30 thoughts on “News/Politics 8-14-19

  1. Thank AOC and Democrats, since their hateful language led to this.


    As I said…. hateful.


    “Exclusive–Watch: Leftists Threaten Contractor in Fla; Day Before ICE Facility Shot at in Texas”

    “A group of open borders activists threatened employees of a government contractor in Florida that provides facility space for the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency to detain border crossers and illegal aliens the day before a shooting at the contractor’s offices in Texas.

    In exclusive footage captured by Matt Perdie of Breitbart News, protesters with Never Again Action, Miramar Circle of Protection Friends of Miami-Dade Detainees, Food Not Bombs Fort Lauderdale, Students Working for Equal Rights, and the Black Lives Matter Alliance of Broward County shouted threats at workers and former employees of the GEO Group, a private contractor used by ICE for facility and detention space.

    One protester specifically threatened GEO Group’s former general counsel John Bulfin, shouting the locations and addresses of where his children live in the United States.

    “We know where all your children live throughout the country … John Bulfin you have kids in [bleeped out], you have kids in [bleeped out],” the protester shouted. “We know everything about you and you won’t just be seeing us here.”

    “We know where you sleep at night,” another protester shouted. “We know what kind of dog food you buy your dogs.”

    “We’re not actually joking,” the protester said before shouting the location of where Bulfin lives. “John Bulfin you go to [bleeped out], you go to church on [bleeped out], you live on [bleeped out the] road. We are not joking.””


  2. More hate, and this ain’t no white nationalist……


    “MSNBC Panelist On Most White People: ‘Destroy Them’

    In a Sunday segment on MSNBC, Elie Mystal called for the majority of white people in America to be destroyed.”

    “In a feisty segment on Sunday’s “A.M. Joy,” Elie Mystal of Above the Law made an inflammatory comment in which he said white people who voted for Donald Trump should be destroyed. This came after a segment in which he argued there is no moral difference between avowed white supremacists and any white person who votes for Trump.

    In the clip, host Joy Reid asked how those who are “drugged” by the president’s rhetoric should be communicated to and convinced they are wrong. That’s when Mystal got even more heated, saying:

    “You don’t communicate to them, you beat them. You beat them. They are not a majority of this country — the majority of white people in this country are not a majority of the country. All the people who are not fooled by this need to come together, go to the polls, go to the protests, do whatever you have to do. You do not negotiate with these people, you destroy them.”

    Ironically, this comment came on the same day the New York Times ran a piece arguing that Fox News is inciting white supremacist violence by using words such as “invasion” to describe the situation at the border. A double standard is at work here, and it has become increasingly blatant throughout Trump’s presidency. When his supporters use fiery language and hyperbole, it is incitement to violence, but when progressives do the same thing, it is justified outrage.

    Even the most generous interpretation of his comments — that “beat them” and “destroy them” mean at the polls — leaves some very troubling question. Are all of these tens of millions of people to be shunned and kicked out of polite society? If they are so horribly irredeemable that others cannot communicate or negotiate with them, what would Mystal have us do with them?”


  3. Tightening the rules, with Bill Clinton’s help. Stay home and be a burden to your own country.


    “Today, the Trump administration released the final version of a rule that increases the government’s ability to deny green cards for people deemed likely to depend on government aid such as food stamps, housing assistance and Medicaid. As Robert Verbruggen explains, federal law gives the executive branch lots of discretion to reject immigrants who are “likely at any time to become a public charge.” This approach is rooted in the common sense notion that immigrants should support themselves, not burden taxpayers. If they can’t support themselves, they should leave.

    However, previous administrations nonsensically ignored major and growing programs such as food stamps, Medicaid, and housing assistance when deciding whether someone is likely to become a public charge. Immigrants could use these programs without reducing their chance of getting visas or green cards.

    The new rule changes this. These programs will be included, as they should be, in determining whether an immigrant is a public charge.

    The left, of course, is howling. However, the rule isn’t draconian. It applies to “an alien who receives one or more designated public benefits for more than 12 months in the aggregate within any 36-month period.” Receipt of two benefits in one month counts as two months.

    Thus, immigrants in dire straits can seek assistance of the types addressed in the new rule Their status will be in jeopardy only if they remain on it for a year or more, total, during a three-year period.

    And even if they do, they won’t automatically be denied green cards. Other factors will be considered in assessing the likelihood that an immigrant who has used welfare extensively will be granted status.

    In other words, the new rule calls for a “totality of the circumstances” analysis to applying the “public charge” label. Now, however, extensive use of major forms of welfare will be an important circumstance, as clearly it should be.”


  4. Good thing too, because they’re probably costing us way more than we’re told. It makes no sense to harm our most needy in order to help others we’re not obligated to help.


    “Illegal immigration may look good for the economy on the surface, but a deeper look reveals exorbitant costs that disproportionately hurt some of the worst-off in America.”

    “If Americans were honest with themselves, would they admit that they benefit from illegal immigration? According to a recent article in The Federalist, they would.

    The author says, “All Americans — not just large farms and meatpacking plants — benefit from illegal immigration by paying lower prices for food. If industrial farms and meatpacking plants across the country refused to hire foreign workers and decided to pay competitive wages that would attract American workers, we would all pay much more for meat, fruit, and vegetables.”

    Yet we’re not convinced that mass illegal immigration does produce an overall economic gain. The economics are much more nuanced. The argument that illegal immigration is a net benefit is characteristic of a blinkered view of social costs that is unfortunately prevalent among libertarians and conservatives.

