Track Palin's trial has been pushed to March 27th.

Courtesy of KTVA: 

Sarah Palin's oldest son is scheduled for trial in a case accusing him of assaulting his father at the family's Alaska home. 

A judge Friday set trial for the week of March 27 for Track Palin after his lawyer said the case would not be ready for a late-February trial as initially set. Palin participated in the proceeding by phone from an undisclosed treatment location. Afterward, the lawyer declined to say what kind of treatment. 

The 28-year-old Palin pleaded not guilty last month to a felony burglary charge in the December incident. He also faces misdemeanor charges of assault and criminal mischief.

I am a few days late in reporting this, mostly because I predicted the trial would be postponed repeatedly and figured all of you did as well. 

In other words this might not be the last postponement we see in this case.

When the trial does take place it is going to be covered by a number of national news outlets so we will be kept well informed as it unfolds.

I would also like to take a moment to address the growing gossip about Bristol's marriage.

Currently there is no definitive evidence that the marriage is over, despite numerous comments declaring it to be so.

Yes it does not appear that Dakota and Bristol are spending much time together, and in fact Dakota has not appeared in any of Bristol's Instagram photos since December.

But that does not constitute proof.

I think we can all predict, based on Bristol's past, that this relationship will not stand the test of time.

But as of now we do not know that it has definitively hit the skids.

Once we have evidence to prove that, trust me I will gladly report that here.

Right Wing flips out as illegal immigrant accused of killing the young woman who inspired "Kate's Law" is found innocent of both murder and manslaughter.

Courtesy of CNN: 

A jury on Thursday found an undocumented immigrant not guilty in the July 2015 death of Kate Steinle, a decision that reignited the debate over immigration policy. 

Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, 45, was acquitted of murder and involuntary manslaughter charges, as well as assault with a deadly weapon. Jurors convicted the Mexican citizen of being a felon in possession of a firearm, which could bring a three-year sentence. 

Prosecutors had argued Garcia Zarate intentionally shot Steinle, 32, with a Sig Sauer .40-caliber handgun as she and her father walked on San Francisco's Pier 14. But Garcia Zarate's defense attorney said the shooting was accidental and the bullet ricocheted off the ground and traveled about 80 feet before hitting Steinle. 

Federal immigration officials said they will try to deport Garcia Zarate. He had been deported from the United States five times prior to Steinle's death.

This woman's death became a rallying cry for conservatives, and a tool for Donald Trump to make his argument that we needed to build a "big, beautiful border wall."

She also was the inspiration for Kate's Law, which suggests harsher penalties for illegal immigrants who have repeatedly broken the law.

Of course as soon as Trump heard about this he was all over Twitter.

A disgraceful verdict in the Kate Steinle case! No wonder the people of our Country are so angry with Illegal Immigration.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 1, 2017

The Kate Steinle killer came back and back over the weakly protected Obama border, always committing crimes and being violent, and yet this info was not used in court. His exoneration is a complete travesty of justice. BUILD THE WALL!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 1, 2017

The jury was not told the killer of Kate was a 7 time felon. The Schumer/Pelosi Democrats are so weak on Crime that they will pay a big price in the 2018 and 2020 Elections.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 1, 2017

I'm not sure what Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer have to do with this, but as usual Trump needs to attack someone.

Trump was certainly not the only one to take to Twitter over this.

Jury convinced that illegal alien killed Kate Steinle accidentally. She would still be alive if we had a wall.

— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) December 1, 2017

Oh yeah, if only there had been a wall. Simple minded moron.

Even the Wasilla Wendigo contributed her two cents.

Such an insane recent news cycle, and now this?? Outrageous “not guilty” verdict in murder case of Kate Steinle. The illegal alien who shot her was just given more rights, grace and favor than the devastated Steinle family. San Francisco is NOT a safe place. - SP

— Sarah Palin (@SarahPalinUSA) December 1, 2017

Actually they were given the same rights, as both sides were represented and the jury delivered its verdict based on the evidence.

That is how justice works in this country.

It is indeed a tragedy that this young woman lost her life, but it is also just another among the thousands of deaths each year caused by gun violence.

The only reason the conservatives give two shits about this incident is that it involved an undocumented immigrant.

Period.

The Bundy boys stamp their feet and refuse to show up for court appearance.

Courtesy of Oregon Live:  

Two sons of Nevada cattleman Cliven Bundy refused to attend, and several co-defendants shouted an oath of defiance at the end of a Friday court appearance for 17 men accused of conspiring and taking up arms against federal agents near the Bundy ranch in Nevada in April 2014. 

