Wednesday Hump Day Cartoons: A Fleeing Humanity 


That vintage cartoon panel sure would have made me laugh a year ago…I would have used it in one of my cartoon mash-ups, depicting the populous fleeing a GOP debate. Now I can only think how prophetic that little drawn rectangle frame could be. If I had a way, I’d be gone. Wouldn’t you?

So, soon Comey is supposed to come out and speak.


Before I get to the political cartoons, let me put a couple more tweets here:

Below is the copy of that above link, via TwitLonger:

TwitLonger — When you talk too much for Twitter


Now the cartoons.

The one thing I love about the cartoonist Pat Bagley, if you follow his twitter…he will post many comments and statements aside from his wonderful cartoons.

Here is a link to the past 10 cartoons by Pat Bagley:


Follow him.

Cartoons continued:



That’s all, because it is 1pm…go time?



23 Comments on “Wednesday Hump Day Cartoons: A Fleeing Humanity ”

  1. Minkoff Minx says:

    My internets is working very slow…but anyone know of the links to the live feed for Comey’s news cast?

  2. dakinikat says:

  3. Sweet Sue says:

    Love the cartoon, but ooonuts are mammals?
    I don’t get it.

  4. bostonboomer says:

    These people who are saying that tax return is favorable to Trump are confused or deluded. How is it favorable to Trump that in 2005 most of his income came from selling two buildings and that without the alternative minimum tax he would have paid almost nothing? Now that we know that, how can he get away with his plan to eliminate the AMT? The return also showed that there’s no way Trump is a billionaire.

    So tell, me again, how is this favorable for him?

    • Enheduanna says:

      The rubes will be totally impressed he paid millions in taxes. To them that gives him the right to throw brown people in camps, discriminate wantonly, launder billions of Russian oligarch dollars, destroy their health care, social security and Medicare benefits and grab em by the pussy.

    • quixote says:

      I saw a post pointing out that Melania became a citizen in 2006. Since she’s married to a US citizen, she needed to submit previous 3 years’ of returns as part of her citizenship application. 2003, 2004, her filing single. 2005 joint with tRump, had to be squeaky clean.

      Which this one pretty much is. Sounds like there’s about a $5mill underpayment, but I was surprised he paid much of anything, considering his usual MO. However, if it was for showing to The Authorities, that would explain it.

      Him not being a billionaire is not criminal. Just embarrassing, if he was capable of that. So it’s not impossible that it’s just a red herring to get people off the Russia questions. Which do indicate felonies and treasons. And Maddow was smart enough to be trying to point that out, although I gather most of the media fastened on the returns, as they were probably supposed to.

      • quixote says:

        (Just to be clearer about the iffy bits of the return, summarized by Ed Felten of Gin and Tacos:)

        There are but a few reasons one person pays another vastly more than the actual value to buy a piece of property. None of those reasons involve things that are legal. Aaron Schock is about to go to prison for it. Duke Cunningham did go to prison for it. And Donald Trump received $100 million from a Russian organized crime figure for a property not worth 1/3 of that, which the buyer never even occupied and eventually had demolished. This came at a time when Trump was deeply in debt to a German bank that is under investigation for helping Russian criminals launder money using third parties.

        (He’s paying the tax, so the IRS isn’t worrying he got overpaid. Same as they’re not the agency who worries if you deal drugs, so long as you pay taxes on your profits. Otherwise, as Al Capone found out, the accountants can get you when nobody else will.)

  5. dakinikat says:

    NBC News: Judge in Hawaii blocks Trump’s new travel ban nationwide; was set to take effect tomorrow

  6. dakinikat says:

    • dakinikat says:

      A federal judge in Hawaii on Wednesday issued a sweeping freeze of President Trump’s new executive order temporarily barring the issuance of new visas to citizens of six-Muslim majority countries and suspending the admission of new refugees.

      In a blistering, 43-page opinion U.S. District Judge Derrick K. Watson pointed to Trump’s own comments and those of close advisors as evidence that his order was meant to discriminate against Muslims and declared there was a “strong likelihood of success” those suing would prove the directive violated the constitution.

      Watson declared that “a reasonable, objective observer—enlightened by the specific historical context, contemporaneous public statements, and specific sequence of events leading to its issuance—would conclude that the Executive Order was issued with a purpose to disfavor a particular religion.”

      He lambasted the government in particular for asserting that because the ban did not apply to all Muslims in the world, it could not be construed as discriminating against Muslims.

      “The illogic of the Government’s contentions is palpable,” Watson wrote. “The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed.”

  7. NW Luna says:

  8. NW Luna says: