![IMG_0066](https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54189661421_e920d0a605.jpg)
![IMG_0073](https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54188772307_b60a91a6fd.jpg)
![IMG_0080](https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54189661526_52f5bc3485.jpg)
![IMG_0081](https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54188772302_c4b77453d2.jpg)
blogging every day since January 14, 2004
Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo discuss the viral “Holding Space” moment in recent Wicked interview. pic.twitter.com/kdbULBcwgB
— wicked news hub (@wickednewshub) December 7, 2024
The most overpaid actress ever. pic.twitter.com/2tx3PqdA8c
— MAZE (@mazemoore) December 6, 2024
🚨 #BREAKING: President Trump has just met with Emmanuel Macron in France
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) December 7, 2024
It’s clear how much Macron respects Trump. America FINALLY has strong leadership again. pic.twitter.com/dfjeuz3A8N
Writes Darconville, in the comments to last night's "Lake Mendota ice at noon."
Maybe Darconville is Alexander Louis Theroux, the author of the novel "Darconville's Cat," who is about 85 years old at the moment, or maybe he's a fan of that novel, or maybe Darconville built his pseudonym beginning with the word "dark."
I wonder if he began with a liking for the dark and the idea of Darkmonth played into his preference or if — like Christmas — it helped make a difficult time of year easier to bear.
I first mentioned Darkmonth in the first year of this blog, 2004. And here's something I wrote in 2020: "My word for this time of year is 'Darkmonth'... I put the solstice in the center — it's December 21st — and count back 15 days to get to the first day, and that is today, the 6th. We have not yet reached the coldest month-long period of the year — and you never know exactly when that's going to be (and it's very rarely 30 consecutive days). But we have reached the 30 darkest days of the year, and by the first day of winter, we'll be halfway through the darkest month."
The winter solstice this year is also December 21st — it's not always December 21st — so Darconville correctly identified yesterday, December 6th, as the first day of Darkmonth. Revere the dark through January 5th.
On January 6th — it's always Epiphany — we will be out of the dark.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 7, 2024
The decision [by a 3-judge panel of the D.C. Court of Appeals] could be a death blow for the app in [the U.S.]. More than 170 million Americans use TikTok.... The decision also raises new questions for President-elect Donald J. Trump, who has repeatedly signaled his support for the app, but who doesn’t have a clear path for rescuing it under the new law....
The company argued that the law unfairly singled out TikTok and that a ban would infringe on the First Amendment rights of American users....
ADDED: Will truth, beauty, and love save the world?
Alex DiBranco, executive director of the Institute for Research on Male Supremacism, said some anti-fascist and gender-focused nonprofits are concerned again about the Trump administration seeking to discredit or even prosecute them by classifying them as far-left domestic terrorist groups....
So join the Trump-aligned Republicans and the Democrats and civil liberties groups who are wary of thought-police exercises that could infringe on First Amendment rights. The great thing about dedication to First Amendment rights is that they are there to protect your side when your side loses its grip on majoritarian power.
Alysa McCall, a scientist at Polar Bear International, told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) that polar bears rarely attack humans. When an attack occurs, the bear is often hungry, young and unwell, she said.... "If you're attacked by a polar bear, definitely do not play dead — that is a myth," she told CBC. "Fight as long as you can."
This is a great article in the NYT by Ben Sisario, and this is a gift link so you can get to all the many fine elements of the article, which I will hint at with this excerpt:
“Everybody wanted to sound more modern,” said Trevor Horn, who produced key ’80s albums by Yes, Grace Jones and Frankie Goes to Hollywood. “And drum machines and synths sounded more modern.”... Yes hired Horn... to produce... the band its first, and only, No. 1 hit....
That single was “Owner of a Lonely Heart,” with a sharp-edged guitar riff and a dreamy irresistible hook. Horn was intrigued by the short synthesizer interjections on the demo version by Trevor Rabin, the group’s newest member; Horn used the Synclavier keyboard — then the cutting edge of studio tech — to turn them into jarring multi-layered sonic goblins that seem to leap from the shadows.
The 3 phrases in boldface can be clicked on, at the article link, and you'll hear exactly what they refer to. Unlike the link on the song title — which goes to the music video on YouTube — I wasn't able to copy the code and make it work here. So please click on the gift link if you want to know what counts as "sonic goblins" in the mind of Ben Sisario.
For Mr. Obama’s friends, he said, talk of bridging differences in a bitterly divided country seemed like an academic exercise.