U.S. Magistrate Judge Peggy Leen decided not to order marshals to bring Ammon and Ryan Bundy to court by force, so the two Bundy sons remained in a nearby holding cell. Marshals were instructed to provide a speaker so they could hear audio of the court proceedings. 

Another defendant, Peter Santilli, blurted out that the Bundy brothers didn't want to be shackled. Leen admonished Santilli that he didn't get to speak on their behalf. 

So began a contentious three-hour hearing during which the judge didn't make immediate rulings on a range of arguments, including the government's request to have three trials and defendants' requests to be tried together or in groups of their choosing.

Kind of hard to blame the Bundys.

After all they were already found not guilty of conspiring against the government, so they probably figure they will soon be walking out of prison scot-free.

Besides let's face it once Donald Trump is sworn in he will probably not only give them amnesty, but he will probably give them both cabinet positions. 
 

The Guardian makes the case for trying former British Prime Minister Tony Blair in front of the ICC.

Courtesy of The Guardian:  

Geoffrey Robertson rightly argued that it is not legally possible to put Tony Blair on trial in the international criminal court for a crime of aggression, because aggression was not included in the Rome statute that established the ICC. Joshua Rozenberg suggested that the focus should therefore be on cases against British soldiers for abuse of detainees. However, there is an alternative route to take Blair and his ministers to the ICC over their war crimes. 

Under the Hague and Geneva rules, occupying powers are prohibited from fundamentally transforming the economy and political system of a country. Yet this is exactly what happened: the coalition provisional authority (CPA), through which the UK and US governed, forced through a series of major structural economic reforms, including the removal of product subsidies and protective trade barriers and other tariffs, a flattened tax system in which the richest and the poorest paid the same rate, and economic policies that threw Iraqi industry wide open to foreign investors. It also reformed the political system root and branch, creating a government structure based on sectarian identity, which arguably played a key role in stimulating the violence that continues to this day. 

One Foreign and Commonwealth Office lawyer advised Blair in February 2004 that because “the extensive body of CPA legislation dealing with economic reform and governance was of questionable lawfulness … the risk of claims against the UK could not be ruled out”. 

This issue had been contentious in the days leading up to the invasion. Concerns about the legality of the occupation were expressed in writing by several officials. In his memo to Blair on 26 March 2003, the attorney general Lord Goldsmith had warned that “wide-ranging reforms of governmental and administrative structures would not be lawful”. Meanwhile, Iraqi oil revenues were used to fund reconstruction, the majority of it carried out by US and UK contractors. Chilcot noted that by the end of the CPA’s first year of occupation, there were more than 60 UK companies working in Iraq, on contracts worth an estimated $2.6bn. To the victor, the spoils. Over $8bn of that Iraqi oil revenue was lost, unaccounted for in a process described thus by Blair’s representative in the CPA, Sir Jeremy Greenstock: “A lot of cash was going round in suitcases to be dispensed to Iraqis, not all of which was accounted for.” 

The CPA also laid the groundwork for a fundamental restructuring of Iraq’s vast oil industry. While the period formally defined as occupation ended in June 2004, British troops remained in Iraq for a further five years. The official narrative was that they were there at the invitation of sovereign Iraqi governments, but those nominal governments were successively appointed, promoted or defined by the US and UK. 

Contrary to Blair’s protestations, government documents released this week spell out how Iraqi oil was a central motive behind the war. Throughout the six years that British troops remained in Iraq, the UK consistently maintained two objectives in relation to oil: to transfer oil from public ownership to multinational companies, and to ensure BP and Shell got a large share of it. While the post-2004 phase may escape the formal legal definitions, it raises important political and ethical questions.

Remember how protesters of the Iraq War claimed that it was all about oil, and they were dismissed as being liberals who did not understand the "post 9-11 world" we lived in?

Well guess what?

It was all about the oil. 

The attacks were just a convenient excuse to do what George W. Bush and his neocon buddies wanted to do seconds after he was sworn in as President of the United States.

And we just sat back and let it happen.

Video of Track Palin's pre-trial conference.

So as you can see it appears that both Track and his attorney essentially blew this hearing off, and did not bother to participate.

It also sounds as if the prosecutor needs more time to pick up additional discovery from the district attorney, and so asked to reschedule the pre-trial conference for March 14th at 8:30.

The trial call, which is the first time that Track can get a pleas deal, is set for March 24, 2016.

One actually good news that we learn from this video, is that there is going to be video.

That means that even if we cannot attend the proceedings, we will still see what is happening in the courtroom, and THAT is exactly the kind of thing that the Palins desperately do not want to us to see.

By the way let me give a shout out to whoever sent me all of these links in the comments.

You did most of the work for me this morning and I really appreciate it.

John Oliver stands up for overworked public defenders, and explains how their caseloads and lack of resources negatively impact their clients.

Courtesy of Raw Story: 

According to the host of Last Week Tonight, everyone in America is aware of the part public defenders play in our court system, but few know how overworked they are, giving the example of Fresno defenders handling up to 1,000 cases per year — or nearly three per day. 

“With caseloads that heavy, public defenders cannot possibly prepare an effective defense,” Oliver explained. “A study in New Orleans, a few years back, found the city had some part-time defenders who could only spend an average of seven minutes per case. And that is not long enough to prepare anything. If I only had seven minutes to prepare this show, I would definitely not be talking about public defenders right now. I’d be desperately trying to fill time right now by listing the Muppets in order of f*ckability.” 

Oliver said that with caseloads so high, the system is known as “meet ’em and plead ’em,” with the vast majority of cases being resolved through plea bargaining whether the accused is guilty or not. 

Furthermore, despite the Miranda warning’s promise that “an attorney will be appointed for you,” suspects in 43 states can still be billed for using a public defender regardless of their ability to pay.

Okay that fight between the judge and the public defender is  jaw dropping.

I swear Oliver is quickly becoming the voice for justice in this country.

God on Trial: The Verdict.

I caught this for the first time the other day after it popped up on one of the sites I visit frequently.

I had never seen this movie entitled "God on Trial" but I found this portion to be incredibly riveting.

Here is how IMBD describes the film:

Awaiting their inevitable deaths at one of the worst concentration camps, a group of Jews make a rabbinical court to decide whether G-d has went against the holy covenant and if He is the one guilty for their suffering.

You know you almost HAVE to believe that conversations like this took place in concentration camps all over the place during World War 2. In fact I believe that they are happening with increasing frequency in the years since that terrible war, and not only among the Jewish population.

I am interested in your feedback, because as an Atheist all I could think was that the questions posed simply had no reasonable nor logical answers, and either pointed to the non-existence of God or to the existence of a terrible God who relishes the act of human genocide and revels in our suffering.

Shellie Zimmerman explains why she is divorcing her husband George.

Arrogant, self centered, and abusive. 

Nothing about that surprises me.

This just in Ted Nugent is a disgusting human being. Oh, you knew that already?

Courtesy of the New York Daily News: 

Ted Nugent wasted no time in providing ammunition to further stoke tensions over the George Zimmerman case. 

The conservative rocker and NRA board member took aim at the controversy surrounding a Florida jury’s not guilty verdict in the shooting death of unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin -- calling the teen victim a “dope smoking, racist gangsta wannabe.” 

In a column for the right-leaning site Rare, Nugent wrote the prosecutors were pressured into bringing a trial when it was obvious “cut and dried self-defense.” 

“The race-baiting industry saw an opportunity to further the racist careers of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, the Black Panthers, President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, et al, who then swept down on the Florida community refusing to admit that the 17-year-old dope smoking, racist gangsta wannabe Trayvon Martin was at all responsible for his bad decisions and standard modus operendi of always taking the violent route,” wrote Nugent. 

“Trayvon had no reason not to attack, because it was the standard thug thing to do. See Chicago any day of the week.” 

You know somebody on MSNBC this morning asked the question "If the Trayvon Martin case is not about racism, then why is George Zimmerman suddenly the Right Wing's hero?"

I thought that was a very good question.

I think the reason is probably because he was able to shoot an unarmed black teen, with a Constitutionally allowed gun no less, and walk free. Which goes to prove that despite electing the first African American President, that racism is still alive and well and still has a huge impact on who is found guilty or innocent.

For people like Nugent it confirmed that the idea that in conflict between the races black people are ALWAYS the bad guys, and justice always favors those with lighter skin.

That is the kind of soothing bedtime story that helps people like Ted Nugent, Sarah Palin, and the Teabaggers sleep at night.

George Zimmerman to get his gun back, as lawyer says he has even "more reason" to need it now. Meanwhile protestors hit with rubber bullets fired by police. Update!

Courtesy of Mediaite:

George Zimmerman is about to get his gun back, and defense attorney Mark O’Mara says he has “even more reason” to carry it now that many are angry over his acquittal. 

Zimmerman’s Kel Tec 9 pistol will be returned to him, pending a decision about his concealed weapons permit. 

