The Question of the Hour (Presidential Panic)

#trumpswindle | #WhatTheyVotedFor

“If there is going to be an independent investigation of this president, and his campaign and his ties to Russia, it is inconceivable that an independent investigation would not include an examination of the president’s financials, his tax returns, his business records, all the rest .... Is the president, or his family, potentially at risk of having violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which is a crime for which you go to jail? Is the president, or is his family, potentially at risk of being blackmailed by foreign business partners who have evidence of ties or behavior that might put the president and his family in legal jeopardy if those things were exposed?”

―Rachel Maddow

A John Looking for Something to Kiss

Question #1: What is the Speaker of the House on?

Question #2: Where can I get some?

We had occasion, yesterday, to review the Speaker’s odd behavior during a press briefing on Wednesday, but apparently Mr. Boehner’s message didn’t come across well enough; the pesky press had the audacity to ask him questions on Thursday. Walter Einenkel picks it up from there:

The easy joke is that it is kinda gross and strange and weird. It’s a bad attempt at lightening the mood by Boehner. The real grotesque quality is not that Boehner did something awkward and condescending, it’s the fact that he is being asked a very serious question, about the single issue he is there to discuss, with real information at his fingertips. His response and that of some of the press is that this is a game where no one asks or expects real answers as there is no reason for anyone to say anything with integrity or honesty or import.

The question being asked is not how John Boehner makes kissy faces to nieces and nephews when they leave after the holidays. It’s about thousands of people’s salaries. Government employees charged with protecting every American citizen living on American soil. It’s a serious question.

Another Day in America

Our Lede of the Day comes from Steven Hoffer at Huffington Post:

An Ohio attorney is accused of raping a woman in a courthouse conference room after she refused to have sex with a judge.

For his part, the accused attorney, Javier Armengau, said last week, “I have not engaged in any wrongful conduct nor have I done anything that should warrant a complaint.” The trial already seems a spectacle as Armengau’s attorneys work to discredit the witness. As John Futty of The Columbus Dispatch reported:

The 48-year-old woman became increasingly frustrated and combative with one of Armengau’s attorneys, who tried to point out inconsistencies between her testimony and statements she made to Columbus police.

“I don’t know where you’re getting this,” the woman said of her interview with police, “but I’d love to see it” ….

…. The woman is the third accuser to testify against Armengau in his trial on charges of rape, sexual battery, gross sexual imposition, kidnapping and public indecency. The allegations were brought by five women, each of whom had some connection to Armengau’s work as a criminal defense attorney.