“It felt far-fetched, even naïve, especially since, as far as they were concerned, the election proved that democracy’s down pretty far on people’s priority lists,” he said. But, he said, “it’s easy to give democracy lip service when it delivers the outcomes we want,” adding, “it’s when we don’t get what we want that our commitment to democracy is tested.”...
There's a special meaning to "democracy" in Obama's world, it seems — something like: It's democracy when we win. It seems to me that the election proved that we have a democracy and the people delivered their opinion. Obama seems to be saying that democracy is a background value, not the process of going through an election, and when that value is properly in place, people vote against Donald Trump.
Speaking of words, I wonder if "the waking" will catch on. It sounds like the title of a zombie movie.
Secret Service chief Ronald Rowe Jr. got into a screaming match with a GOP lawmaker over 9/11 during an otherwise cordial hearing. https://t.co/SK6rnmRGdj pic.twitter.com/eKwBOkO1mN
— POLITICO (@politico) December 5, 2024
Other commenters mark his passing in the comments to Tuesday night's sunrise post and in this earlier post that day.
This morning I'm seeing Neo's blog post, "RIP commenter 'Mike K'": "RIP Mike K, and all the commenters here who may have died but all we know is that they disappeared never to return."Bissage was a dearly beloved commenter on this blog who disappeared one day, when the uncooperative dear became uncooperative. I've tried to call him back: "Come back, Bissage. We're counting oranges again. Remember? 42. 42. 42..." To no avail.
I appreciate hearing the specific news that a commenter has died, like when Gahrie's brother's dropped into a comments thread: "Hello.... This is my brother gahries account, and it appears this post was close to the last thing he read/saw before he passed away Sunday morning sometime after 130am...."
I miss Gahrie and Bissage and Michael K and many others who died or drifted away and even some of those who left in a huff. They, unlike the dead, can drop back in. Why don't they? It's not for me to figure out. The blog, like life itself, can only move forward, and the day will come when we will all be left behind. So thanks to all — except the actual trolls — who walked along this way as far as they did.
I do want to acknowledge that there is evidence to suggest that gender-affirming care with respect to hormones can have some impacts on fertility. Critically, puberty blockers are -- are -- have no effect in and of themselves on fertility, so I don't think that concern can justify the ban on puberty blockers, which is just pressing pause on someone's endogenous puberty to give them more time to understand their identity. With respect to hormone use, there are some effects on fertility, but the court found that many individuals who are transgender remain fertile after taking these medications. They can conceive biological children.
Rich women have needs, and arts associations need their money.
This is an embarrassing headline: "How Biden Changed His Mind on Pardoning Hunter: ‘Time to End All of This’/The threat of a retribution-focused Trump administration and his son’s looming sentencings prompted the president to abandon a promise not to get involved in Hunter Biden’s legal problems."
They — the authors are Katie Rogers and Glenn Thrush — cannot know the interior of the President's mind. He may have changed what he was saying about his thoughts, but I presume that he was lying all along, for political purposes, when he said he wouldn't pardon Hunter, and I presume that he always intended to pardon him.
The phrase "How Biden Changed His Mind" is misdirection — sleight of hand. If we fall for it, we unwittingly form a belief that Biden did change his mind. He and his supporters weren't lying to us throughout the campaign season. He was weighing all the factors and the factors changed after the election. He painfully reweighed and his consistent and honorable decision-making process yielded a new result. Let Rogers and Rush detail the factors and burnish our respect for the venerable statesman.
No, no, absolutely not. Now, and only now, am I reading past the headline. So let's see:
A dark sky had fallen over Nantucket, Mass., on Saturday evening when President Biden left church alongside his family after his final Thanksgiving as president.
It was a dark and stormy night. We begin with a weather report.
Inside a borrowed vacation compound earlier in the week, with its views of the Nantucket Harbor, Mr. Biden had met with his wife, Jill Biden, and his son Hunter Biden to discuss a decision that had tormented him for months....
Who, if anyone, is the source of this knowledge of Biden's months-long mental torment?
Support for pardoning Hunter Biden had been building for months within the family...
Who? Jill? Hunter? Who's talking to the NYT? How is building support observed? Was this support in the mind of Jill? Was it voiced to the President?
... but external forces had more recently weighed on Mr. Biden, who watched warily as President-elect Donald J. Trump picked loyalists for his administration who promised to bring political and legal retribution to Mr. Trump’s enemies.
Biden also "watched" as Trump got elected, but that's not mentioned. It's not politically convenient to characterize Biden as waiting to see if his party might win, lying about the pardon in an effort to produce that win, and needing a new plan when the party lost. It needs to be about Trump's bad behavior, and son of a bitch, it was!... in this dark-and-stormy-night tale the NYT is telling.
Mr. Biden had even invited Mr. Trump to the White House, listening without responding as the president-elect aired familiar grievances about the Justice Department — then surprised his host by sympathizing with the Biden family’s own troubles with the department, according to three people briefed on the conversation.
So Trump was sympathetic, and it's here, for the first time in the article, that we see a reference to sources. It's harder to portray Trump as a vengeful narcissist when 3 sources say he sympathized with Biden. It was sympathy, we're told, in the context of Trump's complaining that Biden's administration was using criminal prosecution against Trump. Maybe that inspired Biden to see how a pardon of Hunter could be portrayed not as a political favor to Hunter but as an end to political disfavor. It sounds crazy, but we're looking for "How Biden Changed His Mind."
But the article doesn't pursue that, perhaps because it had no evidence that the meeting with Trump jogged Biden's thoughts on the subject. Or do you think the fact that Biden was smiling widely is circumstantial evidence that a wonderful new idea had arisen?
The next thing in the article is this:
But it was Hunter Biden’s looming sentencings on federal gun and tax charges, scheduled for later this month, that gave Mr. Biden the final push....
The final push. So we were supposed to see the Trump meeting as a push? This is a long article, and it purports to tell us "How Biden Changed His Mind," but there was no elaboration of "how" in that bit about the meeting with Trump. Now, I'm wondering if Trump cleverly played Biden somehow? The Times had 3 sources about the conversation and we got one unenlightening sentence.
But there is much more to the article after that introduction. We're told the NYT spoke with "a half dozen people close to the president and his family," but not told who they are or anything about how they could have access to Biden's mind and why they should be trusted to tell the truth.
When the president returned to Washington late Saturday evening, he convened a call with several senior aides to tell them about his decision. “Time to end all of this,” Mr. Biden said, according to a person briefed on the call....
That's says nothing about how or when Biden decided to pardon Hunter, only about the timing of the action.
Mr. Biden’s decision has tarnished a storied public legacy that began more than 50 years ago....
Here's a good place for elision.
Hunter Biden’s decision to plead guilty on the tax charges — after a weeklong gun trial in Delaware in June that rehashed the family’s darkest days — had further embittered Mr. Biden.... [who] began to realize there might not be any way out beyond issuing a pardon. It appears that there was never serious consideration of anything short of a full pardon, such as a commutation of his sentence, they said.
Was there any serious consideration of restricting the full pardon to the gun and tax charges? The article doesn't mention the sweep of the pardon Biden gave, covering every possible federal crime in a 10-year period, such as the oft-alleged corrupt dealings with Ukraine and China!
For his part, Hunter Biden was hardly shy about telling the people around him that he wanted — needed — a pardon, although it is unclear how often he had discussed the matter directly with his father before this past week....
You've got sources. What did he say? Did he threaten to do drugs again and yell about how it would all be dad's fault? Did he say he's writing a memoir that will destroy Joe's reputation forever? Did he threaten to offer his testimony to Trump officials about Joe's involvement in corrupt dealings with Ukraine and China? You're inviting your readers to visualize this scene. That's what I'm seeing.
And here's a hint that the corrupt dealings were part of the discussion:
While both father and son expressed anger over the yearslong effort by Republicans to link Hunter Biden’s questionable foreign business consulting to the president — the unproven “Biden crime family” narrative — they were almost equally contemptuous of the prosecutors who aggressively pursued both cases....
The door was cracked open for half a sentence, then quickly shut.
The statement that followed from Mr. Biden on Sunday offered a window into the mind-set of an aggrieved president who, in the end, could not separate his duty as a father from his half century of principled promises as a politician....
The most comforting possible narrative is chosen! That's the answer to how — how Biden "changed" his mind. He's just too devoted a father — to his duty as a father. Surely, you won't subtract very much from the value of his half century of principled promises as a politician!
I've read the whole thing now, and the NYT hasn't rebutted my presumption that Biden was lying all along, for political purposes, when he said he wouldn't pardon Hunter. And I need to know much more about the 10-year sweep of the pardon, covering all federal crimes, and how that connects to Joe Biden's own possible corruption. Don't just label that "unproven." Investigate it!
ADDED: I just listened to this morning's episode of the NYT "Daily" podcast, and it is much better. The guest is the NYT reporter Peter Baker. Excerpts:
I think obviously the only thing that's changed between June... and December when he gives this pardon, is the election. And you can look at it a couple of different ways. You could look at it in the way of him not being honest in the summer. That he really was in fact considering this, but didn't want to say before an election because it would be politically damaging. And only after the election does he admit that in fact he is going to use his extraordinary power for his son. Or — and this may be an and/or — you can also look at it as waking up to the reality of a Trump-run Justice Department in which this new president is promising retribution and specifically to go after Hunter Biden and a president who's on the way out thinking, I'm not going to let that happen. I'm not only going to pardon him for this tax and gun charges. I'm going to protect him from the next guy who's making very clear he's going to use the FBI for retribution....
[In his statement announcing the pardon, Biden] talks about the current prosecutions that his son has faced being unfair and selective. He doesn't say the other part... which is that he is guarding against politicization of the Justice Department by his successor. Right? He could have framed it that way, but he didn't. But the net effect of what he did by making it a 10-year sweeping pardon for any and everything that his son might have done does have that effect. And it does tell you what was probably going through his mind when he decided to issue the pardon.
What Peter Baker says was "probably going through his mind" is what I was saying Rogers and Thrush left out of their "How Biden Changed His Mind" article.
All of it done, I presume, with an intent to influence the 2024 election. All of it bullshit. By the midpoint you'll have lost the capacity to take the phrase "rule of law" seriously:
My favorite nugget: "There's a kind of old-school, sort of flinty core to his conception of how you are to be in the system — how you are to be as a person, a moral person...."One of the best supercuts ever.
— MAZE (@mazemoore) December 2, 2024
President Biden won't pardon Hunter because Joe Biden is a man of great character! 🤣😂pic.twitter.com/lM8aTRGrq5
Yes, yes, of course, you Democrats can pose fussily and piously making distinctions between all the crimes Hunter may have done in the last 10 years and anything attributable to Trump's pardonees. Go ahead. Try. I see your efforts. They're so self-serving they underscore the essential problem: political favoritism.
Fine distinctions are confusing and hypocritical. You're going to say violating gun laws doesn't really matter? Then how are you going to pull off the call for more gun laws, which you know you're going to need for your usual political theater on the occasion of the next massacre? You're going to say a rich man's tax evasion is a measly offense and still hope to see us to respond to your cries for severe taxing of the rich?
No, no, your best move is to trash Biden. You already kicked him to the curb last July. No one remembers the show of honoring his statesmanship you staged at the Democratic National Convention. You've already lost the election and suffered a complete breakdown of confidence in your party. You need to rebuild the foundation. There's nothing to keep. Your party is a teardown.
Trump is about to take over and make a show out of throwing light on the deep state. Don't condemn yourself to defending every awful thing that may come out — which may include corrupt dealings with Ukraine and China that were blithely swept into Biden's pardon of Hunter. Trash Joe Biden now to position yourself to seem to welcome all this forthcoming bad news and to offer yourself as the staunch new party of reform.
This blog has a theme today.
The quotes in the post headline are from the first 2 posts of the day, below. The Bannon article has 2 more quotes about breakage:
• Spoken in a new interview: "Somebody’s got to break the system so somebody else can come in and build it. People have roles in life, right?"
• Spoken on January 5, 2021: "All hell is going to break loose tomorrow."
“We are so close,” he tells me. “We just need to see this through.” Trump may have won the presidency, but to enact the sweeping changes he wants to make — chief among them destroying the administrative state and deporting millions of undocumented migrants — he needs to move fast, with the support of his party.
The article, by Peter Baker, is "In Pardoning His Son, Biden Echoes Some of Trump’s Complaints/President Biden complained about selective prosecution and political pressure in a system he has spent his public life defending."
The prosecutions of Mr. Trump and the younger Mr. Biden were each handled by separate special counsels appointed specifically to insulate the cases from politics.... There is no evidence that Mr. Biden had any involvement in Mr. Trump’s cases.... But Mr. Biden’s pardon will make it harder for Democrats to defend the integrity of the Justice Department and stand against Mr. Trump’s unapologetic plans to use it for political purposes even as he seeks to install Kash Patel, an adviser who has vowed to “come after” the president-elect’s enemies, as the next director of the F.B.I. It will also be harder for Democrats to criticize Mr. Trump for his prolific use of the pardon power to absolve friends and allies, some of whom could have been witnesses against him in previous investigations....
Mr. Biden’s pardon will also give ammunition to Republicans who have contended that Hunter Biden was guilty of wrongdoing beyond the charges for which he was actually prosecuted.... The pardon Mr. Biden issued to his son specifically covers any offenses “which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from Jan. 1, 2014, through Dec. 1, 2024,” not just the tax and gun charges....
“There has been an effort to break Hunter — who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution,” the president said. “In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me — and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough.”
You can only cogently say "Enough is enough" about the things that lie within your own power.
Mr. Patel laid out his vision for wreaking vengeance on the F.B.I. and Justice Department in a book, “Government Gangsters,” calling for clearing out the top ranks of the bureau, which he called “a threat to the people.” He also wrote a children’s book, “The Plot Against the King,” telling through fantasy the story of the investigations into Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign’s possible ties to Russians....
In planning to remove Mr. Wray from atop the nation’s premier law enforcement agency, Mr. Trump would be echoing one of the most defining acts of his first term, his dismissal of James B. Comey as F.B.I. director as investigations of Trump associates began to heat up. That act led to the appointment of the special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, who spent nearly two years examining the Trump campaign’s possible ties to Russia....ADDED:
AND:Do you guys even understand how amazing this Kash appointment is?!
— Defender of the Republic 🇺🇸 (@realdefender45) December 1, 2024
Let me remind you pic.twitter.com/nLo4aIFuDF
PLUS:🧵 of MSNBC Meltdowns tonight over Kash Patel 🤣
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) December 1, 2024
“The most dangerous nominee we’ve seen yet to our democracy” pic.twitter.com/QRhzfFUNOT
This is Kash Patel, Trump's nominee for FBI Director. The Deep State is f*cked. pic.twitter.com/cejy7hhioP
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) December 1, 2024
Then I got a text from Meade: "Pills/Bad transcription by NYT."I googled it when I was writing the post, and I considered elaborating on this figure of speech. I couldn't find any example of "break pearls in half" as a figurative expression. I did find out that pearls are *cut* in half for some purposes, but these were real, not metaphorical, pearls. What did Ben mean? All I can think of is Mickey Mouse, starving, and cutting one bean into slices.
That's the top-rated comment at the Washington Post's article "Hunter Biden’s team issues a fiery defense ahead of sentencing, possible pardon/Judges are scheduled to sentence the president’s son for gun and tax offenses in December."
President Biden, we're told, "repeatedly said that he will not pardon or commute the sentences of his son." But, yeah, who cares? He was running for office, and he didn't even win on that promise. He didn't even lose. He got ousted by fellow Democrats who thought he couldn't win and then they lost. Worst loss ever. Ignominious. And he's still got to drag his ancient body through 7 more weeks of this "presidency" nobody thinks he can do anymore. Surely, he can do one thing — that thing maybe he can't even remember promising he wouldn't do — and pardon his only living son, the scoundrel Hunter. Who believes promises these days? Everyone promises anything and everything to get elected. Is he supposed to drag himself through his last days on Earth — his post-presidency days — with his son in prison? Is he supposed to satisfy himself instead with the hollow, icy honor of posing as a weirdly scrupulous man who kept a promise not to pardon his son? Promise? Was there really a promise? Love. Family love. That's the greater thing. No joke.
UPDATE, later the same day: Biden pardoned Hunter.
Chew on this, from 2019:
December 8, 2019
Part of blogging is choosing what not to blog.
There's one thing in the last few days that so many people seemed to think needed to be blogged (or tweeted or Facebooked) about, and I knew not to be part of the virality. It's nothing that involved anyone dying or anything evil, just something where I could see people were accepting a cultural con and doing free PR for somebody. There's an additional development that makes it more obvious that it was that sort of thing, but many people are doing another post about that. I'm pleased with myself for passing on this story, which I won't identify because that's my point. I didn't let myself be used in someone else's promotion. Didn't do it before, and won't do it now.
ADDED: I said "I won't do it now," when "now" was 4:57 a.m., but I will do it now, at 2:58 p.m., because the post did get people guessing, and I want to recognize the winner, who posted at 8:11 a.m. The winner is dustbunny, who said: "The duct-taped banana art scam."Tags: bad art, bananas, blogging, dustbunny, unsaid things