“Even more reason now, isn’t there?” O’Mara said, when asked by ABC News if ZImmerman was intending to rearm himself now that he is a free man. “There are a lot of people out there who actually hate him, though they shouldn’t.” 

Why? Why would this man even want to own a gun again?

And as for needing it now more than ever? Well that would indicate that Zimmerman has NO remorse and is ready and willing to take yet another life.

I guess now we simply wait until Zimmerman murders the next black teenager that makes him feel frightened. I wonder what his excuse will be THIS time?

Meantime last night protests broke out all over the country. Most were peaceful though a few got a little out of hand.

The police were quick to deal aggressively even with the peaceful ones.

Courtesy of NBC: 

NBC News reported that in New York City, thousands of demonstrators marched from Union Square to the tourist-heavy Times Square Sunday night, slowing and in some cases halting traffic. WNBC reported the area was gridlocked with people holding signs in support of Martin and calling Zimmerman’s acquittal a failure of the judicial system. 

In Los Angeles, the group of at least 200 was cleared from I-10 by about 7 p.m., when LAPD officers began firing rubber bullets, protesters said. Some of the first tweets showing photos of people on the freeway were posted shortly after 6 p.m. 

At least two major protests were held in Los Angeles, beginning about 4 p.m. - one at Martin Luther King Jr and Crenshaw boulevards and another in Leimert Park in South Los Angeles. 

Several people were also struck by bean bags in a shopping center near 10th Avenue and Washington Boulevard in Mid-City, said Jasmyne Cannick, who tweeted photos of the protesters and said she and an attorney were observing the rally. 

"They're in pain and I don't know what's going to happen to them," Cannick said. 

She said that protesters seemed confused and panicked once officers began firing the bean bags at them from multiple sides.

As I said some of the protests got heated, including in Oakland where there was some minor property destruction and at least one burnt flag.

Of course it was those latter incidents that were the focus of Right Wing reports, even though the aggressiveness paled in comparison to the property damage that often follows a disappointing loss or unexpected win of a city's favorite hockey or football team.

P.S. By the way THIS is what happens when a black man shoots a white teenager. 

I guess standing in his own house while confronted by an angry mob of white kids threatening his family is not reason enough not to fire his weapon. Gee, if only they had been black.

Update: Well it appears that one of the Zimmerman jurors wasted no time in trying to cash in.

I think I feel a little nauseous.

The George Zimmerman verdict. Justice denied for Trayvon Martin. Update!

I have refrained from posting about this trial while it was going on, and believe me I watched ALL of it, because I became too emotional, and knew I would end up writing a long and rambling post that I did not have time to write and you probably did not have time to read.

However now that it is over, ramble I must. Though I will try to keep it as short and on topic as I can.

You know I thought I was prepared for last night's verdict. But I was wrong.

It hit me hard, and also made me furious.

From the outset I found nothing defensible about Zimmerman's actions.

His muttered "These assholes always get away" was evidence of racial profiling in my opinion.

The fact that he left his vehicle in defiance of instruction, determined his intent to confront in my opinion.

And his use of a gun to end an altercation with a teenage boy determined his guilt in my opinion.

Open and shut case right?

 Nope.

Elizabeth Warren takes no prisoners during her first Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing.

Courtesy of the Huffington Post:  

At her first Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing, Warren questioned top regulators from the alphabet soup that is the nation's financial regulatory structure: the FDIC, SEC, OCC, CFPB, CFTC, Fed and Treasury. 

The Democratic senator from Massachusetts had a straightforward question for them: When was the last time you took a Wall Street bank to trial? It was a harder question than it seemed. 

"We do not have to bring people to trial," Thomas Curry, head of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, assured Warren, declaring that his agency had secured a large number of "consent orders," or settlements. 

"I appreciate that you say you don't have to bring them to trial. My question is, when did you bring them to trial?" she responded. 

"We have not had to do it as a practical matter to achieve our supervisory goals," Curry offered. 

Warner turned to Elisse Walter, chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission, who said that the agency weighs how much it can extract from a bank without taking it to court against the cost of going to trial. 

"I appreciate that. That's what everybody does," said Warren, a former Harvard law professor. "Can you identify the last time when you took the Wall Street banks to trial?" 

"I will have to get back to you with specific information," Walter said as the audience tittered. 

"There are district attorneys and United States attorneys out there every day squeezing ordinary citizens on sometimes very thin grounds and taking them to trial in order to make an example, as they put it. I'm really concerned that 'too big to fail' has become 'too big for trial,'" Warren said.

Damn, this woman is fierce!

I have to say that if for some reason Hillary cannot run in 2016, that I am ALL IN for Elizabeth Warrens to run. She would be amazing.

And can you imagine the amount of money that the financial institutes would donate to her opponents to keep her out of the White House? It would make 2012 look like chump change.

Hey maybe we can have an ALL female ticket for 2012?

Clinton/Warren 2016!

What do you think?

Criminal trial of former chairman of the Florida Republican party proves too embarrassing to go forward.

Courtesy of Yahoo News:  

The criminal trial of former Republican Party of Florida chair Jim Greer had promised to be embarrassing for party leaders, rising Republican star Marco Rubio and former Gov. Charlie Crist, who is contemplating a new political future as a Democrat. 

But Greer's guilty pleas on Monday to four counts of theft and a single count of money laundering ended the trial before it even started and ensured that some state GOP secrets will remain confidential, at least for the time-being. 

"There were a number of people who did not want this trial to go forward and the trial isn't going forward," Damon Chase, Greer's attorney, said after the former chair entered his pleas in court. "Once again, Jim Greer is falling on his sword for a lot of other folks." 

Greer, 50, could face a prison sentence of 3 ½ to 35 years when he is sentenced March 27. Assistant statewide prosecutor Michael Williams wouldn't say how many years prosecutors would seek. 

The trial had threatened to expose the underbelly of Florida's dominant political party and its formerly high-spending ways. Party officials took heat three years ago from revelations of excessive spending at restaurants and luxury hotels on party-issued American Express cards by Republican leaders, including Rubio. Testimony about those expenditures had been expected at the trial. 

Topics also covered in pretrial depositions included allegations of prostitutes at a state GOP fundraiser in the Bahamas, the drinking habits of Crist and intraparty strife. Some of Florida's most powerful politicians were scheduled as witnesses, including Crist, former U.S. Sen. George LeMieux, former Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum and several state House and state Senate leaders.

Of course the attorney for the Republican party denies these are the reasons the trial is not proceeding.

Greer's acknowledgment of guilt was what the party wanted all along, party attorney Stephen Dobson said, and they weren't worried about potentially embarrassing testimony at trial. 

"There was absolutely no concern. In fact, a lot of people were looking forward to clearing a lot of these allegations that had been made up," Dobson said outside the courtroom. "Today the truth came out."

Uh huh, right! Yeah look a guy does not plead guilty while facing the possibility of 35 years in prison unless he is getting some deal cut for him by powerful people, or is being threatened with something FAR worse.  This is after all the Republican party we're talking about.

Gee I wonder who the GOP is worried enough about to put the pressure on Greer?

Oh I am sure it will come to me.

Damn! I would really like to have watched this thing unfold. It has all the makings of a very entertaining, and revelatory, opportunity to stock up on popcorn.

I only hope that some intrepid Florida reporter is dissatisfied with this outcome and starts to do some digging.

Jerry Sandusky essentially gets life in prison for crimes against children.

Courtesy of the Business Insider:  

The former Penn State assistant football coach convicted of molesting 10 young boys over a 15-year period will be spending 30 to 60 years behind bars, according to Bloomberg News. 

Jerry Sandusky was convicted in June of 45 counts of child sex abuse. 

Today's sentence means the 68-year-old will conceivably spend the rest of his life behind bars. 

Before sentencing the disgraced coach, Judge John Cleland said the case is "a story of betrayal. You abused the trust of those who trusted you," the New York Daily News' Sports I-Team tweeted from the courtroom. 

Incredibly Sandusky is arguing to stay out of  solitary confinement, which he would undoubtedly be placed into for his protection.

He also denied his guilt in rather bizarre and rambling testimony before his sentencing:

Sandusky said in his statement that he has spent his time in jail meditating, writing, exercising, and reading books about persecution and struggle. He said he has faced "outbursts by troubled inmates" and "special inmates who have smiled at me." 

"Somehow, someway, something good will come out of this. These are people I cared about, still do. I used to think of ways to praise them, to help them have fun." 

"To my loved ones I want to say, the most difficult part is the pain of separation. Some of the labeling hurts but they don't compare to the pain of their absence," he said. 

You know besides the years of molestation inflicted by Catholic priests, and the churches attempts to cover up their crimes, I don't think I can remember a more egregious example of a person, or persons, victimizing children in this manner.

It is just very troubling that Penn State covered for him for all of those years, simply to protect their reputation and continue to win football games. I find that almost impossible to comprehend.

