Sunday Reads: Friday Lite Make-Up Cartoon Post

Pin-up by Bill Medcalf

Pin-up by Bill Medcalf

Good Morning

<——–  Isn’t she beautiful?

Doesn’t she look happy and fancy free?

Enjoying a Sunday drive in a damn cool convertible on a fabulous sunny day.

Something that we all deserve, yes?

Well, that pin-up by artist Bill Medcalf is the closest thing I could get for you this morning.

Okay, here are a few news stories and then the cartoons, since we did not have any on Friday night.

Police: Man hijacked Texas bus, let driver and passengers go, then killed himself after chase


China quake: Rescuers battle to reach survivors

The quake has left 203 dead or missing and has injured some 11,500.

The latest figures were given by China’s Ministry of Civil Affairs, quoted by Xinhua. It said 960 of the injured were in serious condition.

You read those figures right.

Cruz called Sandy aid ‘pork’ but wants ‘all available resources’ after Texas blast

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) says that he is prepared to make “all available resources” available from the federal government to assist in the recovery after an explosion at a fertilizer plant in Texas — but the senator voted against aid for victims of Hurricane Sandy earlier because he said it was “pork.”

The Dallas Morning News reported on Thursday that Cruz had reacted to the fertilizer plant explosion that killed dozens in West, Texas earlier this week.

“We are in very close touch with officials on the ground and we’re monitoring the tragic accident closely,” Cruz said in Washington. “It’s truly horrific and we are working to ensure that all available resources are marshaled to deal with the horrific loss of life and suffering that we’ve seen.”

In a statement on his website, Cruz added that “[w]e remain in communication with Gov. Perry’s office and emergency management officials, and stand to offer whatever support we can.”

But following the super storm that devastated much of the East Coast last year, Cruz was not as willing to part with taxpayer money.

According to The New York Times, the junior Texas senator voted against Sandy aid three times.

I just won’t make a comment about this, but my guess is you know what I would say about it if I did.

Two more links for you…

Yesterday Boston Boomer put this Greenwald link in the comments, it is good and I think it deserves a front page notice: What rights should Dzhokhar Tsarnaev get and why does it matter?

First, the Obama administration has already rolled back Miranda rights for terrorism suspects captured on US soil. It did so two years ago with almost no controversy or even notice, including from many of those who so vocally condemned Graham’s Miranda tweets yesterday. In May, 2010, the New York Times’ Charlie Savage – under the headline “Holder Backs a Miranda Limit for Terror Suspects” – reported that “the Obama administration said Sunday it would seek a law allowing investigators to interrogate terrorism suspects without informing them of their rights.” Instead of going to Congress, the Obama DOJ, in March 2011, simply adopted their own rules that vested themselves with this power, as reported back then by Salon’s Justin Elliott (“Obama rolls back Miranda rights”), the Wall Street Journal (“Rights Are Curtailed for Terror Suspects”), the New York Times (“Delayed Miranda Warning Ordered for Terror Suspects”), and myself (“Miranda is Obama’s latest victim”).

Some of you may remember the fuss that caused. Boston Boomer wrote about it back in March of 2011, here and Dak wrote about it here.

In a great analysis last night denouncing the DOJ’s decision to delay reading Tsarnaev his rights, Slate’s Emily Bazelon details exactly what roll-back of Miranda was achieved by Obama. Specifically, the Obama DOJ exploited and radically expanded the very narrow “public safety” exception to Miranda, which was first created in 1984 by the more conservative Supreme Court justices in New York v. Quarles, over the vehement dissent of its liberal members (Brennan, Marshall and Stevens, along with O’Connor). The Quarles court held that where police officers took a very brief period to ask focused questions necessary to stop an imminent threat to public safety without first Mirandizing the suspect, the answers under those circumstances would be admissible (in Quarles, the police apprehended a rape suspect and simply asked where his gun was before reading him his rights, and the court held that the defendant’s pre-Miranda answer – “over there” – was admissible).

The Court’s liberals, led by Justice Thurgood Marshall, warned that this exception would dilute Miranda and ensure abuse. This exception, wrote Marshall, “condemns the American judiciary to a new era of post hoc inquiry into the propriety of custodial interrogations” and “endorse[s] the introduction of coerced self-incriminating statements in criminal prosecutions”. Moreover, he wrote, the “public-safety exception destroys forever the clarity of Miranda for both law enforcement officers and members of the judiciary” and said the court’s decision “cannot mask what a serious loss the administration of justice has incurred”.

As Marshall noted, the police have always had the power to question a suspect about imminent threats without Mirandizing him; indeed, they are free to question suspects about anything without first reading them their Miranda rights. But pre-Miranda statements were not admissible, could not be used to prosecute the person. This new 1984 “public safety” exception to that long-standing rule, Marshall said, guts the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee that one will not be compelled to incriminate oneself. As he put it: “were constitutional adjudication always conducted in such an ad hoc manner, the Bill of Rights would be a most unreliable protector of individual liberties.”

Go on…

As controversial as this exception was from the start (and as hated as it was among traditional, actual liberals), it was at least narrowly confined. But the Obama DOJ in 2011 wildly expanded this exception for terrorism suspects. The Obama DOJ’s Memorandum (issued in secret, of course, but then leaked) cited what it called “the magnitude and complexity of the threat often posed by terrorist organizations” in order to claim “a significantly more extensive public safety interrogation without Miranda warnings than would be permissible in an ordinary criminal case”. It expressly went beyond the “public safety” exception established by the Supreme Court to arrogate unto itself the power to question suspects about other matters without reading them their rights (emphasis added):

“There may be exceptional cases in which, although all relevant public safety questions have been asked, agents nonetheless conclude that continued unwarned interrogation is necessary to collect valuable and timely intelligence not related to any immediate threat, and that the government’s interest in obtaining this intelligence outweighs the disadvantages of proceeding with unwarned interrogation.”

That is what Graham advocated regarding Miranda: that Tsarnaev be interrogated about intelligence matters without Mirandizing him, and that’s exactly what Obama DOJ policy – two years ago – already approved. Worse, as Bazelon noted: “Who gets to make this determination? The FBI, in consultation with DoJ, if possible. In other words, the police and the prosecutors, with no one to check their power.” At the time, the ACLU made clear how menacing was the Obama DOJ’s attempted roll-back of Miranda rights for terror suspects.

Although we do not yet know how long the Boston bombing suspect will be questioned pre-Miranda or what will be asked, Bazelon – citing the Obama DOJ’s 2011 policy as well as last night’s announcement – writes:

“And so the FBI will surely ask 19-year-old Tsarnaev anything it sees fit. Not just what law enforcement needs to know to prevent a terrorist threat and keep the public safe but anything else it deemed related to ‘valuable and timely intelligence’. Couldn’t that be just about anything about Tsarnaev’s life, or his family, given that his alleged accomplice was his older brother (killed in a shootout with police)? There won’t be a public uproar. Whatever the FBI learns will be secret: We won’t know how far the interrogation went. And besides, no one is crying over the rights of the young man who is accused of killing innocent people. . . .”

So Democrats reacted with horror and outrage to Graham’s suggestion that “the last thing we may want to do is read Boston suspect Miranda Rights telling him to ‘remain silent.'” But that’s already Obama DOJ policy, enacted with little controversy. And last night’s announcement makes clear that the Obama DOJ intends, as Bazelon says, to question him about a wide range of topics far beyond matters of imminent threats to public safety without first Mirandizing him.

Please go and read the rest of that article. Greenwald goes on to say that the liberals have changed their minds on this enemy combatants…he sites MSNBC as a major supporter of it now…I didn’t know that. Honestly, I have avoided the news this weekend…could not stand it any longer. I have not changed my mind, they need to be reading Tsarnaev his Miranda rights.

This whole thing about postponing Miranda, it bothers me. Juan Cole has a post up this morning that makes some valid points. Is LindJohn’s notion of an Enemy Combatant Racist? How about attempted Assassination of the Commander in Chief?

He is referring to Lady Lindsey and John McCain by the way, but look at this:

This attempt to sidestep the US Constitution by creating an alternative jurisdiction, and to try civilians in military courts, is a stride toward dictatorship. It is precisely the tactic used by Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak, and the demand that the military stop arresting and trying civilians has been central to the country’s revolutionary reform movement.

Likewise, Bahrain has started trying civilians in military courts, as part of its authoritarian crackdown on its protest movement.

That exemplar of human rights, the Uganda regime, also resorts to this practice. So LindJohn want to put us in some pretty classy company.

That is some scary comparisons don’t you think? Cole continues…

Tsarnaev is an American citizen and a civilian who killed and injured people on American soil. He is a murderer, and should be tried in the courts like a whole host of others who committed or plotted murder as a means to terrorizing the public.

The point seems obvious to anyone to the left of Attila the Hun. Those who point to the Civil War are confusing ordinary times with times of martial law. We’re not having a civil war and there is no martial law.


