"When officers arrived at the home, they found several wild animals all roaming freely inside Meyer’s home, including three tigers, a cougar, a skunk and a fox..."

"... police said. They also found Meyer’s 14-year-old daughter in the home during that time, police said."

The news clip at the link doesn't mention the selfie angle to this woman's behavior, but here's the screen grab I made:

"We should subject him to merciless scrutiny and criticism, just as we should with any other president."

"In fact, that will be possible only if we accept that he is legitimately the 45th President of the United States, and the time for protesting Trump's holding this office has passed. If you drown out any discussion of the specifics of his presidency with the familiar refrains that he's abnormal, racist, sexist, etc., you'll remove yourself from the realm of productive debates about the president."

Writes my son, John Althouse Cohen, urging us to get past the shock of Trump's election and start taking him seriously. Trump wasn't taken sufficiently seriously as he ran for President, but he achieved everything he said he would. We should assume he's going to do the specific things he's got in his first-100-days plan and focus on what we'd like and not like to see happen. As John puts it, none of Trump's proposals "involve turning America into a fascist dictatorship, forcibly removing citizens from the country, systematically violating due process, instituting apartheid, or squelching free speech." And some of the proposals are or might be good ideas that even Trump opponents might want to nudge him to focus on.

I remember a couple days before the election, when Newt Gingrich said: "[I]f Trump is elected, it will just be like Madison, Wisconsin with Scott Walker.... a Madison, Wisconsin kind of struggle if Trump wins." But the Wisconsin protests did not happen at the point of Scott Walker's election in 2010. They began in February 2011, after Scott Walker had taken office and the GOP legislature had presented a bill — Act 10 — with specific proposals people objected to. The anger and outrage was directed at legislation, not at the outcome of the election.

So the not-my-President protests against Trump are not like what happened in Wisconsin. Protesting an election — and election that is not contested or unclear — doesn't make much sense unless you're opposed to preserving our constitutional system of government. Perhaps some protesters fall into that category. Some may be a bit confused and think the electoral college ought to be changed, but that's not to say there's something illegitimate about the result of the election. Trump won clearly under the rules of the game everyone was playing. The protesters seem mostly to be afraid of what Trump will do, so they ought to address their protests to the specific proposals.

That's not only how the Wisconsin protests worked, that's how the Tea Party originated. It was not at the point of the election or the inauguration, but the following month, in February, when something particular was proposed. It happened to be — did you remember? — Obama's mortgage relief plan.

The Tea Party has had a lasting effect on American politics, and I don't think we'd have seen the same thing at all if it had begun as a freakout on seeing Barack Obama elected.

Lesley Stahl to Donald Trump: "A lot of people are afraid. They’re really afraid. African Americans think there’s a target on their back."

What is the basis for the statement that Donald Trump has made "African Americans think there’s a target on their back"?

And if there is no basis — I don't think there is — then Lesley Stahl — ironically — should be condemned for the very thing for which she is blaming Trump — making black people feel targeted.

ADDED: Stahl was crafty in the way she phrased her question — nonquestion, really:

I want to ask you all about something that’s going on right now around the country. A lot of people are afraid. They’re really afraid. African Americans think there’s a target on their back. Muslims are terrified.

There's just this fear out there. She's not saying who scared who. She put black people and Muslims together. Muslims heard some specific policy proposals that are the basis of an appropriate question about fear. She did not mention Hispanic people, some of whom could be said to feel threatened by immigration proposals. But what's the Trump-connected basis for fear in black people?

Trump's response was to say "it’s horrible if that’s happening" and to direct an attack at the press: "they’ll take every single little incident that they can find in this country," even things that might have happened if he wasn't "around doing this," and "they’ll make into an event because that’s the way the press is."

Stahl does not frame a follow-up question that specifies how she's tying Trump to the fear going on right now. She merely invites the Trump offspring " to say anything about this fear that’s out there." "Out there" is an embarrassing tell.

Donald Trump, Jr. steps up: "I think the fears, you know, while they may be there, some fabricated, some not-- are totally unfounded."

ALSO: "Trump transition team begins minority outreach with 'new deal for Black America.'"

How Donald Trump used and deflected questions about same-sex marriage and the abortion precedents.

Let's study the "60 Minutes" transcript. Lesley Stahl brought up the diverse set of individuals that she labeled "the LGBTQ group" — it's "One of the groups that’s expressing fear." Trump reminded her that he "mentioned them at the Republican National Convention," and: "Everybody said, 'That was so great.' I have been, you know, I’ve been a supporter."

So Stahl switched to an issue that is important to many of people, individuals both in and, like me, outside of the group: "Do you support marriage equality?" Trump said:

It’s irrelevant because it was already settled. It’s law. It was settled in the Supreme Court. I mean it’s done.

Stahl tried to jump in with "So even if you appoint a judge that," and Trump just kept going, mentioning the Supreme Court, but only as an institution that has already done something. It's already decided:

It’s done. It-- you have-- these cases have gone to the Supreme Court. They’ve been settled. And, I’m fine with that.

This is different — but not that different — from how he'd spoken a moment earlier about abortion and the Supreme Court. I say "not that different," because the question was framed differently for abortion:

Lesley Stahl: During the campaign, you said that you would appoint justices who were against abortion rights. Will you appoint-- are you looking to appoint a justice who wants to overturn Roe v. Wade?

That's different from the demand for his opinion on same-sex marriage, "Do you support marriage equality?" Note that Trump did not answer the question asked. He only said it didn't matter, then pointed to the Court's past decision, which he said he was "fine with." I'd infer that he supports same-sex marriage or at least opposes upsetting the expectations that fell in place when the Court decided.

With abortion, the question was about whom he'd pick for the Court and whether that person was not just someone who personally opposes abortion but someone who "wants to overturn Roe v. Wade." That's a different question, and it was also a question he didn't answer:

Donald Trump: So look, here’s what’s going to happen-- I’m going to-- I’m pro-life. The judges will be pro-life. They’ll be very—

Note that he first switched to his personal opinion — "I’m pro-life" — and then he addressed the nominees' — he pluralized it — opinion: They'll be very pro-life. Stahl then prodded him about whether they'd actually be for overturning the precedent (because one can be personally pro-life but still believe in keeping the precedent in place). Trump deflected the question again:

Well, there are a couple of things. They’ll be pro-life, they’ll be-- in terms of the whole gun situation, we know the Second Amendment and everybody’s talking about the Second Amendment and they’re trying to dice it up and change it, they’re going to be very pro-Second Amendment. But having to do with abortion if it ever were overturned, it would go back to the states. So it would go back to the states and--

You might think he finally danced back to the question, but he did not. He only started explaining what would happen if Roe v. Wade were overturned, not whether he'd appoint a justice who "wants to overturn Roe v. Wade." This time, he succeeded in knocking Stahl off the question. We got this back-and-forth:

Lesley Stahl: Yeah, but then some women won’t be able to get an abortion?

Donald Trump: No, it’ll go back to the states.

Lesley Stahl: By state—no some --

Donald Trump: Yeah.

Donald Trump: Yeah, well, they’ll perhaps have to go, they’ll have to go to another state.

Lesley Stahl: And that’s OK?

Donald Trump: Well, we’ll see what happens. It’s got a long way to go, just so you understand. That has a long, long way to go.

That's only about how people would deal with the loss of the constitutional right to have an abortion. Trump doesn't even concede that it would be "OK" to put women in the position of needing to travel farther to obtain an abortion. He gently puts the question away with the familiar colloquial phrase "we’ll see what happens." He pats the question to sleep with "long... long, long." I read that to mean what I already thought: He doesn't want Roe v. Wade to be overturned, and even as he wants pro-lifers to know he cares, he'd like pro-choicers not to worry too much.

"I don’t want to be just a little nice monotone character and in many cases I will be... that’s easier. Honestly to do that, it’s easier."

Said Donald Trump to Lesley Stahl on "60 Minutes" last night. Full video and transcript, here.

The NYT publisher and executive editor would like you to take them seriously now... now that they are done putting their all into getting Hillary Clinton elected.

They'd like to be empowered for the purpose of undercutting President Trump.

I don't know who's supposed to be influenced by this:

As we reflect on the momentous result, and the months of reporting and polling that preceded it, we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism. That is to report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives and life experiences in the stories that we bring to you. It is also to hold power to account, impartially and unflinchingly. You can rely on The New York Times to bring the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage of the new president and his team.

We cannot deliver the independent, original journalism for which we are known without the loyalty of our readers. We want to take this opportunity, on behalf of all Times journalists, to thank you for that loyalty.

Please, don't go. I get that they're saying that. But I don't get the argument why we should stay. I see a promise to keep doing something they haven't been doing. Or... a dishonest claim about what has been done and a promise to continue dishonestly. There's no confession of bias, no admission of any need to do better.

Striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives... what? Does it depend on the meaning of "striving"?

ADDED: As you can see, I didn't consider what the NYT wrote to be anything close to an apology, but Donald Trump characterized it as an apology in this tweet:

The @nytimes sent a letter to their subscribers apologizing for their BAD coverage of me. I wonder if it will change - doubt it?

They all laughed.

"How should Democrats respond to Gary Johnson and Jill Stein supporters?"

My son John, a Johnson voter, opines.

Think about this: a candidate as bumbling as Johnson, who was ignored by the mainstream media except when there was a story that allowed the media to ridicule him for supposedly not knowing about the world, did far better than any other Libertarian candidate in history. That should send a message....

It's Priebus as Chief of Staff.

And I guess this means Trump is leaning toward looking normal.

In selecting Mr. Priebus, the president-elect passed over Stephen K. Bannon, the right-wing media mogul who oversaw his presidential campaign. If Mr. Trump had appointed Mr. Bannon, a fierce critic of the Republican establishment, it would have signaled a continued disdain for a party that Mr. Trump fought throughout his campaign.

Nice to see the Wisconsin boy chosen.

Robert Stacy McCain reads Jessica Valenti's memoir "Sex Object."

Excerpt:

Dear God, what awful choices she has made in her life! Her personality was warped by insecurity, a problem made worse by the way her parents burdened her with their own ambitions and, of course, there was New York City itself.... The working-class neighborhood where Jessica Valenti grew up was frequented by hookers and their customers, and when she traveled to school via the subway, she encountered the notorious “flashers” and “mashers” (exhibitionists and frotteurs) who have menaced the city’s public-transportation system for decades. Ms. Valenti doesn’t seem to understand this as a uniquely urban hazard....

"I love you in a place where there's no space or time/I love you for in my life you are a friend of mine."

"And when my life is over/Remember when we were together/We were alone and I was singing this song for you..."



"Leon Russell died on Nov. 13, 2016 in Nashville at the age of 74. His wife said that he passed away in his sleep."

From the NYT obituary:

With a top hat on his head, hair well past his shoulders, a long beard, an Oklahoma drawl in his voice and his fingers splashing two-fisted barrelhouse piano chords, Mr. Russell cut a flamboyant figure in the early 1970s. He led Joe Cocker’s band Mad Dogs & Englishmen, appeared at George Harrison’s 1971 Concert for Bangladesh and had hits of his own, including “Tight Rope.” His songs also became hits for others, among them “Superstar” (written with Bonnie Bramlett) for the Carpenters, “Delta Lady” for Joe Cocker and “This Masquerade” for George Benson. More than 100 acts have recorded “A Song for You,” a song Mr. Russell said he wrote in 10 minutes.

By the time Mr. Russell released his first solo album in 1970, he had already played on hundreds of songs as one of the top studio musicians in Los Angeles. Mr. Russell was in Phil Spector’s Wall of Sound Orchestra, and he played sessions for Frank Sinatra, Sam Cooke, Aretha Franklin, the Ventures and the Monkees, among many others. He is heard on “Mr. Tambourine Man” by the Byrds, “A Taste of Honey” by Herb Alpert, “Live With Me” by the Rolling Stones and all of the Beach Boys’ early albums, including “Pet Sounds.”

Amazing. So many beautiful songs. All those connections.

"What if minority voters just won’t turn out for non-minority candidates any more?"

"That’s a real problem for the Democrats, especially if all the racial politics they pursue in order to try to motivate minority voters (Black Lives Matter, immigration protests, etc.) actually serve to make minorities less likely to vote for whites, even if they’re Democrats. And if working-class whites start to vote Republican the way minorities have voted Democratic — and all that racial politics is likely to encourage that — the Dems are in trouble."

Writes Instapundit.

You can't control human minds. If you get people to think of one thing, they're not going to stay with that one thing. It will remind them of other things and there are consequences. It seems as though the Democratic Party had the idea of telling people in some groups that they should think of themselves as members of that group and to do what is advantageous to their group interests, which is to support the Democratic Party.

But the message doesn't stick and remain fixed. For one thing, everyone, not just the people in the targeted group, hears the message, and those non-targeted people may react, feeling perhaps that they should think of themselves as members of their group and to pursue the interests of their group.

And the people in the targeted groups might resist being grouped the way the Party wants them to stay grouped or they may accept the grouping but question whether the Party that wants to own that group really has its best interests at heart. After all, the Party has the open and obvious goal of getting power, and everyone can see that they are being used as a means to the Party's end.

"People, stop being crazy. Yes, we have a new President..."

"Everybody has gone coo-coo. The only sane person is this crazy Russian immigrant..."

"A California middle school teacher was recorded telling minority students their parents would be deported, leaving them to be placed in foster care..."

At Bret Harte Preparatory Middle School in South Los Angeles.

"If you were born here, then your parents gotta go, and they gonna leave you behind. You’ll be in foster care,” said the male phys ed teacher to 6th graders.

“How are they going to find me?” a student asks.

“I got your phone numbers, your address, your mama’s address, your daddy’s address. It’s all in the system, sweetie. And when they come and there’s an illegal, they gotta go,” the teacher responds.

ADDED: I was curious about Bret Harte Preparatory Middle School. I checked the website and found this in its "mission statement":

Every student and adult on campus has the right to learn and work in an environment that is sage free of harmful and disruptive influences.  No person will be allowed to deprive another person of an opportunity to learn.

Sage free?? Is that like "Stone Free"...



... but with sage...

The first "Saturday Night Live" after the election — I was expecting something great... what a disappointment!

"Alec Baldwin will have to be on," I said, eagerly awaiting the opening sketch and wanting to see what the show would do with the kick-in-the-head Trump victory.

The show opened with Kate McKinnon's Hillary Clinton playing somber chords on the piano...

... I recognize the chords — there's no secret — it's "Hallelujah." They're combining the election story with the story of the death of Leonard Cohen. How's that going to work?

"Oh, she's doing this in earnest," Meade says, and he turns out to be right. Kate McKinnon sang the song in a somber tone, an earnest expression of sadness about the election (and perhaps also about the death of Leonard Cohen). No Alec-Baldwin-as-Donald-Trump ever bursts in. She completes the song, then turns to us and says, earnestly, her eyes glistening with tears, "I'm not giving up and neither should you."

The rest of the show was under-written and flat. I'm sure they knew that, since in one segment, they resorted to the gimmick of going meta, stopping a sketch mid-scene and switching to the actors analyzing what went wrong with the sketch, and the meta part was also under-written and flat.

The host was Dave Chappelle, who was making a big comeback. His opening monologue seemed be the result of a decision to just let him go on however he wanted for as long as he wanted. Many of his lines were garbled, and nearly all of it was some sort of racial analysis of what just happened in the election, with the main idea being that black people have always known that white people are racist. The most memorable joke was that he's staying in a Trump hotel and he likes it because: "Housekeeper comes in in the morning and cleans my room and I'm just 'Hey, good morning, housekeeper!' grab a handful of pussy, say, you know, 'Boss said it was okay.'"

There were some humiliating, cringe-inducing sketches. 2 were based on pathetic couples getting sex — "Last Call with Dave Chappelle" and "Love and Leslie" — and one was about a grown man (Chappelle) breastfeeding on his mother (Leslie Jones). There was a long, unfunny impersonation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. There was a passable sketch about young white people watching the election returns with their black friend, played by Chappelle, who, I'm thinking, the show's decisionmakers deemed insufficiently energetically funny, since midway through the sketch, Chris Rock shows up to play the role of the white people's other black friend. There was an elaborately produced "Walking Dead" segment that gave Chappelle a chance to bring back a lot of characters that some people may remember from his old TV show. I don't know "Walking Dead" and I didn't watch much of the old Chappelle TV show, so I found this segment very hard to watch. It was one black man forcing a group of black men down on their knees and threatening them with violence. When the violence finally comes — at 3:23 — it gets surreal, and you might enjoy this part if you can endure the n-word and decapitation.

The severed head does some comical things. At 4:10 it talks about the nation "beginning to heal, through laughing again": "Because even though our country feels irrevocably severed like a man from his head, let my example prove that we should continue to move forward." The head asks us "to see ourselves in one another," and the special effects put this talking head in various places, including on the body of Donald Trump ("I am every man") and Hillary Clinton ("I am every woman").

The severed head was the best thing on the show. But then, I like optimism and surrealism. Mostly, I think the show just couldn't get it together to digest the news enough to make it into comedy. It was a real test of comic skill, nerve, and endurance, and they didn't have what it took. I guess it would have been easy to celebrate a Hillary victory, to gloat and mock, but they got their comeuppance, and it showed.

The 10-year-old boy did a great job of standing there stoically at 3 a.m. Imagine being thrust into the public spotlight like that!

Rousted out of a deep sleep, suited up like an adult, and stood on the stage to be gawked at by a billion people. It was a surreal moment for all of us, but what was it to the boy? Now, a GIF has been made of the funniest second of the child's struggle, and people a Facebook watch it loop and they laugh.



Now, he must go live in the White House. When is the last time a boy has been made to live as the only child in the White House? John John had a sister. Poor Barron! My heart goes out to him. He's doing a great job. The idea that this GIF shows that he doesn't respect his father makes me sad. How hard he tried at 3 a.m. to do what was right, but the boy's eyes rolled back for a second, perhaps into sleep, and it amused the crowd.