text:
Carhartt Clothing
Carhartt clothing sets the standard for high quality work clothing worldwide. Find a broad selection of Carhartt jeans, Carhartt pants, Carhartt shorts and Carhartt shirts for Summer, or buy your Carhartt coats, Carhartt jackets and gloves for Winter and save big!
Dickies Clothes
Dickies has developed an innovative clothing line that encompasses everything from jackets, coats, work pants, shorts and shirts, to denim jeans, overalls, coveralls and medical scrubs that all deliver great value!
Carhartt Coats
Carhartt Coats offer you a variety of lining options and materials that will keep you warm all winter long. Choose from a dependable selection of high quality linings, fabrics, colors and styles available for your new Carhartt Coat.Shop Carhartt Coats
Carhartt Jackets
Carhartt Jackets offer the perfect solution for your cold weather needs. From quilt flannel lining to fleece lining, you'll find every angle covered with the Carhartt Arctic Extremes collection, all in great looking styles and colors!Shop Carhartt Jackets
Carhartt Sweatshirts
Carhartt Sweatshirts are for people who like to work hard and play harder. Enjoy the quality, comfort and value offered by Carhartt Sweatshirts with long lasting Carhartt hooded, zippered, crewneck and pullover sweatshirt styles.Shop Carhartt Sweatshirts
Carhartt Pants
Carhartt pants are trusted by millions of people in America and Europe who require rugged, hard-wearing pants whether at work or play. Carhartt pants are available in a range of colors, styles, fabrics and sizes.Shop Carhartt Pants
Carhartt Jeans
You can do almost any job wearing a pair of Carhartt Jeans, known for exceptional durability, comfort and quality of construction, you'll enjoy Carhartt's traditional, relaxed, loose fit and Carhartt dungaree styling for many years to come.Shop Carhartt Jeans
Carhartt Overalls
Founded in 1889, the Carhartt Clothing dynasty was based upon many workers' needs for a durable and long lasting overall. Since then, Carhartt overalls are now known as the "Best of Breed" in work and bib overalls design everywhere.Shop Carhartt Overalls
Carhartt Shirts
Whether it's a Carhartt flannel shirt, henley shirt, denim shirt, mock turtleneck or a high quality Carhartt T-Shirt, you'll find a nice selection of great looking Carhartt styles and colors to choose from.Shop Carhartt Shirts
Carhartt Vests
Carhartt vests are guaranteed first quality outdoor vests! Choose from the arctic lined duck vest, an arctic quilt lined sandstone vest, an arctic quilt-lined camo vest, or a fleece lined denim vest.Shop Carhartt Vests
Carhartt Coveralls
Carhartt coveralls include Carhartt insulated coveralls, Carhartt Extremes insulated coveralls and Carhartt Extremes bib coveralls. Also offered are non-insulated Carhartt coveralls within an extensive range of premium Carhartt clothing.Shop Carhartt Coveralls
Carhartt Flame Resistant Clothing
Carhartt Flame Resistant Clothing (also known as Carhartt FRC and Carhartt Fire Resistant Clothing) protects you from wayward sparks within a full line of flame-resistant clothing for all your flame-retardant needs.Carhartt Flame Resistant Clothing
Carhartt Shorts
A pair of Carhartt shorts is one of the most functional and versatile pieces of clothing you can own. Perfect for warm weather work, hiking, gardening or just casual wear, Carhartt shorts are forever comfortable, durable and stylish.Shop Carhartt Shorts
Carhartt Boots
Carhartt boots offer well conceived designs to endure rugged work conditions, as well as a host of outdoor activities. Carhartt boot options offered include waterproofing, soft toe or steel toe construction, insulation, slip and water resistance.Shop Carhartt Boots
Wrangler Jeans
If you don't know Wrangler, you don't know jeans. Wrangler jeans have been made in the U.S. for generations. Why such longevity when the fashion market is constantly changing? Because Wrangler jeans are comfortable, durable and great to wear.Shop Wrangler Jeans
Work Boots
Need a comfortable and long lasting work boot? You'll find major brands with features such as slip resistant soles, waterproofing, removable insoles, composite toe, steel toe or even titanium toe protection and other great facets.Shop Work Boots
Timberland Pro Boots
Engineered for heat resistance and durability, Timberland Pro Series Work Boots include the use of a special rubber based compound that improves resistance to oil, while maximizing slip and abrasion-resistance on all surfaces.Shop Timberland Pro Boots
Wolverine Boots
With slips and falls being the leading cause of job-related injuries, Wolverine's line of Durashock Slip Resistant boots and shoes offers one of the best solutions that deliver safety and comfort, on the job or off.Shop Wolverine Boots
Carolina Boots
Designed to fit into specific work environments so as to perform above expectations, Carolina Shoes and Carolina Boots offer options for special needs or functions. From work boots to safety shoes, Carolina footwear performs.Shop Carolina Boots
Danner Boots
Founded in 1932, Danner Boots has upheld a proud tradition of manufacturing high quality work boots, as well as hiking, mountaineering, hunting, fishing and military footwear that's well regarded for reliability and comfort worldwide.Shop Danner Boots
Thorogood Boots
Thorogood Boots offer an excellent line up of application specific footwear values unmatched in the industry today. Thorogood Boots have the kind of construction and fit sought after by military specialists.Shop Thorogood Boots
Georgia Boots
Georgia boots offer solid value, durability and comfort with proven technologies and outstanding innovations that include use of Gore Tex membrane technologies and a host of smart design features.Shop Georgia Boots
Dr. Martens Shoes & Boots
Dr. Martens shoes and Dr. Martens boots have long been known for a unique air cushioned sole which has proven very popular for extended wear in the workplace. Dr. Martens offers excellent steel toe shoes and boots for men and women worldwide.Shop Dr. Martens Shoes & Boots
Caterpillar Boots
Caterpillar boots love mud and rough terrain, no matter what your Caterpillar boots size is. Better still, with a wide selection of Caterpillar work boots, Caterpillar steel toe boots and women's Caterpillar boots, it's hard to go wrong.Shop Caterpillar Boots
Reebok Shoes & Boots
Reebok shoes and Reebok boots are a favorite for those appreciating an athletic design. From stylish Reebok steel toe tennis shoes, to men's Reebok shoes and Reebok boots, you'll find a great selection.Shop Reebok Shoes & Boots
Bates Boots & Shoes
Bates boots and Bates shoes deliver exceptional wear for either military boot or police boot needs, as well as hazardous duty in the field. Bates military boots and Bates uniform boots perform incredibly well in any situation.Shop Bates Boots & Shoes
Harley Davidson Motorcycle Boots
Harley Davidson motorcycle boots offer you classic styles like the Harley Davidson Harness Boot, the Harley Davidson Engineer Boot, the Harley Davidson Belt Buckle Boot, and many other great styles for men and women.Harley Davidson Motorcycle Boots
Chippewa Boots
In the early 1900's, Chippewa Boots began as a maker of logger boots for midwest camps in the pulp and paper industries. More than one hundred years later, Chippewa is still producing the world's finest logger boots.Shop Chippewa Boots
This was my first time to use this company and because of the AMAZING customer service we have received I WILL be back and will recommend it to everyone! Thank you so very much!"
Lanette F. from Walker, Louisiana


text:
On Wednesday, Oct. 29, representatives from Hope College and leaders from local businesses will engage in a long-standing tradition of visiting more than 150 area businesses in Holland and Zeeland, seeking contributions to the Hope Fund for the 2008-09 Community Campaign.
The Hope Fund has been in existence for almost as long as HopeCollege itself. The Community Campaign, on behalf of the Hope Fund, began more than 30 years ago as a way to engage community leaders with Hope faculty and staff in building and maintaining relationships between the community and the college.
In addition to those receiving personal visits on campaign day, hundreds more businesses and friends of HopeCollege will receive letters encouraging a contribution.
"The Community Campaign encourages area businesses to invest in Hope College with tangible benefits," explained Mark DeWitt, Hope's director of corporate and foundation relations. "Since our founding, Hope College and the communities of Holland and Zeeland have always enjoyed an almost unrivaled town-gown relationship and this campaign acknowledges our relationship. Hope is grateful for business and industry participation in this effort through financial partnerships and volunteer support."
Doug Ruch, who is a 1981 Hope graduate and president and chief executive officer of the Fleetwood Group, is the chairperson of the 2008-09 Community Campaign. The Fleetwood Group designs and manufactures furniture and electronic systems for global learning.
Doug carries on the tradition that started with his father, Richard Ruch, as the first Community Campaign chairperson in 1978. He noted that he is pleased to be heading this year's fundraising effort based not only on his own student experience or more recently the experience of his two sons as Hope students themselves, but because of what he sees Hope adding to the area.
"Leaders of distinction within the college community, nationally recognized programs, facilities that help students achieve at the highest levels, good employment for over 800 faculty and staff, and over 3,200 student-citizens are just a sampling of the benefits Hope provides to our community," he said.
Revenue from the Hope Fund provides discounted tuition for every student. It also underwrites health, counseling and career services, assists in bringing world-renowned artists, authors, musicians and lecturers to campus and generates service opportunities for its students. Financial support of the Community Campaign and the Hope Fund makes available unrestricted resources that enhance the academic mission of Hope College.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
| 2.9°C Belfast
A scathing report into the near-collapse of the Co-operative Bank has pinned the blame on toxic loans inherited from its disastrous merger with the Britannia and laid bare a "sorry story" of multiple management failures.
The review by former Treasury mandarin Sir Christopher Kelly concluded that the takeover by the Co-op of the UK's second biggest building society "should probably never have happened".
Sir Christopher was damning about the roles of former bank chief executive Neville Richardson, ex-chairman Paul Flowers, and Peter Marks, who was at the time chief executive of the wider Co-op group.
The report painted a picture of the bank's culture in which an "acceptance of mediocrity" took hold and little was done "to discourage the wrong behaviours". Mr Richardson was said to "dislike challenge" - though he denied this.
It also pointed to the inaction of regulators over Mr Flowers - whose appointment despite his lack of experience meant the bank lacked proper oversight at a time of crisis - as well as in relation to the Britannia's pre-merger financial affairs.
Sir Christopher was asked to investigate after the bank was found to have a £1.5 billion hole in its balance sheet which meant that it had to be rescued by bondholders in a move that saw the Co-op group lose overall control of the business.
He said: "This report tells a sorry story of failings in management and governance on many levels.
"The roots of the shortfall lie in a merger between the bank and the Britannia building society which should probably never have happened.
"Both organisations had problems. Bringing them together exacerbated those problems. It might have worked if the merged organisation had first class leadership. Sadly it did not."
The report, which cost £4.4 million to produce, threw the spotlight on Mr Richardson, the Britannia chief executive who took charge of the Co-op bank following the merger in 2009 before leaving in 2011.
Sir Christopher said there was "overwhelming" evidence that it had not been in a good position when he departed, with the bank's capital position only looking reasonable because "problems had been pushed into the future".
A botched IT update which would end up wasting £300 million was "floundering" and there was no plan to deal with bad commercial loans that would come to create most of the Co-op's financial black hole other than "to wait for things to get better".
Sir Christopher found that Mr Richardson had presided over the creation of a high risk investment portfolio while at the Britannia, before doubling his pay to become boss of the newly-expanded Co-op bank where he received £1.2 million in 2010.
It later emerged that the Financial Services Authority (FSA) had been so concerned about the building society, before the merger, that it had been placed on a watch list. The FSA later said that the Britannia would have collapsed were it not for the Co-op.
The report also focused on a later, abortive attempt by the Co-op to buy hundreds of Lloyds branches, known as Project Verde - which was enthusiastically backed by group boss Mr Marks.
He was said to have described the £1.75 billion offer as a "punt" though denied using the language. Sir Christopher said his lack of banking experience and commitment to pushing through the deal "made a dangerous combination".
Its failure would cost the bank £73 million and result in a significant distraction for the embattled lender, the report found.
Sir Christopher said he found no "compelling evidence" that the Co-op had come under political pressure over the deal, after allegations by Mr Flowers. But both the ex-chairman and former Treasury minister Mark Hoban declined to speak to him.
The lion's share of the Co-op's black hole was an £802 million loss on commercial property loans, which was compounded by a £300 million hit from the IT fiasco and £269 million for its involvement in payment protection insurance mis-selling.
Sir Christopher found the group and bank boards "seemed either oblivious to these issues or, if they were aware, failed to take sufficient timely action to mitigate them".
The bank had performed only "cursory" checks on the Britannia's commercial loans ahead of the merger.
Sir Christopher said the Co-op group - whose record £2.5 billion losses for the year were largely the result of the bank's failure - had badly let down its millions of members by its failure to provide "proper stewardship".
The bank's downfall came when, just as the losses were crystallising at the start of 2013, the Bank of England's Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) ordered it to beef up its balance sheet in line with a new policy in the wake of the financial crisis.
But Sir Christopher cleared regulators of singling out the Co-op and said they had been making "warning noises" about the issue for some time.
The report was based on more than 130 interviews with current and former employees, board members and others, and examination of internal papers and external reports.
His report appeared to back calls for change in the wider Co-op group's democratic structure and said its method of appointing members to the board undoubtedly contributed to "serious failures" in oversight of the bank.
In response to the report, Co-op Bank chief executive Niall Booker apologised for "past failings" and said it had been "working diligently" to address them.
It also revealed it was appointing new auditors, Ernst & Young, ending a 40-year relationship with KPMG amid a regulatory investigation into the Co-op's past accounts in the years leading up to the end of 2012.
The wider Co-op group said the report demonstrated the need for change in its own governance, which has faced with stiff resistance from some within the organisation. Interim chief executive Richard Pennycook said: "It is a sobering assessment."


text:
Hello I believe you can't do just by criteria. you would have to write a Pre event that does this...
Hello Using log4j was working until 9.3.6. Currently, we just put System out and splunk the server logs to debug...
Hello You would have to write a PX for this. Unfortunately, there is no configuration available for your use case...
Hi Feri, Could you please confirm if the AgileAPI Jar which you are using in your custom Application is Taken...
I don't believe this is possible the way you are asking (disabling/greying out the reject button). The only potential...
MyAgilePLM.com acts as a passive conduit for the online distribution of third party Advertisements and does not screen the content of such Advertisements. Pursuant to the foregoing, Client agrees that MyAgilePLM: (a) is not responsible for, and does not endorse, any Advertisements; (b) makes no guarantees about the accuracy, suitability, legality, reliability or quality of the information contained in Advertisements; and (c) assumes no responsibility for objectionable, inaccurate, misleading, or unlawful content within Advertisements.
ZipRecruiter special notice: Job offers are only for residents of the job's location. No relocation. Please do not apply if otherwise!
No Comments
Your answer on question "RE: agile database packages showing as invalid was edited"
Name *
Email *
By clicking "Sign up" you indicate that you have read and agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.
Powered by Crowds Insight | Manage your Crowds in site


text:
Calendar | Community
| Family & Friends in the Armed Forces
| Milestones
Community Action |
Humane Society | YMCA
Lincoln Park District
Lincoln Park District -- on the Web
Park district notes
From Roy
Logan, program coordinator
Send a link to a friend
06, 2013]
Are you looking for fun as you start working
out in this new year? Gather up a bunch of your friends and play
co-ed volleyball. The park district still has an opening for one
more team, and the start of the season will be delayed by one week
to give you time. The park district also has the names of a few
people who are interested in playing but just don't have enough to
fill a roster. If you are someone in that situation, call the
administrative office between 8 a.m. and 4:30 at 732-8770 or email
email@example.com to have your name added to the
list. It is possible that the sponsor fee could be divided by the
number of names on the roster, making it very inexpensive for
everyone. Games are played on Tuesdays at 6:30 and 7:30 p.m. The
costs for this program have been the same for several years.
The second and third art workshops will be on Sunday, Jan. 26. Up
first, from 1 to 2 p.m., is the session for children in kindergarten
through second grade, and then from 2:30 to 4 p.m. the same day,
lessons will be offered to third-graders through eighth-graders. The
classes are designed for kids to have fun while creating. If you
enjoy drawing and painting, then you'll enjoy the workshop. No
experience is necessary. All the materials will be provided, and all
that the children need to bring is a desire to make some awesome
art. The cost for these workshops is $20/$24.
[to top of second column]
The workshop instructor will be Jodi Phillips, a local artist who
has been actively painting for 10 years. Her primary focus lies in
acrylics, but she also enjoys watercolors. Her artwork has been on
display in the windows of the former J.C. Penney building, currently
known as O'Donoghue's, and in Horsefeathers in Elkhart. She is also
one of the juried artists who has been displaying and selling at the
Pride of the Prairie Folk Art and Craft Show for many years.
[Text from file received from Roy Logan,
Lincoln Park District]
Back to top


text:
Building a raised vegetable bed can be an easy and fun weekend project. For a full list of materials and tools and a set of instructions go to this link: www.digthedirt.com
Building a raised vegetable bed can be an easy and fun weekend project. For a full list of materials and tools and a set of instructions go to this link: www.digthedirt.com
now? what?
I agree with you. I'm lazy too. That's why I'm getting 3 garden window boxes. It's pre-built.I? don't need to assemble them like in the video. LOL.
You have to see our tomatoes …..Go to my channel? ……? MrUrbangreen
Wow, this is alot of? work, Id rather pay somebody. :s
You can raise it up to save your back by putting legs? under it and a screen….
Great vid and tips! Question: What do? you think about putting one of those weed protection sheets underneath the raised garden bed? Will that hinder the roots? Is it okay to mix the dirt with compost/manure/etc?
very simple thank? you much appreciated
Cutting planks at home depot? is free.
how much do they charge for? cutting the planks?
Its not? that high off the ground.
You're correct but pre-drilling will keep ANY wood from? splitting.
Its amazing how many people complain about this. It's a simple, easy, INEXPENSIVE project. If you don't like it or how it's? done STFU!
This kinda has the? feel of gardening for the well-to-do class as a quaint hobby. Expensive lumber and extra steps. You also threw out bunches of good organic material that would have fed the plants.
3, 2x4x10 pine. Cut the third 2×4 into 3 equal lengths, screw everything together. No need for predrilling. Use a garden weasel (far superior than any shovel!) to tear up the grass and soil, add lots of compost, mix more, cover with newspaper/cardboard and use more compost to hold it down. No weeds!
you must be? from the city…
U made it too complicated all? u need us 4 pieces of the same size wood some screws and a screw driver or drill
Thanks? for the great tips!
You didn't predrill the holes just because you didn't want the wood split, you had to predrill them, because you had? to screw them in with that crappy screwgun.
@tastycajun0381? yes DFW
nicely explained, perfect for beginners! Thank-you, I enjoyed? this very much:)
Excellent tutorial. Well filmed and explained.? Thank you!
hello! was wondering if i could just lay some tarp down and start with? the soil on top (as the bed will be on gravel) or if i have to dig through the gravel til i hit the soil and start there?
I use tapping screws and you do not have to pre drill,? nice job on these thanks for the video
Whew. I built my raised beds last year and it was ALOT of work! Clay soil and Bermuda grass..and my property slopes. lol
BUT…It was worth it. This spring it was so enjoyable to just get out there and start planting without all that work!?
Some people… They must be living in the middle of nowhere.. No neighbours, family or friends – people you can ask if you can borrow a drill or something.. Why buy wood.. you can maybe even get it for free from someone who is taking down his shed or whatever..
Sorry for being? a little sarcastic, but I can't understand why people are so stupid these days that they can't even think of a simple solution.. BTW what is shown here is just an example..
Comments are closed.


text:
- Font:
- +
- -
Guests: Howard Fineman, Mark Halperin, Chuck Todd, John Heilemann, Jane Wells, Pete Williams, Savannah Guthrie, Ken Gross, Melinda Henneberger
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Johnny goes marching home again.
Let`s play HARDBALL.
Good evening. I`m Chris Matthews down in Washington. Let me start
with this John Edwards trial, this waste of time, money and public
attention. John Edwards has just been found not guilty on one charge, the
jury deadlocked on all the rest.
A question in this case from day one. It`s what we see in developing
countries, where one party wins an election and uses its new power to wreak
vengeance on those out of power. I don`t like the fact that a Republican
prosecutor, a holdover from the Bush administration, brought this case
against Edwards and then went off to run for Congress and has, in fact,
just won his primary.
Are we really happy to see a case, as we have here, brought for taking
campaign gifts which may not even have been seen as campaign gifts, when
the Supreme Court has just declared corporations and individuals now have a
unlimited right to give money to campaigns?