And it just makes me wonder how many more Jerry Sanduskys there are out in the world, currently being protected by organizations that value their contribution over the lives of innocent children?

Joe McGinniss responds to the possible reopening of the "Fatal Vision" trial, and to the book written to smear his reputation.

As many of you might remember Sarah Palin recently had an article ghostwritten for her pimping the Errol Morris book that essentially claims that McGinniss is responsible for Jeffrey MacDonald's continued incarceration.

Here is how Joe responded to those allegations courtesy of CNN Justice:  

MacDonald's appeals received renewed attention with the release this month of the book "A Wilderness of Error: The Trials of Jeffrey MacDonald." Written by Academy-Award-winning documentary filmmaker Errol Morris, the book paints MacDonald as a man wrongly convicted on the basis of incomplete and corrupted evidence, as well as prosecutorial misconduct. 

"We've been sold a bill of goods about this case," said Morris. "It's as phony as a three-dollar bill." 

Asked about the controversy, McGinniss was pragmatic in his response. "It doesn't matter what I think of what Morris thinks," he said. "MacDonald was convicted by a jury in a court of law. He's not in prison because of me and he's not going to get out of prison because of Errol Morris." 

McGinniss also tried to put the rest the notion that he was a passionate believer in MacDonald when he embarked on "Fatal Vision." He says he was embedded with the defense team because he was looking for a different angle. 

"I thought it would be fascinating to write about the trial from the point of view of how the defense and defendant were experiencing it. I learned everything from the first time in court. I didn't have my mind made up." McGinniss said what he heard in court was overwhelmingly convincing. 

"There came a point in the trial when much to my dismay I started to feel this evidence is piling up and MacDonald isn't doing anything to dispute it. By the end it was still very confusing. I said to myself, 'I think this guy did it,' but he was so charismatic and likable and had such a strong personality. This was before I learned about the psychopathic personality."

Well I think that is a pretty clear. Even though McGinniss personally liked the defendant, the evidence against him was just too strong to refute, so in response Joe came to believe he was guilty.

That is what trials are designed to do. Prove their case with the evidence.

Did anybody else notice what or who Joe McGinniss did NOT bother to mention?

Yep the Lunatic from Lake Lucille herself!

Here she goes and has a vindictive diatribe written for her attacking Joe, and he did not even bother to mention her name once in this interview.

You know Joe once told me that he looked forward to the day that he never had to even think about Sarah Palin again. It looks like that day has arrived and he has already moved on.

Sadly for some of course, there will NEVER be any "moving on."

NEVER one to let go of a grudge, Sarah Palin has a ghostwritten attack on Joe McGinniss published on rabid Right Wing blog.

Sarah Palin is famous for going after people who she believes have done her wrong, and is also known for NEVER letting go of her hatred for these people who dare damage her reputation by pointing out the truth.

So today Palin had a ghostwriter post a hateful diatribe against Joe over at the now truly defunct Andrew Bretbart's old website. (Well Breitbart himself is "defunct" anyhow.)

Essentially she discusses a new book which examines the Jeffrey MacDonald case that was at the heart of Joe's famous book "Fatal Vision," and resurrects the claim that McGinniss gained MacDonald's trust, claiming he believed that he was innocent, only to turn on him when he became convinced of his guilt. And then takes it a step further by implicating McGinniss in the perception of MacDonald's guilt, which the author believes is false.

Now I only know what I have read about the trial, and saw presented in the television movie adapted from Joe's book, so I don't have any real idea of whether MacDonald was guilty or innocent.

I did talk to Joe very briefly about it once, after it was dredged up while he was still living next to Palin, and he expressed confidence that MacDonald was indeed guilty. And that he had dealt with the man fairly.

However the reason this is worthy of a post is to, once again, illustrate just how vindictive Palin is, and to what extremes she will go to in order to injure or frighten those that dare stand up to her, or who she identifies as an enemy. (A list that WE all know is almost too long to read in one sitting.)

McGinniss, to his eternal credit, may in fact have been the one to have finally put that proverbial stake through Palin's political aspirations for all time. So of course she hates him with the white hot hate of a woman who despises men in general, and despises men who will not succumb to her "charms" even more.

Joe was not only unimpressed with Palin, he wrote a book telling the world exactly WHY she was unimpressive, and potentially dangerous.

Of course Palin lacks the talent to do her own dirty work so in this case she simply used one of Breitbart's journalistic hit-men to write a screed and then stamped it with one of her cloven hooves.

Here you tell me if this sounds like it came from the cottage cheese filled head of the Lunatic from Lake Lucille:

I don’t normally read “true crime” books, and I’ve certainly never written a review of one, but Errol Morris’ new book, “A Wilderness of Error,” isn’t typical of the genre. It’s much more interesting and I think important. It’s a book about the failings of a legal system administered by very fallible human beings, and it’s a book about how we buy into false media narratives that tidy up uncomfortably complex stories and give us permission to call off any further search for truth – and, yes, Morris argues with refreshing clarity that objective truth is real and worthy of being sought after despite the pretentious nonsense preached in faculty lounges about all truth being relative. In fact, he argues passionately that the search for truth is what journalism and justice is all about.

"Pretentious," "fallible,"  "isn't typical of the genre." Does any of that sound like Palin-speak to any of you? Of course not.

No this is just another example of Palin smelling blood in the water and going for the jugular like she has over and over again in the past. And essentially it reveals far more about HER than it does her intended target.

Look "Fatal Vision" was written four decades ago, and nothing that Palin or this writer say about the circumstances surrounding the case will have any significant impact on Joe McGinniss, his reputation, or his future endeavors.

However Joe's book "The Rogue" DID have a very significant and disasterous impact on a certain treacherous politician who caters to the very worst in American politics, and whose influence is STILL causing negative ramifications throughout our now fragile political system. And for that the American people owe him a great debt of gratitude.

In other words, nice try Sarah, but we still know who actually ran Wasilla while you were Mayor, that even those close to you doubt you gave birth to Trig, and that you at one time used your position as a part time sportscaster to seduce a young basketball player named Glen Rice.

And NOTHING you have ghostwritten about the author of that information will EVER erase it from our minds.

And no giving us the evil eye will not change that either.

Alaska Militia trial now in the hands of the jury.

Coleman Barney, Francis "Schaeffer" Cox, and Lonnie Vernon.

I think this might be the most important part of the prosecutions case, courtesy of the Fairbanks Newsminer:

The most serious charge is the conspiracy to murder charge, and in jury instructions that took more than an hour to read Wednesday, jurors were told that to convict, they must determine the men committed an overt act as part of the conspiracy. 

Prosecutors said there were several. The one most frequently discussed at the trial was the “security detail” assigned to protect Cox in North Pole. 

Cox feared he was the target of a Colorado-based hit squad, and militia members conducted two meetings about what they planned to do if plainclothes men appeared at the station and started shooting. They came up with a plan for a nine-member security detail but could find only five willing to take part. 

Vernon, Skrocki said, showed up with a helmet, body armor and an assault rifle. Barney wore body armor and carried an assault rifle equipped with a launcher with an anti-personnel shell. That constituted a plan to kill federal officers, Skrocki said, even though the government acknowledges that no FBI hit squad exists. 

The defendants also compiled names and addresses in a database held by an unindicted co-conspirator, Michael Anderson. Prosecutors likened the database to an enemies list or a hit list. Anderson, an associate of Cox but not a militia member, eventually destroyed the computer and hard drive on which it was compiled. 

Skrocki told jurors that what they heard from defense lawyers in closing arguments was a lot of excuses and attacks on government informants. By asking militia members to accompany him to the North Pole television interview, and telling them they had to be ready to kill, Cox was recruiting a hit squad ready to kill federal officials, Skrocki said. 

Now I haven't heard all of the evidence presented at trial (Though to be honest I may actually have heard more from my sources than the jury heard from the prosecution.), however it would seem to me that there is ample evidence to put these yahoos away for quite a ling time.

And I have every confidence that they will soon be seeing the world through iron bars.

I happened to peruse the comments section below this Newsminer article, and found that Norm Olson, the godfather of the Alaska militias, was back to shooting his mouth off after having laid low for awhile directly after the arrests.

normolson 

Riddle me this: 

How can the threat to kill be a crime if there is no one to kill? 

If I say that I am stockpiling long range rifles to use against alien spacecraft once they enter the atmosphere, is that a crime? If I say that I am stockpiling and training to kill as many Chinese invaders as possible, is that a crime? If I threaten to kill 200 pound flesh-eating blue parrots that are coming from zombie villages in Brazil, is that a crime? If I stalk the woods, hunting for zombies to kill, is it a crime to openly threaten either the aliens, Chinese, parrots, or zombies? 

 Comeon' folks, put your logic to work... 

On the one hand Olson's logic is flawed if he does not understand that armed men working as "security" for a raving lunatic, and who have been instructed to fight to the death against law enforcement, does not present a danger to the police officers, State Troopers, and yes even average Alaskan citizens.