Peter Bergen sagely writes that an “FBI study reported that between January 1, 2007, and October 31, 2009, white supremacists were involved in 53 acts of violence, 40 of which were assaults directed primarily at African-Americans, seven of which were murders and the rest of which were threats, arson and intimidation. Most of these were treated as racially motivated crimes rather than political acts of violence, i.e. terrorism.”

He points out that in December of 2011, Kevin Harpham was sentenced to 32 years for planting a bomb at the site of a Martin Luther King, Jr., parade in Spokane, Washington. There isn’t any difference between Harpham and Tsarnaev. Both targeted a public event involving moving through the streets. Harpham was allegedly a member of a hate group, the National Alliance, founded by William Price, the author of ?The Turner Diaries. He was also interested in the Aryan Nation..

Then there was Wade Michael Page, who killed six persons, five of them of Sikh heritage and one a policeman. His was certainly an act of terrorism.

I am not aware that Senators McCain and Graham suggested that any of these individuals be tried as enemy combatants.

I’ll just come out with it. I have to ask whether their use of the term “enemy combatant” is racist. Is it only for deployment against people not of northern European heritage?

I don’t know about if it would be fair to ask if this is racist…maybe it is. But it seems to me that this is definitely being used selectively. And that bothers the hell out of me.

You want to read something chilling, take a look at this…

Boston Boomer ended her post on Obama = Bush on Steroids about his change in Miranda Rights with this sentence:

We might as well be living in Libya or Egypt.

And here you have Juan Cole making the same kind of comparison two years later.

Dakinikat wrote this in her post about the withering Miranda Rights under Obama, again this is two years ago:

Just hope you never get classified as a terrorist or you’ll disappear down some rabbit hole.

Let it soak in a moment.

I bet Graham and McCain will be making the Sunday Talk Show rounds this morning, calling for Tsarnaev to be held down at Guantanamo.


Enough of that.

Cartoon time!

GOP and Guns by Political Cartoonist Daryl Cagle

130552 600 GOP and Guns cartoons

Rubber Stamp by Political Cartoonist Bill Day

130476 600 Rubber Stamp cartoons

Spineless by Political Cartoonist Pat Bagley

130414 600 Spineless cartoons

Sleeping with the NRA by Political Cartoonist Cal Grondahl

130563 600 Sleeping with the NRA cartoons

Life Begins and Ends by Political Cartoonist Bill Schorr

129875 600 Life Begins and Ends cartoons

NRA elephant by Political Cartoonist Arend van Dam

130517 600 NRA elephant cartoons

Congress as sheep fearing the NRA, stampeding away from gun safety legislation – Political Cartoon by Kate Palmer, @katespalmer – 04/19/2013

Cartoon by Kate Palmer - Congress as sheep fearing the NRA, stampeding away from gun safety legislation

The Cowardly Liar by Political Cartoonist John Darkow

130484 600 The Cowardly Liar cartoons

Suspect – Political Cartoon by Rob Rogers, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette – 04/21/2013

Cartoon by Rob Rogers - Suspect

Oh did you all see the latest from CNN? According to Andy Borowitz:

CNN Quits Breaking News, Becomes “CNN Classic” : The New Yorker

cnn-desert-storm.jpgIn a sweeping format change that marks the end of an era for the nation’s first cable news outlet, CNN announced today that it would no longer air breaking news and would instead re-run news stories of the past “that we know we got right.”

The rebranded network, to début nationwide on Monday, will be called “CNN Classic.”

“Breaking news is hard,” said the newly installed CNN chief, Jeff Zucker. “You have to talk to sources, make sure their stories check out O.K., and then get on the air and not say anything stupid. I, for one, am thrilled to be getting out of that horrible business.”

CNN Classic will begin its broadcast day on Monday, Mr. Zucker said, “with round-the-clock coverage of Operation Desert Storm.”

Mr. Zucker did not indicate what impact the new format would have on such CNN stars as Wolf Blitzer, saying only, “I can’t promise that Wolf will be a part of CNN’s future, but he will continue to be a big part of our past.”

The CNN chief scoffed at reports that other cable news outlets had eclipsed his network once and for all, throwing down this gauntlet: “We are going to win May sweeps with Hurricane Katrina.”