Well, with now are NBC`s chief justice correspondent, Pete Williams,
NBC`s chief legal correspondent, Savannah Guthrie, and Hampton Dellinger,
an attorney who`s been covering this case for all of us down in Greensboro,
North Carolina.
Gentlemen and lady, you don`t have to agree with my point of view. I
want to know the facts, however. This strange case, Pete -- you start.
I`ve heard your commentary and analysis today. What does it tell you that
the jury could find a unanimous decision on a matter in which it was pretty
clear the money wasn`t coming in for campaign purposes because the campaign
had basically ended for most of that year, in 2008, and on the rest
couldn`t find agreement?
PETE WILLIAMS, NBC CORRESPONDENT: Well, that may be the basis. We`ll
perhaps hear from some of the jurors on why they decided that he was not
guilty on that count. There were many potential lynches (ph) along the way
that the jury had to get over to find him guilty, if they were going to do
They had to find that the money was intended to influence the
campaign. That was the judge`s instruction to the jury, Chris. She said,
You have to find at least a purpose, if not the purpose, of the reason the
donors wrote these checks to John Edwards was to influence the campaign.
That was the government`s theory here, that he was using this money to
influence the campaign. The government said that`s why it brought -- came
under federal campaign finance laws. And remember, the reason that the
government said these were illegal contributions is because they exceeded
the federal limit. It was almost a million dollars, all told, which was
well over the amount of money that someone could give to a federal
So who knows along the way whether the jury decided the chain simply
broke down and they couldn`t find him guilty. So as a factual matter,
what`s happened here is the jury found him not guilty on one count,
involving the wealthy heiress, Bunny Mellon, her contributions -- or her
checks to John Edwards, I guess we should say, be clear, in 2008. They
count not reach agreement on the other five counts, so the judge declared a
mistrial on them.
And then the question is, will the federal government bring these
charges again? I`m quite certain that the Justice Department hasn`t
decided what to do there. There are arguments for or against it. You`ve
made some of the ones against it. So those are things the government is
going to have to consider.
I would be surprised, at the end of the day, Chris, if the Justice
Department does decide to refile, given the complexities in this case and
the things you`ve mentioned, the fact that the whole world of campaign
finance has changed, and that, you know, in a larger sense, in terms of
justice, you know, John Edwards has suffered a lot during this trial.
What`s to be served by doing it all over again? But the Justice Department
hasn`t made that decision yet.
MATTHEWS: You know, Savannah, I was thinking about this case and
points that Pete has made earlier this afternoon. You`ve been talking
about the irony of here we are, prosecuting somebody for taking campaign
money that he didn`t even -- maybe didn`t even think it was campaign money
-- that`s apparently what the jury couldn`t decide on -- and was given to
him as a personal gift to take care of his personal problems, including,
perhaps, his affair with Rielle Hunter.
And then the court`s coming along here and saying, Well, that`s all a
crime. You ought go to jail for 30 years for that.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court ruling it`s OK in the Citizens United
case to give unlimited amounts of money from the Koch brothers to any
campaign purpose you want, basically. It`s like they changed the drinking
law from 21 to 18, but they`re still prosecuting somebody for carrying a
six-pack around with them when they`re 20.
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE, NBC CORRESPONDENT: Well, it just adds to the
confusion that`s kind of the subtext of this case. Now, of course, the
jurors didn`t hear about the Citizens United case. They didn`t hear about
where this campaign finance law stands today.
Nevertheless, there was already sufficient doubt about whether or not
these contributions given in 2000 (SIC) and 2008 were really even campaign
contributions whatsoever.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
GUTHRIE: So I think there`s a -- that confusion is probably what led
to the result, where the jurors were unable to decide. But I will make one
point, Chris. They didn`t acquit on those other charges, OK? They know
how to acquit. They couldn`t agree. That means someone in that jury room,
perhaps more than one, thought there was grounds for conviction on those
charges, perhaps.
MATTHEWS: OK, we`re going to be hearing -- I think we`re going to
hear pretty soon from John Edwards, shortly from him.
Let me go quickly to Hampton Dellinger. What always stunned me was
that the Obama administration kept that U.S. attorney on in office after
taking office in 2009, letting him proceed with this case, let a Republican
go after a Democrat with a new Democratic administration.
What was that decision based on, just not wanting to look bad or
looking like you might -- were obstructing a strong, a good prosecution,
which turned out not to be one?
HAMPTON DELLINGER, ATTORNEY: Well, I`ll -- sure, Chris. And I`ll
defer Pete Williams` reporting on that. Obviously, this case crossed
You know, I think the tough call now is for the Obama administration
for everything that Pete said, plus these two facts. One, this case was
really well tried by the federal prosecutors, Robert Higdon (ph) from D.C.,
David Harbaugh (ph), as well.
Secondly, every major evidentiary ruling in this case went in the
government`s favor.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
DELLINGER: And so, you know, the key issue here was always John
Edwards being the first person to be prosecuted for this, so he couldn`t
have had criminal intent. The federal Election Commission was not on board
with this prosecution. They didn`t even find a civil violation. And so
the federal government couldn`t have had a better opportunity for a
conviction. They didn`t get it.
MATTHEWS: And they had a judge raising the bar so high by saying -- I
mean, lowering, sort of like limbo or something, saying, All you have to do
is show that one purpose of giving this money would be to help his
campaign, right?
DELLINGER: That`s right. And the statute says anything of value
given for "the" purpose of influencing an election will be considered a
contribution. She didn`t require that finding of this jury. She said it
could be for one of many purposes.
And so, you know, there was every opportunity for a conviction here.
John Edwards, the politician, ended his career in defeat. John Edwards,
the defendant, got a huge victory today.
MATTHEWS: You know what`s interesting, Pete -- I don`t know whether I
can push this argument too hard, but here was a case that we thought would
be enshrouded with talk about the man`s affair, about what a cad he was, if
you will, to use an old term, in terms of cheating on his wife and covering
it up.
And yet here we have an acquittal on one count and a hung jury on the
others, which indicates to me it was probably a majority of the jurors were
probably against conviction on those. But without going that far, it`s
interesting that here we have a guy walking, basically, and not being
affected by all the -- you know, the coloring of this by his marital
WILLIAMS: Well, I think that`s a good point, Chris, that the jury
obviously was able to make a distinction between what the legal issue here
was, which is did John Edwards illegally accept a campaign contribution?
And they were able to separate that out from the tawdry aspect and the very
-- the very disreputable aspect of his life.
They were, in essence, not finding him guilty of being a bum, as you
MATTHEWS: Yes.
WILLIAMS: ... and the jury was able to make that distinction. I
think -- just getting back to the -- to what Hampton was just saying here,
is, you know, I guess politics was an issue you raised about whether a
Republican prosecuting a Democrat -- and I guess you could say that the
opposite question`s going to come in...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And so after he makes his statement, we`ve asked
you to respect his ability to get to the car and to be able to leave at
that point. Thank you.
MATTHEWS: OK. Well, there you heard it...
WILLIAMS: That sounded like someone saying, yes, he`s not going to
MATTHEWS: Yes, we let the sound up on that. That was a young
spokesperson coming out from the courthouse, saying that Mr. Edwards is
going to come out and make a statement but not take any questions and
answers. It sounded like it`s going to be a pretty terse statement he`s
going to make, and a happy one, I assume, although he may be cautioned.
Do you think here, cautioned not to do any kind of hot-dogging in the
end zone, if you will, Pete?
WILLIAMS: Well, that`s -- that`s right because there is always the
prospect that the government will retry the case. But what I was about to
say is, I guess one of the many, many factors the Justice Department is
going to have to consider is the potential politics issue here because now
we have a Democratic administration. We have a former Democratic candidate
for president. Does that push it the other way?
Well, here he comes now.
MATTHEWS: Oh, here they come. Here comes John Edwards to make a
short statement. Let`s watch him now. Well, apparently not...
MATTHEWS: ... like him, and there he is. There we have John Edwards
coming out rather calmly. He`s going to approach that lectern there and
speak at that mike we`re watching. Let`s -- let`s quietly watch -- listen
to what he has to say.
wanted to say first thank you for the jurors and their incredibly hard work
and their diligence. They took their job very, very seriously, as we saw
both during the trial, the attention they paid to the evidence during the
trial, the presentations of the lawyers, and the fact that they`ve now
spent almost nine -- almost nine full days deliberating, trying to reach a
fair and just result under the evidence and the law.
And all I can say is thank goodness we live in a country that has the
kind of system that we have. And I think those jurors were an exemplar for
what juries are supposed to do in this country. They were very, very
The second thing I want to say just a word about is responsibility.
And this is about me. I want to make sure that everyone hears from me and
from my voice that while I do not believe I did anything illegal or ever
thought I was doing anything illegal, I did an awful, awful lot that was
And there is no one else responsible for my sins. None of the people
who came to court and testified are responsible. Nobody working for the
government is responsible. I am responsible.
And if I want to find the person who should be held accountable for my
sins, honestly, I don`t have to go any further than the mirror. It`s me.
It is me and me alone.
Next thing, I want to say a word about is -- are the people that I
love because it`s been an incredible experience for me to watch my parents.
My dad just turned 80, my mom, who`s 78, tromp up here from Robbins (ph),
North Carolina, every day to be with me and to support me. And I love them
so much, and they did such a wonderful job raising me and my brother,
Blake, and my sister, Kathy (ph), who I also love dearly.
I also want to say a word about my own children. Kate, who most all
of you have seen, has been here every single day. She has been here, no
matter what, no matter how awful and painful a lot of the evidence was for
her, evidence about her dad, evidence about her mom, who she loves so, so
dearly, but she never once flinched.
She said, Dad, I love you, I`ll be there for you no matter what. And
I`m so proud to have had her with me through all of this process.
And then finally, Emma, who turned 14 recently, Emma Claire (ph) and
Jack, who just turned 12, who I take care of every day and I`ve not been
able to see them quite as much, but I see them in the morning. I get their
breakfast ready, get them off to school, and then we get home at night and
we all eat supper together. And I love them both so dearly and they`re
such an important part of every day of my life.
And then finally, my precious Quinn, who I love more than any of you
could ever imagine, and I am so close to and so, so grateful for, so
grateful for Quinn. I`m grateful for all of my children, including my son
Wade, who we lost years ago.
But you know, this is the last thing I`m going to say. I don`t think
God`s through with me. I really believe he thinks there`s still some good
things I can do. And whatever happens with this legal stuff going forward,
what I`m hopeful about is all those kids that I`ve seen, you know, in the
poorest parts of this country and in some of the poorest places in the
world, that I can help them in whatever way I`m still capable of helping
And I want to dedicate my life to being the best dad I can be and to
helping those kids, who I think deserve help and who I hope I can help.
Thank you all very much.
MATTHEWS: Well, I ask if Pete Williams wants to respond to that. I
found that very effective -- a very effective confession, Pete, on a
personal front, and a resilience -- you`d have to call it that, a
resilience from what he`s been through.
WILLIAMS: Yes, and I think, you know, he made a similar statement at
the start of the trial, that he didn`t believe he ever did anything illegal
but that he did a lot of things that were wrong and he takes
responsibility. So obviously, contrition there, if he knows the federal
prosecutors are listening, that you know, he obviously is trying to make
amends and said he did some very bad things, but being very careful to say
that he never thought that he was violating campaign finance laws, which is
what this trial was all about.
MATTHEWS: Why do you expect he gave that strong encomium to the
WILLIAMS: You know, I`ve never heard somebody who was acquitted in a
criminal trial not say, Thank God I live in a country that has a jury
WILLIAMS: So it`s a common sense of relief that everybody has. And
of course, he`s probably given that speech many times as a trial lawyer, as
well. I don`t mean to say it`s not sincere, but it`s not one that`s
unfamiliar to him.
MATTHEWS: Hampton, it sounded to me like he was not giving up his
political career, as well. We`ll get to more of this on the program
tonight, as we continue with HARDBALL, looking at the political dimensions
of this trial, which are to me pretty steep at this point, on a lot of
fronts good and bad. Your thoughts.
DELLINGER: And Chris, I watched firsthand, as many of us did in North
Carolina, the rise, the incredible rise of his political career, really
coming out of nowhere to take that U.S. Senate seat in 1998, to unseat a
Republican incumbent.
I don`t think he`s thinking about political office right now. He`s
got to be very concerned about the government`s ability to bring a trial
again on the counts where there was a hung jury.
Lanny Breuer, the head of the Justice Department`s criminal division,
sat in on a day of court, so this case has had the attention of the Justice
Department at the highest levels.
And I do think it`s important to note that the Justice Department --
the prosecutors had a great chance for a conviction here, in the sense that
all of the political tawdriness, everything he did wrong, came out in
court, in front of this jury. So little of the evidence about the Federal
Election Commission taking a pass on this case as a civil violation went in
front of this jury.
So this was the chance, I think, for the federal government to get a
conviction. John Edwards hopes he never sees the inside of a courtroom as
a defendant again.
MATTHEWS: Well, let`s go back to Pete on that, our regular expert who
I trust so much. It`s so -- if you look at the things that they were
asking -- the prosecution was asking this jury of regular people to do,
regular people, not lawyers -- they were asking them, basically, to make
law. This kind of a case hadn`t been tried before.
They were asking them to basically supersede -- apparently, were
rulings by the FEC. They were asking to set the bar, accept the fact that
the bar was set very low in terms of some political influence, some
campaign influence being attempted by this contribution.
Does that mean that this is as good a case as they can make and
they`re probably not going not going to try it again?
WILLIAMS: Well, I -- of course, the hard thing that the jury had to
decide was what was in John Edwards`s head. What was his intent? Did he
understand that taking this money was, as the government said, illegal?
Edwards has always insisted that he didn`t.
And -- but I take Hampton`s point here, that, in other words, one of
the things the Justice Department has to consider when they decide to go
for a retrial or not is, Did we give it our best shot? Is there something
we failed to do?
And I think everybody who`s watched this trial said no. They put on
their best case.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
WILLIAMS: And so you have to ask yourself, you know, having taken
this good a shot, what`s the reason to do it again?
The only thing I was starting to say before Edwards came out is, I
suppose one of the things the government has to consider is the flip side
to the political question that you raised initially, and that is, this is
now a Democratic administration. Will it be criticized if it doesn`t seek
a retrial against a man who was a Democratic candidate for president?
But having said that, many of the critics of the original prosecution
were Republicans and conservatives who thought that this was a
misapplication of federal campaign finance law. So it`s not a simple
political calculus.
MATTHEWS: Let me go to Hampton on another question. I might be back
to Pete with the same question. As we get the information from the jurors,
as they begin to speak and we begin to determine -- someone`s going to have
a tally probably by midnight in the papers tomorrow, if not sooner, about
which way they were headed. If they came 12 to zip for acquittal on the
big count, on count 3, which had to do with getting money from Bunny
Mellon, Rachel Mellon, for 2008 -- OK, they agreed on that.
Suppose it comes out it`s about 10 to 2, there are about 2 holdouts
who were for prosecution, for conviction? Would that lead the U.S.
attorney`s team not to go ahead with a second trial?
DELLINGER: Certainly, Chris, that can make a difference. And
obviously, it was unanimous on the decision to acquit. You know, we can`t
know what the Justice Department`s got to do.
But I think we have to assume good faith here. You know, this case
did cross administrations. There have been a lot of critics about this
case. And I think one important thing we can`t forget is this was the
first case. The problem for the federal government was John Edwards,
particularly after Senator Ensign, after Congressman Moran`s issues, the
way the Federal Election Commission had not seen a problem with some of
those cases, it was very tough to make John Edwards the first case.
So it doesn`t mean that, you know, all the shackles are off in terms
of politicians` misconduct. But the always problem -- the problem always
was making John Edwards the first case. And now the jury`s spoken that
they didn`t see criminal intent on the part of John Edwards.
MATTHEWS: Quickly, to Pete. Do you think if we find out that the
jury was leaning heavily towards acquittal on all counts, it`d make that
much less likely we`ll have a second trial?
WILLIAMS: Possibly. I will say this, that the natural inclination of
the prosecutors in this case is going to be to want to try again. It`s --
it`s going to be main Justice`s decision, Attorney General Holder, his
MATTHEWS: I see.
WILLIAMS: ... whether they think that the government should do this
again. And that`s a difficult question, and I`m quite confident they have
no idea what they`re going to do.
MATTHEWS: OK, thank you, Pete Williams, a great answer, a factual
answer, We don`t know yet because they haven`t decided it yet. Thank you,
Pete Williams, and thank you, Hampton Dellinger.
Much more on the Edwards trial ahead, as we presume, with this amazing
case tonight, amazing political story. Just remember,this guy was on the
Democratic ticket in 2004. He came very lose in 2008, coming in second in
Iowa, right ahead Obama and ahead of Hillary.
This guy was a major figure just a couple of years ago, and look how
close he came to going to the pen today. He`s beat it this time. We will
see what is coming next.
This is HARDBALL, the place for politics.
MATTHEWS: We`re back with coverage of the John Edwards trial.
What a day it`s been. The jury found him not guilty on one big count,
and deadlocked on all the others. He`s basically still innocent right now
under the law.
Let`s go to the politics of this story with two of our big
heavyweight. I meant that in terms of their political acumen.
MATTHEWS: Chuck Todd, NBC News political director and chief White
House correspondent, and also John Heilemann, MSNBC contributor and
national affairs editor for "New York" magazine. He wrote the cover story
this week on the Obama campaign strategy.
That`s what we were going to talk about. We have to talk about this.
Chuck, bring us back to how big this guy was. For those of us
covering him in 2004...
CHUCK TODD, NBC NEWS POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Yes.
MATTHEWS: ... in those small rooms in Iowa, around the country, New
Hampshire, he was a force to be reckoned with. He was hot. It was the
tale of two cities. It was an emotional, populism like you never heard
And then here was in the dock, basically, facing 30 years -- 30 years,
he was facing today, and he`s still free.
TODD: Let`s not forget, if Bob Shrum had gotten his way in 2000, it
wouldn`t have been Gore-Lieberman. It would have been Gore-Edwards. He
was such a fast-rising star in `98. There was -- he was one of the short-
listers in 2000.
MATTHEWS: And they could have won with that ticket. That ticket
might have won.
TODD: It might have. Who knows in a revisionist history?
Remember, he really made his stamp, put his stamp on his early career
among Democrats for what he did on Bill Clinton`s behalf in the Senate
trial during impeachment. And that`s sort of where he became a D.C. rising
star, already winning that Senate seat.
So, yes, this was a guy that was on the fast track. And the minute,
essentially, that Gore didn`t win and he didn`t get picked, I think it was
two months into President Bush`s first term that John Edwards made his
first visit to Iowa. This guy absolutely was on the fast track, and really
just maybe a week away from the momentum, late momentum he got in 2004, he
could have won the Iowa caucuses and made it a whole different ball game
for John Kerry.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
TODD: He was very close.
MATTHEWS: Go ahead, John Heilemann, because I was really impressed by
-- he was one of these guys who is really good in a room of 200 people. He
was really, really good in those packed rooms.
And my question is about that speech he just gave us about 10, 20
minutes ago when he talked about, the lord is not finished with me yet,
that argument, that resilience, I`m staying in public life. It may not be
electoral life, but it sounded like it. It really sounded like electoral
life to me.
JOHN HEILEMANN, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: I don`t know, man.
If John Edwards thinks he`s going to have an electoral future, he`s
more deluded than he has demonstrated himself to be in the past. But,
look, Chris, you say he was great in a small room in Iowa. And he was.
But that came from his roots, of course, which is that he was great in a
He was a tremendous attorney, a great plaintiff`s attorney. He made
himself a rich man by tugging on the heartstrings of jurors in North
Carolina. He used those skills to great effect politically, as Chuck said,
in the Senate, and then in his race of 2004. That vaulted himself in that
second-place finish in Iowa in 2004, was the thing that made him
attractive, and the connection to Bob Shrum that Chuck also mentioned that
got him on to the ticket in 2004.
But as we wrote in "Game Change," Mark Halperin and I, it was that
moment that things really started to change for John Edwards in a bad way.
Being on the ticket in 2004, he went from being a guy who everyone who knew
him said was one of the nicest, most genuine, most humble people in
politics to being an egomaniac.
That`s when the hubris started to creep in. And that`s when he
started to believe he could get away with anything.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
HEILEMANN: And that`s when he went down the path of ruin in 2007-
MATTHEWS: Yes. And of course it didn`t build -- help his substance.
I remember covering him out in Sioux City somewhere where you would sitting
in this bus. There wasn`t a piece of paper in the bus.
TODD: He wasn`t a reader.
MATTHEWS: He didn`t read anything.
TODD: He wasn`t a reader.
HEILEMANN: Right.
TODD: In fact, you talk to people, it was surprising. He was very
much sort of a skimmer. He would get top-line information.
The more you got to know John Edwards as a political candidate, the
less impressed you got for those of us that covered him.
HEILEMANN: Right.
TODD: And you would sit there and you could tell. The coverage of
Edwards was never -- it sort of -- it was great at first and then as
reporters watched him, because, Chris, you were just pointing out, you
could tell, hmm, there is not a lot there. This guy really is maybe only
an inch deep when it comes on specific policy issues.
It wasn`t clear what motivated him and what exactly his passion was,
other than to get elected. Look, I have always thought this entire Edwards
saga, there is a tragic element to this that I think none of us can fully
understand unless you have lost a child.
And I have always thought that the reason I still -- will still have
sympathy a little bit for John Edwards is that no one knows what it`s like
to lose a child, and when they lost a child, John and Elizabeth Edwards
changed. Their lives changed, everything changed. And I think whatever
happened between the two of them, nothing was ever the same.
So I have always thought you have got to realize...
MATTHEWS: That is a reality. Just pause on that.
TODD: Exactly.
MATTHEWS: Pause on that one, Chuck.
MATTHEWS: That happens to people who lose children. It does
something tragic to the relationship that`s so -- it`s common and it`s
TODD: Look at everything that happened in their lives and then they
decided to have two more children, he decided to have a political career.
Everything changed in their lives.
And so I have always -- as much as -- and I think a little bit of what
Edwards did today frankly was a little bit creepy, going as public as he
did. I thought it was -- I was uncomfortable watching him. I thought, you
know what, we don`t want to hear from you, John Edwards. Just say thank
you to the jury, thank your daughter Cate who has been unbelievable back
there, and go home. We don`t want to hear a speech.
HEILEMANN: And you don`t especially -- Chuck, I think the thing that
was a little creepy was hearing him talk about Quinn.
TODD: Yes.
HEILEMANN: And obviously there is nobody who begrudges a father the
love for a daughter, but to be talking about the child that was the result
of the affair that got him into this place, I thought that was the weirdest
moment to me.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
HEILEMANN: Again, I don`t begrudge him loving his daughter, even out
of -- whoever the mother of that daughter is, but it was weird to see him
standing on the steps of that courthouse, where he would never have found
himself had he not indulged in that affair that produced that child.
There was something strange about the way he emphasized -- the way he
emphasized his love for Quinn and then kind of had to back up and say,
well, I love all my children, after having sung kind of a song of praise
for her.
MATTHEWS: Let`s listen to that for the people that are just tuning in
ow, because I did agree it was one of those moments.
Bobby Kennedy used to say hang a lantern on your problem, in other
words, his full-court confession there which part of that treatise he just
gave us, which was obviously prepared ahead of time. He did what you`re
supposed to be do on politics. When you`re caught, admit it, because they
already know you`re guilty. You might as well admit it and get the benefit
of having admitted it.
Here he is going through that procedure. Here he is.
JOHN EDWARDS (D), FORMER U.S. SENATOR: My precious Quinn, who I love
more than any of you could ever imagine and I am so close to, and so, so
grateful for, so grateful for Quinn. I`m grateful for all of my children.
MATTHEWS: Well, that`s quite a scene.
Your thoughts. No more political career, Chuck, for him, even if he
beats this again in another trial.
TODD: No, and I actually think the real impact of this is just a
reminder of just how hard campaign -- criminalizing campaign finance and
these laws...
MATTHEWS: I`m with you. I`m with you.
TODD: Look, that`s the real world lesson here. No, John Edwards
doesn`t have a political career, and I don`t know why he still wants -- the
fact that he`s desperate to get in the public life, still, which to me is
what he was saying and it`s from what I understand from talking to others
that he really wants, he wants in publicly, is weird. He ought to go.
MATTHEWS: It reminds me of one of those trials you read about in
South Asia, Pakistan, India, around the world, Latin America, these kinds
of trials they hold. When you lose, the guys who win put you up for trial.
It`s just really tawdry, the whole thing. I`m sorry. That`s my
editorial opinion. I never liked the smell of this case.
Anyway, thank you, Chuck Todd. Thank you, John Heilemann.
Much more on the Edwards verdict, the mistrial, and the whole
political shebang coming up as we continue this program.
And why did the voters, here the jurors, just push back when there`s a
sex scandal involved? They don`t want to hear about it. They don`t want
to think about it. They judge the facts. Again in this case, we saw, like
we saw all during the Clinton era, the voters don`t want to deal with these
matters. They leave it to the private lives of the politicians. They vote
on the facts and on the real politics.
And this is HARDBALL. We saw another example of that from that jury
today. The place for politics.
MATTHEWS: We`re right here at the climax of the John Edwards trial
right as we cover it. Edwards was found not guilty on one count late this
afternoon, and the jury deadlocked on all the other five other counts. The
judge in the case, by the way, declared a mistrial on all those charges.
Anyway, we will be right back with much from Greensboro, North
Carolina, with what this means politically for the Democratic Party
especially and for North Carolina.
This is HARDBALL, the place for politics.
JANE WELLS, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I`m Jane Wells with your CNBC "Market
Stock logged their worst May since 2010. Thank goodness it`s over.
The Dow sinks 26, the S&P is down three, and the Nasdaq loses 10.
Ahead of tomorrow`s closely watched employment report, weekly jobless
claims rose by 10,000 to 383,000. That`s the fourth straight weekly gain.
And the hits just keep coming. The payroll firm ADP said the private
sector added a weaker-than-expected 133,000 jobs this month.
But some good news -- most retailers reported solid same-store sales
in the month of May.
That`s it from CNBC, first in business worldwide -- now back to
EDWARDS: All I can say is thank goodness we live in a country that
has the kind of system that we have. And I think those jurors were an
exemplar for what juries are supposed to do.
MATTHEWS: Well, they found him innocent, and on the rest of the
counts, they found -- they couldn`t reach an agreement. So of course he
liked that jury.
That`s John Edwards.
More now on the dramatic day in North Carolina we have just seen.
John Edwards was found, as I said, not guilty on the one count. And
the jury deadlocked on the five others.
What exactly happened there? What does it mean for John Edwards? I`m
fascinated by this case because I thought it should never have been
Howard Fineman is an MSNBC contributor and editorial director for the
"Washington Post", and Ken Gross is an election law attorney and former
general counsel for the Federal Election Commission.
Let me start with, Ken. The FEC basically said in the Ensign case,
this was not a campaign contribution , this kind of thing.
KEN GROSS, ELECTION LAW ATTORNEY: Right.
MATTHEWS: Why are we trying a case that would require making new law
as part of the process of a verdict?
GROSS: You got me. I just don`t understand why this case was
brought in the first place. It needs to meet a clear standard. There was
no clear standard here.
MATTHEWS: And now we have, Howard, the irony that was pointed by
Pete Williams about an hour ago, we have unlimited campaign contributions
permitted to super PAC door.
HOWARD FINEMAN, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes.
MATTHEWS: It`s like I was saying it was like when they changed the
drinking age in Jersey from 21 to 18, and they got you for drinking at 20,
you know? It was already out of date, the whole thing is out of date.
FINEMAN: I think it`s impossible to know, at least, until we talk to
the jurors. But I think the fact that there is such a huge flood of money,
secret and open, now going into politics partly as a result of Citizens
United and super PACs, as Pete said, they made the money here look like
pikers change, and it made the whole thing more puzzling, perhaps, to the
jurors. There was a lack of legal theory, but the lack of any perspective
on the part of the prosecutors.
Why are you doing this when there`s so much more big and important
going, if you`re worried about money and politics? So, that may have
helped John Edwards.
MATTHEWS: I just thought, about how many murders are going on,
either being tried in this country, just backlogs of criminal cases. Can`t
this to some use, all this prosecutorial -- anyway, here`s something we
have to cover, our specialty, politics, you and I. Here`s John Edwards
saying today about his future, and he says he has one.
And it sounds like he thinks he has a political future after all
this. Let`s watch.
JOHN EDWARDS (D), FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don`t think God
is through with me. I really believe he thinks there`s still some good
things I can do. And whatever happens with this legal stuff going forward,
what I`m hopeful about is all those kids that I`ve seen, you know, in the
poorest parts of this country and in some of the poorest places in the
world that I can help them, in whatever way I`m still capable of helping
them. And I want to dedicate my life to being the best dad I can be and to
helping those kids who I think deserve help.
MATTHEWS: Well, Howard, you know, I`m not a cruel person, but I am
an observant person, and I think he used this opportunity that he knew he
would get on cable television and on network television to make a pitch.
So he smartly said, OK, the jurors are geniuses because they just let me
off, and of course I committed all these sins in moral terms, because
everybody knows I did, so that`s no problem. It`s like Bobby Kennedy
(INAUDIBLE), your probably know about it.
And here was my chance to make a pitch for a political future. I`m
the guy to talk about the two Americas, the rich and the poor Americas.
That`s a bigger issue now than it was when he talked about it. Here he is
joining the fight again -- politically fighting again.
FINEMAN: Well, I knew him when he first came into town. I was
probably one of the first people to break bread with him, practically,
because I knew his consultants, and I said, this guy is a charming guy.
But he`s so veered off into the land of creepy self-delusion.
I`m watching -- I`m watching a car crash of craziness here. And I
know there`s second lives in American politics. But the notion that he
took this occasion to weave the story of his children, of all his children,
including the one that he had with the mistress, that he was having
relations with while his wife was dying of cancer, that he`s going to weave
the story of those children into the story of the poor people of America
and the world.
And thus I am going to be the pied piper leading the Americas and the
children together in a new public role for myself, that was so beyond any
level of self-awareness as to be almost pathological. Did I make myself
MATTHEWS: Indeed you did.
FINEMAN: It`s just sometimes the shamelessness of public figures,
especially politicians, is astounding to me. You have to have a certain
level of shamelessness to be in public life let alone to run for office.
But to do that, in this occasion, was just mind-boggling, completely mind-
MATTHEWS: You`ve never been better at explaining the reality of
political thinking, which is it`s all in, it`s all ego.
FINEMAN: How do I use this opportunity to reestablish my career?
MATTHEWS: I`m talking about a trial which could have put him away
for 30 years.
GROSS: Yes.
MATTHEWS: He`s just beat the rap. He`s declared himself basically
innocent and ready for political leadership again. And he`s also saying,
and I had this child through this woman and that`s something I want to talk
about now.
FINEMAN: Let me weave that story into the other story --
MATTHEWS: We`re running along, watching the parade of these big egos
coming down main street. We`re amazed by them.
FINEMAN: Absolutely unbelievable.
GROSS: This is a long road to redemption for him. I have no doubt
about that. However, it did start out on the right track. He made a
statement that was close to an allocution, and he does have to worry what
the Department of Justice is going to do next. It seems crazy to me that
they would waste more resources because I think the case has been a
monumental waste from the get-go. But he still has to face that.
MATTHEWS: I think I know why it was good in the courtroom of regular
people though, because when you see, and I see a huge ego unleashed, he
could probably direct that to a kind of I`m on your side thing which he
does --
FINEMAN: Well, he was a fantastic courtroom lawyer. I don`t know
what court he thought he was speaking there -- to there. I think he thinks
the court of voters out there in some future place and time that he`s going
to use his pay.
MATTHEWS: I know who he`s talking to. Do you know he`s talking to?
Bunny Mellon.
FINEMAN: All right. Maybe.
MATTHEWS: Contributors have given him a lot of money in the past and
will give him again because they believe in exactly what he just said
there, I`m going to help the poor. And that is the thing he has to go to,
there`s a reason to exist politically. He had to go to tonight and he did
FINEMAN: Well --
MATTHEWS: By the way, out there, it only takes one out of 10. But
they`ve got a lot of money, and he`s back in business.
OK. Thank you, Howard Fineman. Perhaps I thought of something you
didn`t think of.
FINEMAN: You just did.
MATTHEWS: Ken Gross, thank you.
He`s not talking to you or me, a lot of people willing to believe.
We`re going to have more on the Edwards trial. This thing keeps giving --
his acquittal on one count, the mistrial on all the rest. It could be a
political gain for all the prosecution against this guy.
As I said on the top of the show, Johnny`s come marching home again.
And this is HARDBALL, a place for politics.
EDWARDS: The second thing I want to say a word about is
responsibility. And this is about me. I want to make sure that everyone
hears from me and from my voice that while I do not believe I did anything
illegal, or ever thought I was doing anything illegal, I did an awful,
awful lot that was wrong. And there is no one else responsible for my
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL. It has been asked many times
since this trial begun, what`s sex got to do with it? The jury today
answered not much.
Mark Halperin is MSNBC senior political analyst, and creator and
author of Time.com`s "The Page."
"The Washington Post`s" Melinda Henneberger writes the "She the
People" blog and was in the courtroom covering the Edwards trial. She`s a
big "Washington Post" columnist right now.
Let me ask you both, I have been trying to think about the angels of
this trial as it seems to be concluding, at least in first round, with the
acquittal on one count and the hung jury and the rest, Mark. Did the jury
did something again that probably should make us feel good -- they were
able to separate out the questions of the law, but they did have a hard
time deciding the decision, but basically it looks like they weren`t being
driven by the sexual aspects of this whole matter.
MARK HALPERIN, MSNBC SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Chris, the jurors
probably don`t follow the nature of prosecutorial discretion the way you
and I do, but I don`t think there`s any doubt when we hear from them,
they`re going to say what you and I believe, which is this case should
never would have been brought. Whatever you think of John Edwards in terms
of how he conducted himself, it was ridiculous case under both the law and
under common sense for them to prosecute them for it. And I think the
jurors felt that way.
And I think if the prosecutors did not decide to retry or not before
they have the jurors, my guess is they`ll treat that jury as a focus group.
And when they hear what they say about separating out the personal from the
legal, I bet they don`t try to bring the case again.
MATTHEWS: But, Melinda, your thoughts, I haven`t heard from you
lately, with talk in the past, what`s your sense of what juries action
today in the acquittal in the one matter, where it looked like they said it
could not have been a campaign contribution because it was basically given
after the campaign was over. And then the rest of them may have been hold
outs but they couldn`t reach a conviction on any of the other matters.
MELINDA HENNEBERGER, WASHINGTON POST : Well, I think to me, if they
had all believed that this was a ridiculous case that you should never been
brought, they would not have spent nine days or nine long days in that room
thinking about it and obviously taking it very seriously.
So I don`t know that it was -- certainly his gamble paid off, to put
on a pretty bare bones defense, but I don`t know that it was a ridiculous
case. It was the case they had and they seem to have done their best to
try and treat it seriously, and I think there was very much a way it to
believe that he was guilty in the case without it being about, you know,
punishing him for being a cad, as you said before. But --
MATTHEWS: Let me challenge you on this.
MATTHEWS: It seemed to me the judge in this case, and the
prosecutors were trying to do a couple things. They wanted the jury to
basically make law. There had not been a case like this before. They
wanted to judge the guy guilty even though the FEC had a case involving --
Ensign out in Nevada where they basically decided it was within the
campaign laws, you could do what they were doing. And also, they raised
the bar, lowered it pretty low by saying all you have to prove is that part
of the contribution was political.
And even with that, the jury couldn`t reach the agreement to convict.
HALPERIN: And they built the case around the liar.
HENNEBERGER: Maybe they did -- maybe the case should never have been
brought, but that`s the case they had and they took it seriously, and they
obviously since, they deadlocked on five of the charges, found that it
wasn`t clear one way or the other.
But if I could go back a .to what you were saying earlier, I had such
a different take listening to John Edwards when he was coming out of the
I don`t think he was all making the case for I want to get back in
the political game. He wants redemption which anyone in his case would
want. I actually listened to him even though I do think he was guilty
under the judge`s instructions, I obviously had a sympathetic response
where of course he wanted to say something to and about his children,
especially about Quinn who he denied. I mean, this is a child he denied,
his own flesh and blood.
So, to me it was natural thing in the world to want to say to the
world, I actually really love this child and I`m going to try to use the
rest of my time on this planet to do something worthwhile. And I did not
hear --
HENNEBERGER: -- you know, an announcement for political life.
MATTHEWS: OK, we`ll see. Thank you. I disagree. But thank you,
Melinda Henneberger, much talk from these guys and I think this guy is a
shrewd trial lawyer.
Mark, do you agree?
HALPERIN: I think he`s a shrewd trial lawyer, but I think that was
humanity, not trying to lay the groundwork for anything. I think probably,
if he cares about what the people in Washington and New York think about
him, he would have been better off not making a statement at all, or not
making a statement like that --
HENNEBERGER: I agree.
HALPERIN: -- but I don`t think it will be particularly well-
MATTHEWS: OK. Thank you so much.
When we return, let me finish with the birth of my granddaughter
Julia. It all happened in the last few days.
You`re watching HARDBALL -- there she is, Julia Ravenel (ph) Matthews
-- the place for politics, but not in the ext minute or so.
MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight with someone who is just started in
this life, Julia Ravenel Matthews came into this world, this Tuesday, in
the hour just before dawn. She is healthy and beautiful and has the glow
about her. I have no way of knowing what lies ahead for Julia, only that
she will spend her life in this 21st century, perhaps right through until
the end of it. She`ll have us parents, Sarah and Michael, a loving aunt in
Caroline, and dotng uncle in Thomas. She will have in Suzie Ravenel (ph)
and Kathleen and I devoted and dazzled parents of her parents.
We`re very fortunate, and thank you so many of you for recognizing
that and sharing in our celebration. Thank you.
That`s HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us.
"POLITICS NATION" with Al Sharpton starts right now.
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>


text:
WASHINGTON (AP/RNN) — Former President George W. Bush, his wife Laura, and other members of the Bush family returned to the Capitol rotunda on Tuesday evening to again visit George H.W. Bush's casket and greet members of the public visiting to pay respects to the 41st president.
The family was also present on Monday, when Republican leaders eulogized Bush, who died at 94 years old on Friday night, in a solemn ceremony at the U.S. Capitol.
The 43rd president, George H.W. Bush's oldest son, hugged well-wishers, shook hands and even took a picture with a baby.
Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and George W. Bush's daughters Jenna Bush Hager and Barbara Pierce Bush were also present.
Earlier in the day former Republican Senator and presidential candidate Bob Dole paid his respects in a moving moment, rising from his wheelchair and saluting.
Colin Powell, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Bush and later Secretary of State under his son, also visited on Tuesday.
On Monday evening President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump were among the mourners paying their respects to Bush at the rotunda.
The Trumps stood in front of Bush's casket with their eyes closed for a few moments before Trump gave a salute.
The casket arrived Monday afternoon from Houston. The public will pay their respects to him until 8:45 a.m. ET Wednesday.
Bush's state funeral is set for Wednesday in Washington, where he will be eulogized by his son, as well as former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, former Sen. Alan Simpson and biographer Jon Meacham.
All former and current presidents are expected to be in attendance at the state funeral: Presidents Donald Trump, Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, as well as all former and current first ladies, with the exception of Rosalynn Carter, CNN reported.
Former Vice President Joe Biden and Dr. Jill Biden will also attend.
Prince Charles, the heir to the British throne, will also pay his respects Wednesday, representing his mother, Queen Elizabeth II. The German government said Chancellor Angela Merkel will also attend the memorial service for the former president.
In remarks at the Capitol on Monday, House Speaker Paul Ryan praised the two-term congressman from Texas as a "great man" and a "gentle soul."
Vice President Mike Pence called him an example whose "lifetime of service will be enshrined in the hearts of the American people forever."
"He was a great leader who made a great difference in the life of this nation," Pence said. "But he was also just a good man who was devoted to his wife, his family and his friends."
He said the 41st president "left America and the world more peaceful, prosperous and secure."
Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-KY, the majority leader, praised Bush for his steady leadership.
"With his even temperament and hard-won expertise, George Herbert Walker Bush steered this country as straight as he steered that airplane," he said, referring to Bush's time as a Navy pilot in World War II.
Bush chose not to have a formal funeral procession through downtown Washington. Burial at his presidential library at Texas A&M University is set for Thursday.
Copyright 2018 Associated Press. All rights reserved. Raycom News Network contributed to this report.


text:
Jury finds Heath guilty of murder
Recorded police interview pivotal as jury convicts John Heath of murder in wife's death
DANBURY -- In the end, John Heath was convicted by his own words.
A Superior Court jury on Wednesday found the 70-year-old former Newtown resident guilty of the cold-case murder of his wife, Elizabeth, emphatically answering the question of who killed the 32-year-old mother and concealed her body in a dank, dark cistern beneath a barn in Newtown nearly three decades ago.
The jury's verdict was returned just over an hour after they re-heard a surreptitiously recorded interview in which Heath made denigrating comments to police about his wife's fitness as a mother, as well as other statements that just didn't ring true with the four women and eight men who determined his fate.
"A lot of it was the audiotape," said juror Andrea Rippel. His story about "who wanted the divorce and what kind of mother" Elizabeth Heath had been to the couple's then 4-year-old daughter ultimately proved to be the tipping point that brought the jury to its unanimous decision, she said.
Jury foreman Peter Kollias said Heath's claims not to have known about the cistern in the floor of the dairy barn where his wife's remains lay hidden for 26 years also strained the jury's credulity.
"John was a skilled tradesman. He built his house. He knew his house. Not to notice that the cistern was there was hard to believe," Kollias said.
Heath never took the stand during the two weeks of testimony that preceded the deliberations, but the fateful statements were made to two detectives, Joe Joudy of the Newtown Police Department and Daniel Jewiss of the Connecticut State Police, who went to his home in Bridgewater on April 14, 2010, the day the body was discovered beneath the old dairy barn on Poverty Hollow Road in Newtown.
The two police officers initially portrayed the interview as a routine follow-up on a cold case investigation -- Heath had reported his wife missing in early April 1984 -- at first not telling him a body had been found and gradually drawing out the comments that eventually proved his undoing.
The conversation was captured on a digital recorder concealed in Jewiss' jacket pocket.
Heath, who is confined to a wheelchair by chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and a host of other maladies, remained stoic as foreman Kollias pronounced him guilty and each member of the jury rose in turn to affirm the verdict, keeping his hands clasped on the counsel table before him.
About a dozen family members, including his current wife, Raquel, their two children, and his and Elizabeth's daughter, Meghann, likewise remained silent. They declined to make any comment afterward.
"My client is obviously disappointed with the outcome," defense attorney Frank O'Reilly said. "He maintained his innocence throughout the trial, and he continues to maintain his innocence now."
An appeal is planned, O'Reilly said.
The jury heard from more than 30 prosecution witnesses since testimony began on Sept. 26, but only one from the defense, Heath's daughter.
Because of the length of time the body had been concealed, and the damp conditions in the cistern, recovery of any genetic material, including DNA and bloodstains that may have definitively pointed the finger at the killer, was not even attempted, prosecution witnesses testified.
Instead, Assistant State's Attorney Warren Murray relied on a barrage of circumstantial evidence, and statements Heath made to investigators when he first reported his wife missing, claiming that she "was never happy" and "didn't want to be a mother," which was contradicted by testimony from her friends and fellow students at the Westport psychiatric institute where she was studying to become a mental health counselor.
For years, Heath, a Vietnam veteran who ran a commercial painting business, insisted that Elizabeth had run away in the middle of the night.
Judge Robin Pavia scheduled sentencing for Dec. 3. Heath's bond was increased to $2 million.
, taking only a few clothes and $600 with her and leaving behind her daughter, purse, pet dog, car and all of her jewelry.
It wasn't until April 2010, when the new owners were renovating the property that John and Raquel lost to foreclosure five years earlier, that police discovered she'd never left.
She had been beaten to death, killed by at least four blows to the head by a "narrow, heavy" club-like weapon, wrapped in bedclothes and plastic bags before being shoved head-first into the 3-feet deep, 18-inch square dry well.
According to the prosecution, Heath killed his wife of nearly six years because he was planning to divorce her, and he feared losing custody of Meghann and the home he'd owned since 1973, as well as having to pay alimony and child support, if they split up.
Heath served divorce papers on Elizabeth three days before she vanished, but claimed the couple remained on amicable terms, even making love on the night before he last saw her.
He did go through with the divorce, which was granted in August 1984, and married Raquel, who had been his daughter's babysitter, the following June.
O'Reilly contended that a more likely suspect was the defendant's father, Linwood "Chet" Heath, an alcoholic who was divorced from Heath's mother, Grace, in 1947 after being sent to prison for child molestation.
Several witnesses testified that around the time Elizabeth disappeared, Chet Heath was sleeping in the barn where the body was found, and O'Reilly suggested during closing arguments the victim may have awakened in the middle of the night, gone outside, and been killed by her father-in-law as a result of an argument.
But both Rippel and Kallios said the jury never attached much credence to the defense theory, citing Heath's own recorded statement, in which he told the two detectives that only he, Elizabeth and Meghann were living on the property when his wife ran off.
"Honestly, we gave it very little credence," the foreman said.
Kallios said the jury was "pretty much on the same page" from the start of deliberations, which began last Thursday, and because of the intervening weekend and Columbus Day holiday, consumed just over two full days.
"There were a few people in the middle of the road, but every time there was a question, we asked for more testimony. We wanted to be thorough, a man's life was at stake," he said.


text:
Imagine the lovechild that would emerge from the coupling of, say, Epic's Gears of War and Zynga's Adventure World. You'd get all the gritty action and polished mechanics of a AAA game buoyed by a constant stream of updates and content. Daddy's eyes and mommy's brains, so to speak. And sequels? With a back-end where developers could create and respond to a game's community much faster than is currently possible, they'd become a thing of the past.
Now, those imaginings may sound like just so much wishful thinking, but Trion—creators of the hit massively multiplayer online game Rift—think that they've got the formula to usher in such a reality. Today, Trion's announcing Red Door, which they're calling both a new publishing/development initiative and a future online destination for gamers. On the development side, the company's looking to offer their technology and services in a bundle that they hope will be a standard like Unity or id Tech but with network support built right into the Red Door package. As for what the average gamer would get, Trion wants you to start thinking of Red Door as a Zynga for hardcore game experiences.
I spoke with Trion CEO Dr. Lars Buttler this week about what makes up Red Door and how it could change not just online games, but the entire industry. "Creativity in the business jumps when new consoles or better hardware hits," says Buttler. "What we're going to have with Red Door is a platform that's going to be continually refreshing and we think that's going to enable a lot of innovation." The colorful codename refers to the sum total of what makes Trion games like Rift work, components that they think are going to be essential to bring AAA quality experiences online in a successful way. What are those pieces, then? Buttler explains that the combo of HD graphics in an MMO environment, the ability to execute and massively scale up a variety of genres and an distributed server infrastructure that supports necessities like billing, customer support and content management.
Buttler uses the Trion games that are either out or in development as an example of how Red Door would work. He says that, in the six months since Rift launched, the fantasy gameworld's seen five major updates which have resulted in the current game having 25% more new features. That results in a stickier experience, with 1 billion quests completed by players over 1 trillion minutes of playtime, all as a result of a powerful ability to figure out what players want by watching how they play. Another Trion game, the Petroglyph-developed End of Nations, aims to prove that a game needn't be a WoW-style RPG experience to thrive as a massive multiplayer offering. When it comes out in early 2012, the massively multiplayer online strategy game will be attempting to assemble players from all over the world across broad, tactical battles. And with Defiance, the platform-agnostic shooter-MMO that Stephen Totilo saw at E3, Trion thinks they'll be delivering a real-time, action-heavy open world that also syncs up to an in-development SyFy TV series, where changes in one medium affect the other. Potential partners wouldn't be tied to the tech powering Trion's games, either. "You could re-write the Unreal engine, for example, to work in Red Door," Buttler says. And the PS3-vs-Xbox 360 magic possible with Defiance would work with other Red Door partner games, too. "We don't care about the end device or distribution network."
However, Buttler says it'd be wrong to focus on the technology. Rather, he observes, it's about what the technology makes possible. "Look at cable TV," Butler offers. "Cable created 25 years of growth in entertainment, because all of a sudden you had these pipes that could deliver new kinds of content. Sure, they started with making sure you could get broadcast network shows in areas where antennas weren't working, but then you got HBO and Showtime and AMC pushing the boundaries of what's possible on TV. You start with the basic and then you get to premium."
So, if social networks like Facebook are the broadband cable, then games like Cityville are the basic channels, at least in terms of content. Buttler sniffs at the kinds of experiences that lots of casual and social games offer nowadays but admits that "Facebook catalyzed a ton of new experiences and we want to do that for premium AAA games." "We want make them more live and more dynamic than the current model of social games where months go by and nothing changes," he continues. "Korean games don't change, for example. Everything takes too long to change, because the platforms aren't built to change. That same jump that cable catalyzed has to come to these social, connected game experiences."
With that jump, Buttler hopes, comes an end to too-safe sequels and watered-down interactivity. Red Door is "exactly what the industry frickin' needs to move forward." And, if you're a developer who's aware that the freemium model is the future but hates the experiences to be found there, "come talk to us," Buttler says. "We want to enable risk-taking again." If you look at the Trion logo, there's always been a door in the "I". "But now," the company founder says, "we're starting to open it and see what's on the other side."
You can contact Evan Narcisse, the author of this post, at firstname.lastname@example.com. You can also find him on Twitter, Facebook, and lurking around our #tips page.


text:
Search by word or name
Recent Posts
- The Donald Affair: Trump Blasts O'Reilly September 22, 2015
- Shutter Island: Moral Therapy, Lobotomies and Mental Illness in Hollywood September 20, 2015
- Conservative group trying to mount anti-Trump ad campaign September 4, 2015
- Trump Valued Saving His Mother Very Low September 1, 2015
- Solutions to Mass Murders: The Lone Wolf Theory, Gun Control and the Buddhist sutra 19 August 8, 2015
- U.S. Said to Seek Records of New York Anticorruption Panel May 6, 2014
- "NYT: Cost of Being Mayor?" Vs 'Mayor cost to us?' December 30, 2013
- The NYT got it wrong in 'When the Mentally Ill Own Guns' December 29, 2013
- Safety tip for this coming New Year: Chris Rock – How not to get your ass kicked by the police! December 28, 2013
- European boycott of death penalty drugs lowers rate of US executions December 19, 2013
- THE PERNICIOUS PSYCHIATRY December 18, 2013
- Psychiatry is dead. Long live psychiatry. Part 3: Lobotomies December 16, 2013
- Psychiatry is dead. Long live psychiatry. Part 2 December 8, 2013
- Psychiatry is dead. Long live psychiatry. Part 1 of 3 (revised) December 6, 2013
- Generation Rx documentary: psychiatry and pharma as drug pimps for our children, seriously. December 1, 2013
mental health and…
Fun blogs
- Hyperbole and a half extremely funny blog about the experience of depression. My favorite.
- Institute for the Study of the Neurologically Typical humor
- Lily Tomlin & Jane Wagner fun. read the script of In Search…
- Lisa Kudro 'web therapist'
- Uncyclopedia
Mental Health
- Center for the Human Rights of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry
- Gotta Find a Home – The plight of the homeless
- Hyperbole and a half extremely funny blog about the experience of depression. My favorite.
- Involuntary transformation A lot of everything, including humor
- Judge David L. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law – Excellent for legal research on mental health issues.
- Mental Patients Liberation Alliance – created and operated by and for people who have been subjected to "treatments" executed by the psychiatric industry.
- The Empowerment Center – excellent resources for mental health
- Weathering the storm – resources about 'bi-polarism'
Political blogs
- Animal liberation front
- Black Agenda Report
- Electronic Frontier Foundation Excellent work at protecting our right to privacy in cyberspace
- End the illusion. Basically, about the bankers' art of screwing a nation. Good 'DIY' ideas.
- Green is the new Red (please, visit) – how animal rights and environmental advocates are being branded "eco-terrorists" in what many are calling the Green Scare.
- Naomi Wolf – that woman knows politics!
tagsabuse of mentally ill abuse of power abuses best practices Bloomberg CAB calle 13 casinos colorado shootings compulsive consumer advisory board culture of abuse disability Donald Trump DSM-5 Erika Menendez FBI fracking gambling Goldman Sachs Gov Cuomo gun control gun laws gun registry HSBC jp morgan Justice Center Justice Center for the Protection of people with special needs Mental disorder mental health mental health humor mental health policiy mental health policy mental health policy of repression mental illness neuropsychiatry newtown connecticut NSA NSA spying nyc NY gun law NYPD nys NY SAFE ACT NYS Mental Health Act NY Times Obama office of mental health OMH OMH (NY State Office of Mental Health) Operating certificate pay for success pharma police state policy Policy and Advocacy privatization privatization of mental health services puerto rico racism self-advocacy state power stereotypes stigma stop and frisk suicide supported housing surveillance state Terrorism terrorists tyranny unlicensing Wall Street Warfare and Conflict Willowbrook


text:
The week began weird and then got weirder. First, it was reported that a Kentucky state senator said climate change is implausible because Earth and Mars share the exact same temperature. And then a U.S. congressman linked the climate change debate to the ozone hole "hoax" and the fluorination of water.
So, let's begin with Kentucky State Senator Brandon Smith (R-D30), the majority whip and owner of a mining company who lashed out at a witness during a Natural Resources and Environment Committee meeting:
As you [Energy & Environment Cabinet official] sit there in your chair with your data, we sit up here in ours with our data and our constituents and stuff behind us. I won't get into the debate about climate change but I'll simply point out that I think in academia we all agree that the temperature on Mars is exactly as it is here. Nobody will dispute that. Yet there are no coal mines on Mars. There's no factories on Mars that I'm aware of.
Meteorologist Dan Satterfield, blogging over at the American Geophysical Union, was swift and merciless in his response:
A statement like this from a 5th grader would be alarming, but from someone (State Senator Brandon Smith) who makes laws is downright frightening. What is more frightening is that the science literacy of his constituency is so low, he'll likely be easily reelected. In case there are any doubts I looked up the weather on Mars today. We can do that thanks to a set of meteorological instruments aboard NASA's Curiosity Rover.
The fact that he owns a coal mine might have something to do with this. As Sebastian Unger said in the Jungle, "It's nearly impossible to convince some of anything, if their paycheck depends on it being otherwise". Your grade school should cancel your diploma Senator. Your voters should fire you.
And then yesterday, Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) was a guest of honor at the 9th International Conference on Climate Change, a three-day denial-fest sponsored by dozens of organizations, including the Heartland Institute, an oil and gas industry-funded think tank.
During Congressional hearings, Rohrabacher uses air quotes when he says "global warming" and once demanded that a scientist "capsulize" all the reasons why he believes that climate change is a big deal in 10 seconds.
At the climate change conference, he didn't disappoint. First, he ranted about the ozone hole and how environmentalism hurts the poorest members of our society:
What about the ozone hole? I'm sure there are scientists here who know a lot more here than I do. But my reading of that is that the ozone hole is sort of like global warming. It was an exaggerated position on some readings and we ended up with the ozone hole… And, in fact, the ozone hole after a few years just disappeared. Yet, we were all told this was a huge crisis, and what happened after that huge crisis hit? We had to get rid of Freon, we had to get rid of all the stuff in the spray cans. How much did that cost us? When we spend billions of dollars needlessly because someone has frightened us into accepting the position, it damages people in our society. When you have less wealth, the people at the lowest rungs of our economic sphere are the ones who feel it the most. [applause]
Where to begin? (1) The ozone hole hasn't disappeared, but is stabilizing and well on on its way to making a full recovery by 2070. (2) The international treaty to act against the ozone hole was a huge success — and epitomizes the type of global agreement that Republicans in Congress refer to as a plot to "redistribute wealth among nations."
And then, Rohrabacher had this to say:
"I don't know whether or not fluoridating the water helps people's teeth become better or not…But I do know that in this country, we should be the ones who should be deciding what we put into our bodies one way or the other, not the federal government or the local government putting fluoride into our water!"
Really, he makes it almost too easy:


text:
Stephen Strasburg slated for Buffalo
The Syracuse Chiefs have confirmed that RHP STEPHEN STRASBURG is scheduled to pitch for the Chiefs on Thursday, June 3 at Coca-Cola Field against the Buffalo Bisons (1:05 p.m.). The Bisons are scheduled to counter with RHP Dillon Gee.
See what the fuss is about: CLICK HERE!
Strasburg is 3-1 with a 1.27ERA in five starts with Syracuse after being promoted from Double-A Harrisburg. He was the Washington Nationals' #1 pick (1st overall) in the June 2009 draft.
MLB.com, the Washington Post and Nationals.com all cited Nationals' General Manager Mike Rizzo today as saying Strasburg's next start is scheduled to be Thursday, June 3 at Coca-Cola Field against the Bisons. Rizzo also said that the Triple-A rookie is scheduled to toss six innings or 95 pitches, whichever comes first, in the start.


text:
Fisher Cats beat Mets
Fisher Cats Press Release:
Austin Bibens-Dirkx pitched seven strong innings and Ryan Schimpf and Kevin Pillar each homered to power the Fisher Cats (8-8) to a 5-2 win over the Binghamton Mets (8-7). The win evens the series up at one win each as the team's head into All-You-Can-Eat Day on Saturday afternoon.
Schimpf got the Fisher Cats out to a good start by smacking his fourth home run in the bottom of the first inning. It was Schimpf's tenth home run in just 93 at-bats at Northeast Delta Dental Stadium.
A pair of runs in the second pushed the lead to 3-1 before Pillar stole the spotlight in the third. He led off the frame with a long fly ball off the center field wall. The ricochet bounced by Binghamton center fielder Alonzo Harris, and Pillar raced all the way home for an inside-the-park home run. It was only the fourth time a Fisher Cat scored the unorthodox home run, the first since Eric Thames pulled off the feat on May 28, 2010.
From there, leading 4-1, Bibens-Dirkx went into cruise control. He pitched seven total innings, allowing two runs on 6 hits. He struck out five and walked one to become the second Fisher Cat to earn two victories this season.
New Hampshire scored its final run in the fifth on a bases-loaded walk by Clint Robinson. In five games against the Mets, Robinson has seven hits, 3 walks, and a run batted in.
The teams now meet up on Saturday afternoon for All-You-Can-Eat Day presented by Rock 101 and Greg & The Morning Buzz. First pitch is at 1:35 p.m. Tickets are available by visiting www.nhfishercats.com, calling 603-641-2005, or stopping by the Fisher Cats Ticket Office at Northeast Delta Dental Stadium.


text:
A Colorado emergency department doctor awakened at 1 a.m. to treat victims of Friday's theater shooting said the first call was a terrible reminder of another local tragedy.
"I was a physician on the scene at Columbine," said Dr. Christopher Colwell, director of emergency medicine at Denver Health. "When I realized what was happening, oh, my heart sank."
Colwell's hospital saw eight patients hurt early Friday, all adults ages 18 to 44, including six initially and two who transferred later. All were treated for gunshot wounds including those inflicted by shotgun pellets and high-caliber weapon bullets.
"One woman was shot directly with a bullet wound to her knee," Colwell said. "Others had injuries in the chest, abdomen and extremities."
Police said 12 people were killed and 58 were injured when accused shooter James Eagan Holmes, 24, of Aurora, opened fire at a midnight showing of the new Batman movie "The Dark Knight Rises" at a theater in Aurora, a suburb of Denver.
Victims were taken to a half-dozen local hospitals for treatment.
Fifteen of those patients were taken to the Medical Center of Aurora, where Dr. Frank Lansville was also awakened at 1 a.m. and then rushed to help colleagues on the night shift.
"Within 18 minutes we were in full operation," he said.
Twelve of those victims suffered blasts from high-caliber weapons, Lansville said, adding that seven were admitted, including five in critical condition. Three victims were treated for chemical exposure to some kind of gas and released.
At Denver Health, the patients were all conscious, Colwell said.
"They were overwhelmed, still trying to grasp what had happened," he said.
The initial call indicated that there were children and teenagers involved in the massacre, which also sparked memories of the 1999 Columbine High School shooting that killed 15 people and injured 21.
"You feel your stomach go in knots," Colwell said.
Related stories:
- 'Mass chaos' as 12 shot dead
- Mass killers often not mentally ill, but seeking revenge
- Shooting suspect was graduate student
Tanner Coon, 17, describes seeing flashes of gunfire, which he thought were fireworks, amid the chaos of trying to escape the shooting in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater as he was "trying to calm" his friend's 12-year-old brother.