On the other hand it is nice to know that Olson is prepared to defend Alaska from an attack of flesh eating parrots and alien spacecraft.  I know I'll certainly sleep better.

What a camo covered dipshit.

The government paid $2500 to fly Todd Palin to Knoxville, Tennessee to sit on his ass during a trial that sent David Kernell to prison for guessing his wife's Yahoo account password. Your tax dollars at work.

"Look, she says jump, I say how high."

Courtesy of the AP:

The government paid nearly $2,500 for Sarah Palin's husband to come to the trial of a Tennessee college student who hacked into her email — even though Todd Palin never testified, court records show. 

In all, the government paid more than $29,000 to fly members of the Palin family and other witnesses to Knoxville, send a prosecutor to Alaska for research and pay other travel expenses, according to the Department of Justice records obtained by The Associated Press through a Freedom of Information Act request. Air travel totaled about $18,600, and hotel bills amounted to nearly $3,300. 

The thousands of dollars spent by prosecutors helped them win a conviction on one felony and one misdemeanor charge against David Kernell, who finishes his 10-month sentence on Wednesday. Prosecutors have said that Kernell's punishment for the hacking during Palin's failed 2008 vice presidential bid should deter any hackers who considered targeting candidates in next fall's presidential election. 

The former Alaska governor, her daughter Bristol and an aide were among the witnesses called to the stand, but the chief prosecutor said he decided Todd Palin's testimony wasn't needed. Sarah and Bristol Palin told jurors that they felt harassed and their lives were disrupted after Kernell hacked into Sarah Palin's Yahoo! email account and made screenshots public that included personal email addresses and cell phone numbers. 

Records show Todd Palin received $2,244.30 as reimbursement for airfare from Alaska to Tennessee, along with $122 for meals and incidentals and an attendance fee of $120. He was listed as a fact witness. 

"We subpoena a lot of witnesses that we think we might need," Assistant U.S. Attorney Greg Weddle said, adding that about a dozen witnesses in all were subpoenaed. "We decided his testimony was no longer necessary for purposes of trial."

So let me get this straight.

The Us Attorney thought he MIGHT want to put Toad on the witness stand, but then later on decided he did not need his testimony? You know usually I would buy that, but THIS is a family that is famous for milking the government for all kinds of travel and hotel expenses, even going so far as to charge the state of Alaska to have Sarah Palin sleep in her own bed.

Something smells fishy here, and it is NOT just the Grizzled Mama's unwashed "ambiance."

So is it normal to fly family members to a trial at government expense and not have them testify? 

J. Tom Morgan of Decatur, Ga., a former district attorney, said that when former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis made a comment about sunshine as the best disinfectant "he wasn't talking about the federal court system." 

"It sounds like a lot of money on a hacking case, but once you go to trial you've got to be prepared for anything and everything," he said. Morgan said prosecutors have discretion in spending and typically if they have a family member tag along they will also have them testify to justify it. 

Though Morgan couldn't speak to the circumstances of the Palin case, he said sometimes family members do get a "free ride."

A "free ride" boy doesn't THAT sound familiar?

I'm sorry, perhaps I am just overly jaded from dealing with this family of unconscionable grifters, but this feels to me as yet ANOTHER incident where Sarah Palin, and her band of Wasillabillies, fucked our government out of more of our hard earned tax dollars.

And they did it while lying on the witness stand about the impact Kernell's guesswork had on their family which cost this young man a year of his life.

In my mind at least our tax dollars were NOT used to pursue the cause of justice.

David Kernell's attorney requests retrial and other Sarah Palin news nuggets.

From the AP:

Assistant U.S. Attorney Greg Weddle on Friday noted defense motions requesting a retrial. He said that only if a new trial were granted on either of the two charges resulting in conviction, the identity theft case also would be retried.

Defense attorney Wade Davies declined comment Friday about his motions for a retrial. During the trial he made motions for a mistrial and now has numerous appeals pending before the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

To me this is a "no-brainer".  Clearly there was a lot of evidence the defense could have introduced that they did not use.  Not to mention getting the Palin's on the witness stand for a REAL cross examination.

Let's see how smug Sarah is the NEXT time she emerges from the Tennessee courtroom.

I did three long posts about Sarah, and her Wasilla-billy family, yesterday  so today I am just going to do a quick round up of Palin related stories and hopefully move on to other topics.

I cannot yet locate the MSNBC video of Palin's interview outside of the courthouse but here is WBIR's.

Here is the MSNBC video with better angle and better sound.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy