcoming gala are going for $100,000, as the controversial charity appears ready to reemerge after laying low following the 2016 presidential election.

    The event, set to take place in New York City on May 24, is offering premium packages for up to $100,000, which include a table of 10 and "invitations to the Clinton Foundation Annual Briefing," Page Six reported Thursday.

    Tickets to the glitzy benefit—which will feature musicians Shaggy and Sting, who have recorded a reggae album together—start at $2,500.

    Axios first obtained a copy of the invitation, which features photos of Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton.

    The gala is set to occur after the Clinton Global Initiative, a branch of the foundation that had hosted an annual conference of prominent leaders, laid off 22 employees last year. The initiative was also shut down last year.

    For the Clinton Foundation, the gala will hopefully be a turnaround, after the charity underwent intense scrutiny during the 2016 campaign, when Hillary Clinton was running for president. The foundation was criticized for taking millions from foreign countries, and on the campaign trail, Hillary Clinton faced questions about the pay-to-play allegations surrounding the family charity. The former secretary of state was accused of giving Clinton Foundation donors special access to the State Department during her tenure there.

  8. Two former Obama administration officials suggested in a New York Times op-ed published Thursday that European countries allied with the United States could expel American ambassadors in retaliation for President Donald Trump withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal.

    "Europe Doesn't Have to Be Trump's Doormat," wrote Steven Simon and Jonathan Stevenson. Simon served as the National Security Council's senior director for the Middle East and North Africa, while Stevenson served as the regional director for political-military affairs.

    "After months of swaggering hesitation, President Trump finally announced the United States' withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran, to which Britain, France, Russia, China, Germany, and the European Union are also parties," they wrote. "This action tramples on European leaders, who urged Mr. Trump to exercise restraint in the interest of international security and multilateralism."

    The two men urged European countries to go beyond "mere words" and counter Trump's withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal with real, concrete actions.

    "The European Union could, for instance, announce the withdrawal of member-states' ambassadors from the United States," they suggested. "Isn't this what states do when diplomatic partners breach solemn agreements, expose them to security risks and threaten to wreak havoc on their economies?"

    1. Obama could be reinstated as President after returning from a trip to the Red Planet, but I doubt it.

  9. The Democratic message has been reduced to Russia and Stormy Daniels.

  10. At 4 minutes, Kamala and Kelly exchange due respect.

    Kamala's face is priceless.

  11. Replies
    1. She's an ass hole. She's also a Tamil:

      Harris was born on October 20, 1964 in Oakland, California to a Tamil Indian mother, Shyamala Gopalan Harris (1938–2009), and a Jamaican father, Donald Harris. Her mother was a breast cancer researcher, who emigrated from Chennai (then Madras), Tamil Nadu, India, in 1960,[7][8] and her father a Stanford University economics professor, who emigrated from Jamaica in 1961 for graduate study in economics at University of California, Berkeley.[13] Her name, Kamalā, comes from the Sanskrit word Kamala ("Lotus"), another name of Lakshmi, the Hindu goddess of prosperity, whose seat is a lotus flower. She was extremely close to her maternal grandfather, P. V. Gopalan, an Indian diplomat,[8][14] and as a child she frequently visited her family in Besant Nagar, in Chennai, Tamil Nadu.[15]

      She a natural born American citizen. Parents were immigrants.

      On my mom's side we were in what is now Virginia in the late 1600's, same century in which Shakepeare died:

      Birth and death of William Shakespeare celebrated - Apr 23, 1564 ...
      Historians believe Shakespeare was born on this day in 1564, the same day he died in 1616. ... He became an alderman and bailiff in Stratford-upon-Avon, and Shakespeare was baptized in the town on April 26, 1564. ... According to tradition, the great English dramatist and poet William ...

      Kamala, who used to fuck Willie Brown:

      Willie Brown (politician) Willie Lewis Brown Jr. (born March 20, 1934) is an American politician of the Democratic Party. Brown served over 30 years in the California State Assembly, spending 15 years as its speaker and later served as the 41st mayor of San Francisco, the first African American to do so.

      seems to believe she is here to instruct people like me how to live a proper American life.

      She's an asshole, tough on torture, easy on killing children in womb, wanting the state to pay for abortions.

      She's nauseating.

    2. May 12, 2018
      The Tortured Logic of Kamala Harris

      By Daniel John Sobieski

      The question of whether torture is immoral does not have quite the yes or no answer that California Senator and posturing Democratic presidential wannabe Kamala Harris implied it had during the questioning of CIA nominee Gina Haspel....

    3. .

      It's funny (not ha ha funny) that everything comes back to race and immigration with you dolts.


    4. No it doesn't.

      In this instance it comes back to enhanced interrogation techniques, the meaning of the word torture, a dispute about how best protect ourselves from savages, and abortion.

      I like people from India unless moslems. The Tamils have little extremism now and then in places but it's nothing to do with race.

      I like the Hindus. They were on to this a long long time ago:

      Can Integrated Information Theory Explain Consciousness?
      By Adam Barrett
      May 12, 2018
      Can Integrated Information Theory Explain Consciousness? Pixabay

      Understanding the biology behind consciousness (or self-awareness) is considered by some to be the final frontier of science. And over the last decade, a fledgling community of “consciousness scientists” have gathered some interesting information about the differences between conscious and unconscious brain activity.

      But there remains disagreement about whether or not we have a theory that actually explains what is special about the brain activity which produces our miraculous inner worlds.

      Recently, “Integrated Information Theory” has been gaining attention – and the backing of some eminent neuroscientists. It says that absolutely every physical object has some (even if extremely low) level of consciousness. Some backers of the theory claim to have a mathematical formula that can measure the consciousness of anything – even your iPhone....

      though they didn't explain it in modern terms....

      I just don't like HER.

      And I don't like her assuming she has a gift of explaining to me how things ought to be done here.

      She's one of these virtue signalers,a like you, assuming she's right on all things.

      I don't think she really knows a damn thing about the United States.

    5. And what is this nonsense about these lefty women running around in pink pussy caps >

      I think it's utterly stupid, and disgusting.

    6. There is an interesting 10 minute video with a couple of brain scientists in the article:

  12. How a Febrile Press Whipped Up Anger At Trump, for Nothing

    By CONRAD BLACK, Special to the Sun | May 9, 2018

    The New York Times’ list of questions that the special counsel wishes to put to the president is a farrago of psychometric inquiries into mood, motive, and opinion that has almost nothing to do with the original canard about Trump-campaign collusion with Russia. Unlike the cases of the Watergate, Iran-Contra, and Whitewater special prosecutors, there was no prior fact of a crime here.

    Nor has any emerged in the year since Robert Mueller was nominated as special counsel in an already long-going investigation, except the very probable untruthfulness under oath of former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, former directors James Comey (FBI), James Clapper (NIA), and John Brennan (CIA), and probably Hillary Clinton and others. Mr. Mueller gives no hint of pursuing anyone but Trump and his collaborators, and right to the last week has packed his investigative team with rabid anti-Trump partisans.

    The press’s febrile animosity to the President has caused them to try to whip up public anger over an astonishing sequence of nothing-burgers. The latest to be debunked are that nasty comments about Kim Jong-un would lead to war and that threatened tariff increases would generate a general trade war.

    There were desperation lunges at the Logan Act (when Mr. Trump was president-elect, and forgotten now that John Kerry might be infringing it); obstruction, though no one has been obstructed; and punch-drunk Watergate myth-maker Carl Bernstein’s “constitutional crisis” over Trump’s “mental incapacity” and the use of the 25th Amendment.

    During droughts of matters to lament or magnify, unattributable reports sprang up like green shoots that the president’s advisers and cabinet thought him a (coarse adjective omitted) “moron” or “idiot.” Now it is the unutterable foolishness about Stormy Daniels, an ingenuous woman whose charm is mitigated by her terribly obnoxious lawyer, whom the Democrats have turned into a press star.

    The president encountered her one evening ten years before the election and no misconduct is alleged. He pays his counsel for the work they do and out-of-pocket expenses, and the effort to turn this into an illegal campaign contribution reaches a new depth in Trumpophobic improvisation.

    Perspective is needed to judge the trends in this seething struggle between Mr. Trump and his bipartisan enemies and most of the national press. Mr. Trump is winning. Donald Trump declared war on the entire political class, “the swamp,” and as all the world knows, he was nominated and elected, and after many months of complete indifference from the Republicans in Congress, he has completely taken his party over and has the Republican members of Congress in lock-step behind him.

    1. The Never Trumpers are retiring in dozens, led by Messrs. Ryan, Flake, Corker, and the ailing John McCain (who helped stoke up the Russian-collusion fraud and called Mr. Trump’s Arizona supporters “crazies”). The president has risen fairly steadily in the polls to between 45% and 50%, and ahead of where President Obama was eight years ago, despite the most intensive press sandbag-job since that which overwhelmed Richard Nixon in 1973–74.

      Support for the Mueller investigation is steadily declining. The president’s approval rating is more than twice that of Congress and almost thrice the press’s. The White House Correspondents Dinner last week was a self-destructively embarrassing disgrace.

      Trump’s main policies are succeeding: All economic indicators are favorable except possibly work-force participation. GDP per capita and real middle- and working-class income are rising with public confidence. Eighty-three percent of American individuals and families and 100% of profitable companies have lower tax rates, while the CBO reports record tax receipts in April.

      North Korea is making serious gestures to avoid a confrontation, the Chinese have entered wide-ranging trade discussions to avoid tariff increases, and the NATO allies are raising their military contributions to the Alliance. Trillions of dollars of profits are being repatriated. Illegal immigration has been sharply reduced (Democrats will have open borders, sanctuary cities, and objections to citizenship questions by census-takers hanging around their necks like a toilet seat).

      The anti-Trump coalition is cracking: Jeff Greenfield, David Brooks, and the editors of National Review and Commentary are all inching toward retention of their disapproval of Mr. Trump morally and culturally while acknowledging that he is at least partially successful.

      The Mueller special-counsel investigation is a fiasco. Attorney General Sessions having recused himself (he should now be able to come back), the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, appointed Mueller after the president fired James Comey as director of the FBI, on Mr. Rosenstein’s recommendation; Mr. Comey leaked to the New York Times memos he had written to himself, whose accuracy is contested, which were government property, and some of which were classified, in order to provoke appointment of a special counsel into Russian interference in the 2016 elections, although Mr. Comey acknowledged that Mr. Trump was not suspected of wrongdoing and had not hampered the investigation.

    2. Mr. Mueller had many conflicts, including his relations with Messrs. Rosenstein and Comey. Mr. Rosenstein has allowed an egregious departure from the special counsel’s mandate, as was severely criticized by federal judge T. S. Ellis III in Virginia in the Paul Manafort case on Friday (about matters that occurred long before Mr. Manafort knew Mr. Trump). In order to give cover for Mr. Mueller’s pre-dawn raid into Mr. Manafort’s home with agents with drawn guns, snapping handcuffs on Mrs. Manafort, Mr. Rosenstein expanded the mandate retroactively but has tried to conceal the new terms.

      Having indicted a bunch of Russians in the certain knowledge that they could not be brought to justice, Mr. Mueller has been completely outmaneuvered by one of the Russian corporate defendants, Concord Management and Consulting, that wishes to go to trial and demands the production of Mr. Mueller’s evidence. Mr. Mueller is now backpedaling and trying to delay matters with the ludicrous claim that the company had been improperly served.

      Messrs. Sessions, Rosenstein, and Mueller all deserve to be fired, and Mr. Mueller appears to wish that, as the last chance to embarrass Mr. Trump politically. The president is wise to leave them, as they are sinking anyway, and unless Mr. Mueller backs down, the last battle will probably be over a subpoena of the president — before the Supreme Court, where the evidence of the unprofessional and unconstitutional conduct of Trump’s enemies will be unanswerably adduced.

      (The spotlight may come on Mr. Mueller finally, especially over the Deegan and Anthrax scandals, where men known to be innocent were imprisoned and a man who was probably innocent was driven to suicide; and over his and Mr. Rosenstein’s curious conduct in the Uranium One affair, in which the Clintons were involved but not seriously pursued.)

      The most surrealistic element of all is James Comey’s book tour. Proud of having assured the president that he (Mr. Comey) was not a leaker or liar and did not make “weasel moves,” he explains endlessly on television that he withheld from Mr. Trump the fact that the Clinton campaign paid for the Steele dossier. He is in public disagreement with his own former deputy and some agents, and many of them are implicated in false Foreign Intelligence Surveillance warrants against a junior Trump-campaign worker.

      Yet Mr. Comey still expected and asked to keep his job. He feels guilty about minor social untruths of his youth, but is blind to his complete ethical breakdown in a great office of national security: profound dishonesty tempered by what Victorians called obsessive scrupulosity. Inspector General Michael Horowitz, in his next report expected imminently, will probably send him down the road to the grand jury as he did his former deputy, McCabe.

      It is shaming to be so self-interested, but my publisher, Regnery, has insisted I mention my book, ”Donald J. Trump: A President Like No Other,” which will be out next Monday and which the National Review online is graciously excerpting. (I apologize for my gaucherie; being an author imposes indignities.)

      It is easy to find Donald Trump distasteful. Those who do, though, should not only recognize the emerging correlation of forces and the President’s policy successes, but be aware also that before he was president, he accomplished more than any previous occupant of that office other than Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Grant, and Eisenhower. The longer his enemies try, in their snobbery and partisan spite, to criminalize policy differences, the more bone-crushing will be their defeat. They have sown, and they shall reap. From National Review.

    3. I think the IG Report has been delayed a bit longer as he is integrating some new information into his, I hope, recommendation of indicts against some of these assholes.

      Comey, for instance.

      Informed opinions I have read think it is entirely possible.

      And, a Federal District Judge really gave a Mueller representative a dressing down in Court the other day.

  13. I do sincerely hope that Kamala Harris is the Democratic choice to run against Trump.

  14. Can Trump possibly be that lucky?

  15. It could only get better if Michael Avenatti runs as VP.

    1. :)

      He owes, among other debts, a huge amount to Uncle Sam for back taxes.

      He invested heavily in the New York cab industry, his investment, with the coming of Uber, totally falling out from under him.


    2. Oops, it was Cohen that bought into the cab business.

      Here is Avenatti's investment:

      In 2013 Avenatti formed a company, Global Baristas, to buy Seattle-based Tully's Coffee out of bankruptcy.[35] Avenatti first formed a partnership with actor Patrick Dempsey, but Dempsey later backed away from the venture after a short legal battle.[36] In his suit, Dempsey alleged Avenatti told him Global Baristas had enough money to operate Tully's but Dempsey discovered Avenatti had taken out a $2 million loan and leveraged Tully’s assets as security; Avenatti settled.[37]

      Both Cohen and Avenatti are crooks.

    3. Neither are doctors, like Dempsey.

    4. Hillary is a bigger crook than Trump even.

      Hillary is really really looking shitty lately.

      She's back on the sauce, too.

      The Donald doesn't drink.

      There's that.

  16. Cynthia Nixon: The Pot Industry Could Be A Form Of Racial Reparations

    “Now that cannabis is exploding as an industry, we have to make sure that those communities that have been harmed and devastated by marijuana arrests get the first shot at this industry,” Nixon told Forbes in an interview last week. “We [must] prioritize them in terms of licenses. It’s a form of reparations.”

    “The reality is that for many white people, marijuana has effectively been legal for years,” Nixon has wrote on her website. “It’s time to legalize it for everyone else. We have to stop putting black people in prison for something that white people do with impunity.”…

    Rev. Al Sharpton says he agrees with legalizing marijuana, but “putting pot shops in our (Black) communities is not reparations” and adds the community should receive first dibs on “education and healthcare” instead....

  17. King of Queens

    On Friday’s “PBS NewsHour,” New York Times columnist David Brooks stated that his views on President Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran deal are “very mixed” and President Obama’s argument for the deal has been disproven by time. He further stated that based on his handling of North Korea, President Trump possibly understands thuggish rulers “better than people who have higher SAT scores.”

    Brooks said the president “comes from a background where basically, in the real estate business, he worked with a lot of thugs, and he cultivated a lot of thugs, and he was a little thuggish himself. But, in my view, that helps him, for all his drawbacks, understand thugs. And so North Korea, he understood that being tough with a thug produces some results. And we’ve had — we’re in a better situation with North Korea than we were otherwise.”

    Brooks added that while he has “very mixed views” on whether withdrawing from the Iran deal was the right move, “President Obama, the argument he made for it, which was that Iran would moderate and become a more familiar member of the company of nations, that has turned out to be clearly false. They are the most genocidal nation on the face of the earth. They export violence and terror around the earth. And so Trump standing up to them at least has some legitimacy. It’s possible that he understands people like that better than people who have higher SAT scores.”

  18. Notice who the undolted dolt upon.

  19. They have to look in the mirror to see the smartest man in the room.

  20. Steven Crowder waterboarded 4 times for Christmas.

  21. I have a meeting with a realtor next week.

    I'll print this out and give it to him:

    Brooks said the president “comes from a background where basically, in the real estate business, he worked with a lot of thugs, and he cultivated a lot of thugs, and he was a little thuggish himself. But, in my view, that helps him, for all his drawbacks, understand thugs. And so North Korea, he understood that being tough with a thug produces some results. And we’ve had — we’re in a better situation with North Korea than we were otherwise.”

    I'll tell him to get in there and be uber-thuggish, and ask if he's read The Art of the Deal.

  22. Good Grief !

    I've been watching MSNBC - Ralph Nader is still kicking !

    Of course he says it's the worst most corrupt administration in our history.


  23. NOT FUNNY: Kimmel Says America Tired Of Trump Bashing....DRUDGE

    That's ALL MSNBC has done all day long.

  24. Senator 'Steel Trap Mind' Grassley -

    May 12, 2018

    Senator Grassley appears to be preparing to bust the frame-up of General Flynn

    By Thomas Lifson

    Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa, the laconic Midwesterner with a steel trap mind, dropped a bombshell yesterday with a letter (the full letter appears below – pdf here) to Deputy A.G. Rod Rosenstein (who supervises the Mueller probe) and FBI director Christopher Wray. But in keeping with Grassley's style, which has so often misled his opponents into overconfidence, you have to read between the lines to see where he is heading. The end point: uncovering the plot to frame General Flynn for lying to the FBI, including likely criminal acts by senior members of the FBI.

    Recall that facing financial ruin, and threats to prosecute his son on unrelated charges, General Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, yet James Comey told the Grassley Committee in a briefing:

    [T]he FBI agents who interviewed Lt. General Michael Flynn, "saw nothing that led them to believe [he was] lying." Our own Committee staff's notes indicate that Mr. Comey said the "agents saw no change in his demeanor or tone that would say he was being untruthful." Contrary to his public statements during his current book tour denying any memory of those comments, then-Director Comey led us to believe during that briefing that the agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe he intentionally lied about his conversation with the Ambassador and that the Justice Department was unlikely to prosecute him for false statements made in that interview. In the months since then, the Special Counsel obtained a guilty plea from Lt. General Flynn for that precise alleged conduct.

    Comey has since changed his tune, in "a Fox News interview in which he denied he ever told lawmakers that he did not believe Michael Flynn lied."

    General Flynn's sentencing has been delayed repeatedly, as Judge Emmett Sullivan (who replaced Judge Contreras after he was removed from the case) has demanded that all exculpatory evidence be handed over to him.

    Grassley is now demolishing the excuses that the FBI and DOJ have used to deny the same evidence to his committee:

    The Department has withheld the Flynn-related documents since our initial bipartisan request last year, citing an ongoing criminal investigation. With Flynn's plea, the investigation appears concluded. Additionally, while we are aware that the Special Counsel's office has moved to delay Lt. General Flynn's sentencing on several occasions, we presume that all related records already have been provided to the defense pursuant to Judge Sullivan's February 16, 2018 order requiring production of all potentially exculpatory material. Thus, although the case is not yet adjudicated, the Committee's oversight interest in the underlying documents requested more than a year ago now outweighs any legitimate executive branch interest in withholding it. So too does the Committee's interest in learning the FBI agents' actual assessments of their interview of Lt. Gen. Flynn, particularly given the apparent contradiction between what [then-director] Comey told us in March 2017 and what he now claims. Accordingly, no later than May 25, 2018, please provide: 1. The information requested in our February 15, 2017 letter, including the transcripts of the reportedly intercepted calls and any FBI reports summarizing them; and 2. The FBI agents' 302s memorializing their interview of Flynn and 1A supporting docs, including the agents' notes[.]

    1. The killer bombshell is the final paragraph, in which Grassley at long last reveals the name of the other FBI agent present when Peter Strzok interviewed General Flynn about his conversation with Russian ambassador Kislyak and requests an interview with him by committee staff members:

      [P]lease make Special Agent Joe Pientka available for a transcribed interview with Committee staff no later than one week following the production of the requested documents[.]

      As Sundance of Conservative Tree House points out, "it's likely Chairman Grassley outed the name for a very specific reason."

      And what might that reason be? Sundance reminds us of previously released text messages between the lovebirds Peter Strzok and Lisa Page:

      Regarding the "widely held belief" that Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe told the FBI agents (Strzok and Pientka) to shape their FBI reports of the interview (FD-302's) to assist a "Flynn lied" narrative…. evidence of that is within the most recent text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok:

      ♦January 23, 2017, the day before the Flynn interview, Lisa Page says: "I can feel my heart beating harder, I'm so stressed about all the ways THIS has the potential to go fully off the rails." Weird!

      ♦Strzok replies: "I know. I just talked with John, we're getting together as soon as I get in to finish that write up for Andy (MCCABE) this morning." Strzok agrees with Page about being stressed that "THIS" could go off the rails…(Strzok's meeting w Flynn the next day)

      ♦Why would Page & Strzok be stressed about "THIS" potentially going off the rails if everything was by the book?


      It was a conspiracy to entrap Gen Mike Flynn. All Strzok needed was an excuse to speak w Flynn. Everything in the 302 was likely fabricated.

      ♦February 14th, 2017, there is another note about the FBI reports filed from the interview.

      Peter Strzok asks Lisa Page if FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is OK with his report: "Also, is Andy good with F-302?"

      Lisa Page replies: "Launch on F 302".

      And he reminds us that previously, on September 10, 2016, Strzok texted about withholding 302s that he called "VERY inflammatory"

      So Andrew McCabe was "good" with the F-302, meaning there was some issue with them. Fabricated, as Sundance believes? A blogger calling himself "Stealth Jeff" writes:

      [T]he fact that Grassley has now gotten the go ahead to publicly reveal this FBI agent's name is HUGE.

      The endgame is approaching. They can reveal who their whistleblower is because it's too late. The IG reports on the Clinton Email fiasco and the FISC Court scheme are dropping any day now.

      After that, when the public has digested them, the indictments are unsealed.

      FBI Agent Joe Pientka ALSO filed a FD 302 form following that interview with Michael Flynn.

      Now Grassley is demanding to see both his & Strzok's FD 302 forms from that interview.

      And he's going to get them.

      Make no mistake: if 302s were altered and Agent Pientka testifies to that, people are going to jail.

      Complete Grassley letter:........

    2. Now Grassley is demanding to see both his & Strzok's FD 302 forms from that interview.

      And he's going to get them.

      Make no mistake: if 302s were altered and Agent Pientka testifies to that, people are going to jail.

      The bastards framed Flynn to try to get him to flip someway on The Donald.

      Jail all the bastards.

    3. The endgame is approaching


      Good ol' laconic steel trap minded Grassley !

      Bye bye Peter Strzok....

    4. Peter Strzok and Lisa Page and their spouses–photos – The Bull ...

      Feb 8, 2018 - FBI agents Peter Strzok and his mistress Lisa Page have been in the ... Strzok's wife is Melissa Hodgman who has worked at the SEC since ...


  25. Notice on Dick Morris Youtube account:

    This account has been terminated due to multiple or severe violations of YouTube's policy against spam, deceptive practices, and misleading content or other Terms of Service violations.

    1. :)

      I think I could believe that, maybe.


    2. .

      Google does not censor right wing speech.


    3. Google censors toe suckers.

      misleading content

  26. Adultery

    One of the biggest surprises came in the public reaction, not toward Morris but his wife, Connecticut lawyer Eileen McGann. McGann did what wives have almost always done in such situations, which was to announce that she was sticking with her husband, and erect a shield of privacy to deflect more detailed questions. But what was widely regarded as the decent and considerate thing to do in years past now struck many American women as letting down the side in the gender wars. For the first time, McGann explains her reactions and reasons in an exclusive interview with Newsweek's Eleanor Clift (box).

    The Morris scandal also illuminates a shift in how many Americans view issues of marriage and fidelity. In carnal terms, it was hardly the most lurid of affairs, despite reports that Morris had enlivened his hours with Rowlands by sucking on her toes....

    "The great experiment of my generation was that people tried to abolish jealousy," says Erica Jong, the siren of sexual liberation in the 1970s, now older (54) and, she believes, wiser. "It never worked. The desire to be monogamous is more pragmatic than ethical... We renounced the idea of sexual freedom because it doesn't work."

  27. Fake News: Mueller probing FOREIGN donations to TRUMP campaign but never investigated OBAMA’S MILLIONS from foreign donors and GAZA

    By Pamela Geller - on May 12, 2018


    In 2008, I broke the groundbreaking news story of a massive network of foreign entities (some terror-tied) donating to then candidate’s Barack Obama’s campaign. I wrote extensively on it and devoted chapters to it in my first book, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America. No media covered it, no federal agency prosecuted it.


    I submitted everything to the FEC and David Keene, then Chairman of the ACU, but it came to nothing.

    Obama received illegal foreign campaign contributions from the terror statelet of Gaza. Among the “donors” Palestinian brothers inside the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip were listed in government election filings as having donated $29,521.54 to Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign. There was no mass media coverage. None. But ABC News is all over a fake news contribution story about President Trump.

    1. JAIL:




      4)Peter Strzok

      5)Lisa Page


      for starters

  28. QuirkSat May 12, 08:16:00 PM EDT


    It's funny (not ha ha funny) that everything comes back to race and immigration with you dolts.

    There us one other variable they do consider- Democrat(bad)/Republican(good)

  29. May 13, 2018
    The 'Election Collusion' Was between Our Intelligence Community and Britain
    By Clarice Feldman

    As I will explain, the widespread notion that Russia and Trump colluded to beat Hillary has long been demonstrable bunk. What seems more clear each day is that there was collusion between certain members of the U.S. and British intelligence communities to spy on the Trump campaign. This may explain, in large part, the reluctance of the Department of Justice to reveal what it knows publicly. After all -- with rare exceptions -- the two countries’ intelligence services have long had important information gathering and sharing agreements, and exposure of this may harm the traditional reciprocal relationship. Whether the British counterparts were hoodwinked into playing this role is still unclear. Maybe they were. On the other hand, with most of what they know about the U.S. electorate doubtless coming from the NYT and even more left-wing British media, they may well have done this willingly, believing the globalist Hillary had a sure shot at the presidency and this was a means...(Read Full Article)