NEWS COVERAGE OF THE BOSTON BOMBING by Political Cartoonist Randy Bish


AAEC – Political Cartoon by Mike Smith, Las Vegas Sun – 04/21/2013

Cartoon by Mike Smith -

Media explosion by Political Cartoonist John Cole

130525 600 Media explosion cartoons

Boston Bombing Media Fail by Political Cartoonist Rob Tornoe

130462 600 Boston Bombing Media Fail cartoons

Boston Terror by Political Cartoonist Bob Gorrell

130522 600 Boston Terror cartoons

AAEC – Political Cartoon by Scott Stantis, Chicago Tribune – 04/18/2013

Cartoon by Scott Stantis -

I want to end this post with something spectacular:

Neil Diamond leads Fenway in ‘Sweet Caroline’ sing-along | News

Neil Diamond called the switchboard at Fenway Park at about 12:30 p.m. ET on Saturday afternoon.

“Hey, I’m here,” he said, according to Red Sox officials. “Can I come?”

The 72-year-old, who had flown himself to Boston just for Saturday’s 1:10 p.m. game against the Royals, surprised the 35,152 in attendance after the top of the eighth inning and sung the song that’s made him synonymous with Fenway Park.

“Sweet Caroline” may have never sounded sweeter.

Video at the link.

Enjoy your Sunday, and share your thoughts with us today.

65 Comments on “Sunday Reads: Friday Lite Make-Up Cartoon Post”

  1. Silent Kate says:

    I view the Texas fertilizer plant the same as the Gulf oil spill. To me the business involved should pay for the havoc they have caused, including the murder of many people if anything they did was not done in the safest possible way. I cannot believe how little news has really been out there about this when it has devastated a community.

  2. bostonboomer says:

    This is a very meaty post–including the cartoons. Lots to think about here. Thanks, JJ.

    • Fannie says:

      Certainly do appreciate this post, and realize just how much all of as citizens of this have our homework to do……………You’d think some of this had sunk in since 9-11, some have, but you just don’t know who the sneaky pies are, and what they are doing behind our backs. Then when the rulings are leaked we turn our head the other way……………Something has gone wrong in our thinking about “safety”. I’ve printed out several articles including BB and Dak’s article from 2011……………..will read and do some homework.

      One thing off the top, with this “public safety exception”……… it a fact that when interogated nothing said by anyone is brought up in court as fact?………..Wondering about that.

      Something stinks with this “War on Terrorism” thank you Bush and Obama.

    • dakinikat says:

      completely agree …

  3. ecocatwoman says:

    Wow jj, what a great post. Thought of you last night when I saw Freaks was going to be on AMC. I had a restless night & ended up catching only part of Ken Burns latest PBS show, The Central Park Five. I highly recommend it. It seemed to me to fit into what is happening now with Dzhokhar. It’s as if he’s been tried & convicted already. And after watching the Burns’ piece it sure seems to me that our justice system is racist. The only thing we can be sure of where our “rights” are concerned is that only the 2nd Amendment right is sacrosanct. Thanks for the comprehensive roundup on the Miranda apocalypse. Great job of pulling the commentaries together for us.

    Ted Cruz is the poster child for what’s wrong with the Republicans – hypocrites. Won’t fund relief for a natural disaster but tax dollars should be spent when the disaster is caused by a private company/corporation. It’s never about real people, only the Right people.

    I can’t possibly pick a favorite cartoon, each one is a masterpiece.

    For those interested, here’s the link to The Central Park Five:

    • TY Connie, but I gotta correct you there, AMC is where you go for mad men and walking dead things. TCM is for classic movies. Sorry to be a stickler but I would not know what I’d do without TCM. Seriously, it is the only thing I watch on TV. It is my only outlet. If I had to have three things in this world to make me happy….it would be. Chocolate, spell check (after the deadline) and TCM.

      Those three days w/o spell check was a nightmare. Sending messages on my phone to Kat and BB, ooof. Spelling Caucusus like caucuses…and other assorted spelling dysassters was imbearassing. 😉

      • ecocatwoman says:

        LOL! Especially because I’m a spelling fanatic.

        Mea culpa. Actually AMC is a movie chain, so we’re both a bit addled. I actually meant TCM but my acronym checker wasn’t working this AM, along with my brain being on recess.

        I just watched Times Talks, the panel interview following The Central Park 5. Wow – tragic, infuriating, uplifting & a tear-jerker. If interested, you can find it at the link I posted above to the PBS site.

      • Beata says:

        Great post, JJ. I love the cartoons.

        I would be lost without TCM, too. I need my classic movie fix. There doesn’t seem to be anything terrific on the channel today, but on Monday night, “Leave Her to Heaven” (1945) is being shown. I love Gene Tierney and that movie!

  4. janey says:

    oh, come on, anyone in this country who doesn’t know their miranda rights should go back to grade school or watch some cop shows. Especially so if you have studied our laws and history in order to become a citizen. You have to pass tests to do that or at least you used to.

    • If that is the case then you would also know that you are supposed to be read those Miranda rights at the time of arrest. Really, the same people making comments like this are the first ones who would raise hell if their rights were “postponed.”

      • janey says:

        New law says they can delay that for 48 hours in order to save lives in imminent danger. New law from the 9/11 era/

      • janey says:

        you can scream all you want, but our lawmakers passed this. That makes it law, until something like the SCOTUS knocks it down. You might like this law if you were in Boston wondering if there were more bombs laying around.

      • janey says:

        PS. Miranda doesn’t do you much good if you don’t know when the cops are trying to get around it. Such as bringing you in but not telling you that you are a suspect. Lying to you about evidence or convincing you are better off without a lawyer. Miranda should be taught right along with the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.

      • bostonboomer says:

        Actually, it isn’t a “new law.” The limitation on Miranda warnings is based on a 1984 SCOTUS decision. I’ve posted comments about this several times over the past couple of days. I don’t have time right at the moment to find the links again. Any information gained from suspects before the Miranda warning cannot be used against him/her in court.

        It appears that Dzhokar Tsarnaev may be charged today, DOJ has told CNN.

        A much more important issue is when Tsarnaev will go before a judge and be assigned a lawyer.

        But the Public Defender’s office has already been told they will be representing him.

        Tasarnaev is fortunate that he is in Massachusetts. I guarantee you there will be a fight if the Obama administration tries anything unconstitutional.

      • RalphB says:

        Marcy is correct about the assignment of an attorney. That normally happens when a suspect is charged or arraigned,

        (CNN) — Dzhokar Tsarnaev, the surviving suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings, may be charged in his hospital bed Sunday, a Department of Justice official told CNN.

        Because Tsarnaev is still in serious condition, a judge would come to his hospital bedside to charge him, a law enforcement source said, noting that suspects who face federal charges are normally arraigned within 48 hours of arrest. Tsarnaev is currently unable to speak.

      • bostonboomer says:

        Yes, and since the public defender’s ofc in Boston has already been contacted and an attorney assigned, I object to the hysterical accusations that suddenly Massachusetts is going to knuckle under to idiots like Lindsey Graham.

        Geeze, even Glenn Greenwald says that a short delay in reading the Miranda rights isn’t a problem. As far as I know, the kid hasn’t even been able to talk yet. He’s probably not aware enough of his surroundings to process anything yet.

      • RalphB says:

        BB. I doubt it’s just MA. I believe law enforcement here would also fight the enemy combatant designation as hard as possible. It seems absurd on it’s face.

      • bostonboomer says:


        Thanks for the support. I’m sure they would fight it in Texas. I didn’t mean to suggest that. I’m just trying to argue that maybe I know something about Boston and Massachusetts that people who don’t live here might not. From the CNN link, it appears that local cops intend to prosecute for murder, so obviously they’d fight having the Feds doing anything weird.

        I recall I went through something like this at another blog when the Cambridge Police violated the rights of a prominent Harvard prof., and no one wanted to listen to anything I or anyone else who lived her (MABlue, Seriously) had to say about it. In that case, I tried to point out that this history of the Cambridge police would suggest their actions were questionable–but I was ignored by people who have never set foot in Cambridge or MA.

        When I referred to Martha Coakley, I was thinking of her role in fight DOMA and forcing Obama to stop defending it.

    • quixote says:

      Just because somebody knows their rights doesn’t let law enforcement off from following the law.

      Hysteria has become institutionalized in this country. Great post, JJ.

      (Could I add a post of mine to your excellent list about our government and dictatorship? June 2009. I’m pretty sure I crossposted it to Skydancing, but I don’t have that link handy. Anyway, almost four years later, and I only want to say this even louder: “I never thought I’d see liberals making excuses for bigotry and war, just because it was their own side doing it. I never thought it would hurt to remember how much hope I felt that the long nightmare of criminal government was coming to an end. I never thought I’d find out that it can get worse than having an unpopular dictator. You can have a popular one.”)

      • bostonboomer says:

        Who are the “liberals” making excuses for bigotry and war? I’m not saying you’re wrong, but could you please be specific. I certainly don’t think anyone at Sky Dancing blog is doing that.

      • quixote says:

        (Um, BB? It’s not about Skydancing. It’s about dictators. Things like pretending there could be legal justifications for torture. You’ve written about it yourself.)

      • bostonboomer says:

        I wrote about liberals finding justifications for torture? Which liberals? Give me at least one name.

        And no, I don’t consider Obama or any of his advisers to be liberals.

    • Which is important because: Can Tsarnaev be ruled an ‘enemy combatant’? | The Great Debate

      The first question depends on the law – so there is a right or wrong answer. If the Justice Department tried to classify Tsarnaev as an enemy combatant without the proper legal authority, for example, the courts would reject that attempt and completely reclassify him.

      Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.), as well as other elected officials, are now calling on the Obama administration to follow the enemy combatant route. Before the Justice Department considers whether that’s a good idea, however, it must determine if it is a legal possibility.

      The short answer is no – unless evidence emerges that tangibly links the suspect to enemy forces, like al Qaeda, that are listed in the September 11, 2001 authorization of force. This is the main source of the administration’s war powers, and courts have only applied the enemy combatant authority to potential defendants who are in or “substantially” backing al Qaeda, the Taliban or other related forces.

      Many observers now talk about how they would like Tsarnaev to be branded an enemy combatant – partially because it would reduce the rights he is afforded. The intense desire to cancel the rights of accused murderers is an old phenomenon, of course. This is one reason our system uses laws and courts, and not a flash-mob referendum, to hold the line.

      But the Obama administration can’t just brand any suspect an enemy combatant. It must use the legal criteria. And based on the available information,.Tsarnaev probably does not qualify.

      There are also many strong reasons why it would be bad policy – even if it were legal. Revoking the constitutional rights of American citizens, on American soil, based on a suspected crime, opens the door to a two-tiered justice system and executive abuse.

      Now, as the administration continues to treat Tsarnaev as a standard criminal defendant, the second question is whether his status as an accused terrorist should somehow alter his rights or treatment.

      This is where the Miranda debate arises. Under a 2011 policy, when “operational terrorists” are involved, the Obama administration aims to stretch Miranda’s public safety exception to the limit.

      The standard exception enables police to push suspects for information that could prevent imminent danger – without advising them of their rights to remain silent or get a lawyer. Courts have defined imminence as a matter of minutes, not hours or days.

      read the rest at the link

      • Let me add that I disagree with Ari Melber when he says that, “Obama has shown more concern for law and precedent than his predecessor. And he has the judicial record to prove it.”
        To me, Obama has continued Bush’s policies…so you can take that for what it is worth.

      • roofingbird says:

        It’s good. You know, it seems like Reuters is still doing a fair job of reporting.

      • roofingbird says:

        I just think that means he is more adept at maneuvering around it.

      • bostonboomer says:

        I don’t see any signs that Tsarnaev will be declared an “enemy combatant.” Talk about “hysteria”!

        That would be completely illegal if it happened, and as I said above, I strongly believe MA would fight it tooth and nail.

        From the CNN story I linked previously:

        A Justice Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told CNN he will face federal terrorism charges and possibly state murder charges.

        Can everyone please relax? This is ridiculous. I’m not defending Obama, per se, but I know Massachusetts. Martha Coakley is a fighter. Plus Deval Patrick obviously wants a legal prosecution, and he is close to Obama.

      • bostonboomer says:

        I’ll just note that I’ve lived in Boston for 46 years, and I know something about how this place operates. You’d think my opinions might carry at least some weight.

      • RalphB says:

        Apparently Huckleberry Closetcase is to be taken more seriously than I imagined whenever he gets a case of the “vapors”.

      • bostonboomer says:

        I don’t like to see that happening at Sky Dancing though.

      • RalphB says:

        Nor do I BB, I think we can and should be more reasoned than that.

  5. Mary Luke says:

    Wonderful post, JJ. You’ve outdone yourself. And where did you get the “Boston Terror News”? I sure need some cartoon right about now.

  6. Mary Luke says:

    @ Quixote: I wish I didn’t find myself having to agree with Peggy Noonan, but she just said flat out on MTP “We are the problem”, meaning “we, the media” are fueling and sustaining an atmosphere of mass hysteria and anxiety. Oh well, at least I didn’t have to agree wtih Modo on a Sunday morning.

    • dakinikat says:

      Wish she’d have mentioned that during the run up to the damned iraq war and during it when she was stoking the fans of propaganda herslef

    • dakinikat says:

      and speaking of MODO:

      If Maureen Dowd’s evisceration manqué of President Obama’s gun control strategy in the New York Times is any indication, Ms. Dowd is in the wrong line of work. She doesn’t understand American politics. She doesn’t know how votes are gained and lost, she doesn’t know what presidents do or understand what powers they have, and above all she doesn’t understand how politicians think.

      Column writing is dangerous work and long success in the game can lead to the stifling of that Editor Within who keeps you from looking too stupid in print. A rich self esteem, fortifed by decades of op-ed tenure and dinner party table talk dominance, has apparently given Ms. Dowd the confidence to believe that she is a maestro of political infighting, a Clausewitz of strategic insight and a Machiavelli of political cunning rolled up into one stylish and elegant piece of work. From the heights of insight on which she dwells, it is easy to see what that poor schmuck Barry Obama can’t: those 60 votes on gun control were his for the taking, if he was only as shrewd a politician as Maureen Dowd.

      The President needs to get his hands dirty, our genteel and accomplished op-ed writer advises the ex-community organizer and Chicago pol. He needs to get real, get down in the dirt, muck around with the senators and exercise raw power. Don’t make empty gestures and don’t give up, she advises him: fight! fight! fight!

      Perhaps because she fears that the President is too stupid to understand what she means, or simply out of her benevolent desire to show her readers just what brilliant political insight looks like, she vouchsafes us some examples.

      It’s Walter Russell Mead, however, so step carefully, while reading.

  7. bostonboomer says:

    Lawfare Blog: Four Reasons Sens. Graham and McCain are Wrong (why Tsarnaev can’t legally be designated an enemy combatant).

    Under the AUMF as interpreted by the courts, and under the NDAA as passed by Congress, the administration is authorized to hold in military detention only those who are “part of” or “substantially supporting” Al Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces. Nothing that has come to light publicly has shown that Tsarnaev was operating as part of any group covered by the AUMF. Unless and until such evidence arises, military detention is not merely a bad idea. It is simply not legally available.

    • bostonboomer says:


      …there’s the small matter of Tsarnaev’s citizenship. Tsarnaev is reportedly a naturalized American citizen, and the government’s appetite for the detention of American citizens under the laws of war has waned—and rightly so. This began under the Bush administration, which tried twice—in the early cases of Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla—to detain U.S. citizens under the laws of war and ultimately backed down both times. The question of whether such detention is legally appropriate for a U.S. citizen captured by law enforcement remains an open one. But it’s an open question that no sane executive would want to test in the presence of a viable alternative—like, say, an open-and-shut prosecution in federal court. As a matter of policy, it was informally off the table long ago, and the Obama administration made that informal policy formal. John Brennan, in a speech at Harvard Law School, declared:

      when it comes to U.S. citizens involved in terrorist-related activity, whether they are captured overseas or at home, we will prosecute them in our criminal justice system. There is bipartisan agreement that U.S. citizens should not be tried by military commission.

    • Exactly, which is why I posted that link to the Reuters article mentioning this under the link to the article that states the brothers acted alone.

      This is the point I was trying to make with those two links, my thought process was moving faster than my ideas were coming through in those comments. That is what is highlighted in the quote I have copied from the Reuters article.

      unless evidence emerges that tangibly links the suspect to enemy forces, like al Qaeda, that are listed in the September 11, 2001 authorization of force. This is the main source of the administration’s war powers, and courts have only applied the enemy combatant authority to potential defendants who are in or “substantially” backing al Qaeda, the Taliban or other related forces.

      My morning post was written before the mayor came out with that statement about the brothers acting alone!

      I don’t see how MA can do Lady Lindsey’s bidding…

      However, I will say this, I have observed the right wing media still pushing the

      Group linked to Tsarnaev brothers…
      Pair ‘specially trained’ for attack…
      ‘No doubt brothers not acting alone’…


      I said up top it would not surprise me if Graham came out in favor of sending Tsarnaev to Guantanamo, I’ll admit that was far reaching…and over the top. But this will be interesting to see how it plays out. Especially with Carmen Ortiz in the mix.

      • bostonboomer says:

        I don’t have any problems with anything you wrote or posted, JJ. I have plenty of criticisms of Obama too.

        I’ve read all of the articles I could find about the so-called “sleeper cell” and I never saw any credible evidence for that in any of the several articles I read.

        I think some Republicans have already suggested that Tsarnaev be sent to Guantanamo and that he should be tortured. Fuck them!

      • Fannie says:

        Not to worry, Obama’s 2014 budget includes 8.5 billion for Federal Prisons, and Gitmo North in Thomson’s (Illinois) the new Supermax will be ready next year. Sounds like to me the Mirandi/5th amendment won’t make a difference, silent or not, it’s a double fuck, and he will be found guilty.

      • Fannie says:

        Let’s not forget, in order to fill up the prisons, they gotta make more laws, and are real sneaky when at work to double fuck you.

  8. bostonboomer says:

    Despite the wacky stories in certain British and NYC tabloids, Boston authorities say the Tsarnaev brothers were acting on their own.

    Asked about any further threat to the public, Governor Deval Patrick, also appearing on “Face the Nation,’’ said “all of law enforcement feels it is over…You can feel the relief here at home.”

    On NBC’s “Meet the Press,’’ Patrick said surveillance video showed Dzhokhar Tsarnaev dropping a backpack and walking away before the second bomb exploded.

    ‘‘It does seem to be pretty clear that this suspect took the backpack off, put it down, did not react when the first explosion went off and then moved away from the backpack in time for the second explosion,’’ Patrick said. ‘‘It’s pretty clear about his involvement and pretty chilling, frankly.’’

    With that kind of evidence, the prosecution isn’t going to be that difficult.

    • gp says:

      I am skeptical that those two did act alone. It is totally plausible but for them to make something like 8 bombs they needed money, time and know how. The fact that every one of their bombs worked properly is actually quite stunning. 2 amateur bomb makers making loads of bombs without testing them out or blowing themselves up is quite questionable. The older brother undoubtedly received training. I know it isn’t all that difficult to follow a recipe but I’ve got years of education in biology, physics and chemistry along with using firearms extensively when I was younger and quite frankly I don’t think I could successfully build 1 of those bombs.

      • RalphB says:

        No one knows at this point whether they tested bombs previously or not. There is almost nothing “undoubtable” about the case at this point, including what the older brother did in Russia.

      • bostonboomer says:


        1. The bombs were made of cheap, readily-available materials.

        2. The bombs didn’t all work properly. Are you joking?

        3. “The older brother undoubtedly received training.” Based on what evidence? How do you know who made the bombs?

        As for money, the younger brother had money at times. I suggested yesterday that he may have been a professional car thief, although no one reacted to my evidence for that. His mechanic reported that he frequently brought in expensive cars to be worked on and always paid in cash. He dressed in very expensive clothes as did the older brother. They could have been selling drugs too. The older brother’s “best friend” was murdered in an obvious drug-related killing.

        • Yes, I thought that was a good observation when you said it bb. And if they were so bent on killing people, why let the driver of the Mercedes SUV they hijacked live? They let him go.

      • dakinikat says:

        Pressure cooker bomb directions can be found in The Anarchist Cookbook leftover from leftwing radicals in the 60s and 70s … cheap and easy and about the only places these are used any more are in very poor countries in Asia like Nepal and Indonesia … mostly by communists

    • dakinikat says:

      I still say the older brother was a lone wolf type and he drug his submissive younger brother into it … he seems like one more variation of ‘rage against the machine’ with a flavor on it meant to give right wingers conspiracy orgasms

  9. RalphB says:

    TBogg from Thursday: One Thing Leads To Another, I Know

    While you were sleeping…

    Barack Obama used a space laser to blow up the Texas fertilizer plant in an effort to suck the air out of the news that the gun control bill failed to pass which was specifically scheduled for a vote to draw attention away from the news about the ricin letters that Obama sent to himself to distract people so that they wouldn’t look too closely at his false flag operation in Boston where he personally set off the bombs from the Oval Office thereby enabling his TSA shock troops to confiscate all the guns (his back-up plan in case the gun bill didn’t pass) scheduled right before the food riots begin because he is also killing off all the bees (using the same drone technology that he used to kill Andrew Breitbart) in order to make the populace weak and compliant thus forestalling the race riots in the FEMA camps – which are currently being built in Cuba with he help of Jay-Z – because of what Michelle Obama said on on the Whitey tape which was supposed to have been destroyed in Benghazi, but wasn’t, which is why Hillary Clinton had to resign…. all of which was all foretold in an episode of The Family Guy viewed in Bill Ayers living room in 1995 even though The Family Guy wasn’t on yet

    It seems he captured them all in one place. Hysterics Unite!

  10. ecocatwoman says:

    NPR just reported that Dzhokhar may never be able to speak again. They didn’t explain why or what injury may have caused it.

  11. Colorado Criminal Attorney says:

    Remember Jose Padilla? (I know; he might as well be a part of ancient history for most people). He did not even do anything, just supposedly thought about doing stuff. He started out under the military tribunal regime and was tortured to insanity before getting a civilian “trial.”

    • bostonboomer says:

      Ancient history? Of course we remember. But that happened under Bush.

      Remember Bradley Manning? That’s still happening under Obama. At least he wasn’t declared an enemy combatant, but he was sure as hell tortured.

  12. bostonboomer says:

    Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is awake and answering questions in writing.

  13. I’ve only seen the pinup and briefly the ‘CNN classic’ blurb and already I’m in love with this post, JJ