    Yes, American consumers may be paying less for the cabbages and the lettuce leaves harvested by illegal workers whose labor is cheap. But that is just the beginning of the analysis, not its conclusion.”


    “The Costs of Mass Illegality
    We must weigh the costs of illegal immigration to our local, state, and federal governments. Illegal workers and their families have access to taxpayer-provided benefits, such as free public schooling. If some of the current Democrat presidential hopefuls have their way, these workers will enjoy free health care, too (they already enjoy certain medical benefits).

    How large is the tally? According to a 2017 study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, federal and state governments pay nearly $135 billion annually to cover the cost of an estimated 12.5 million illegal immigrants and their 4.2 million citizen children present in the country.

    FAIR found the cost of federal provision of medical care to be about $17 billion alone. The total state and local burden for education was $44.4 billion, for general public services $18.5 billion, and for medical care $12.1 billion. That would buy you a lot of lettuce.

    Of course, you can quarrel with FAIR’s study. Maybe FAIR has overestimated the number of illegal immigrants in the country (unlikely), or maybe its cost figures are too high. Also, of course, the costs to the government are to some degree offset by the taxes illegal workers may pay. Finally, FAIR unquestionably has an agenda, and one would need to consult studies by other groups.

    But our point is not to represent FAIR’s study as definitive. It is that any sound analysis of the overall costs and benefits of mass illegal immigration has to probe much more deeply than merely looking at comparative food costs. And other costs should be added to the tally.

    Fraud and Crime Cost Taxpayers, Too
    For one, costs are incurred from fraud and tax evasion of illegal workers. As The Federalist author rightly notes, many illegal workers use fake IDs — for instance, for Social Security. This practice can cheat honest taxpayers of the benefits due to them from Social Security, and it jacks up administrative monitoring and enforcement costs. Consider also the additional policing costs for the crimes and violence committed by low-wage illegal immigrants, and by the unemployed and poor workers for whose legal labor theirs has been substituted, and turn to crime as a result.

    Advocates for illegal immigration love to say illegal immigrants are more law-abiding than native-born Americans. We doubt this is so. The data collection on this question is limited (some would say for political reasons).

    But the U.S. Sentencing Commission reports that noncitizens, about 7 percent of the population, receive 22 percent of federal murder convictions, 18 percent of fraud convictions, 33 percent of money laundering convictions, and 29 percent of drug trafficking convictions. (By the way, until Trump was elected, the federal government had withheld this information for years). In many states where the available data make measurement possible, illegal immigrants also commit a disproportionate number of violent and drug crimes.”


  5. CNN and Fredo have no moral authority to lecture anyone.



  6. Dems are getting desperate. Now they’re threatening the Supreme Court if it doesn’t rule the way they want..


    “Dem Senators to Supreme Court: Rule our way on 2nd Amendment case, or face possible restructuring

    Sheldon Whitehouse: “The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it. Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be “restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.”


    “A group of Democratic Senators (Whitehouse, Gillibrand, Hirono, Blumenthal, Durbin) just filed an extraordinarily vitriolic Amicus Brief in support of the Respondent, N.Y. City. The Brief was signed by Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) for the group, listing himself as Counsel of Record.

    I would not be surprised if Whitehouse substantially drafted the Brief himself. As we have documented here for a decade, Whitehouse is extremely pejorative towards his political opponents, who invariably are portrayed as bad people with bad motives.

    During the debate over Obamacare in December 2009, Whitehouse compared opponents of Obamacare to Nazis during Kristallnacht and people who lynched blacks. Dana Milbank at WaPo noted at the time:

    … Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.) had just delivered an overwrought jeremiad comparing the Republicans to Nazis on Kristallnacht, lynch mobs of the South, and bloodthirsty crowds of the French Revolution.

    “Too many colleagues are embarked on a desperate, no-holds-barred mission of propaganda, obstruction and fear,” he said. “History cautions us of the excesses to which these malignant, vindictive passions can ultimately lead. Tumbrils have rolled through taunting crowds. Broken glass has sparkled in darkened streets. Strange fruit has hung from southern trees.” Assuming the role of Old Testament prophet, Whitehouse promised a “day of judgment” and a “day of reckoning” for Republicans.

    Whitehouse’s attacks on Brett Kavanaugh during the confirmation hearings were demeaning and absurd, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse grilled Brett Kavanaugh about a high school yearbook fart joke. Seriously.

    So it’s no surprise that the Brief signed by Whitehouse attacked Kavanaugh, the conservatives on the Court, and the very existence of the Court itself by suggesting the Court would be restructured if it ruled the wrong way.

    It was a double-barrel attack — impugning the motives of those holding different views of the 2nd Amendment and threatening to damage the Court’s legitimacy:”




    “Even though leftists have damaged the Supreme Court beyond repair by legislating from the bench and trying to ruin the lives of conservative nominees with sketchy sexual assault allegations from more than 30 years ago, several Senate Democrats issued a bizarre warning to the court this week by challenging them to “heal” division or else face “restructuring” in the future — which is to say, vote liberal or else have conservatives rotated off the court.

    “The ominous and unusual warning was delivered as part of a brief filed Monday in a case related to a New York City gun law,” reports Fox News. “The [brief] was filed in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. City of New York, which dealt with legal limitations on where gun owners could transport their licensed, locked, and unloaded firearms. They are urging the court to stay out of the case brought by the NRA-backed group, claiming that because the city recently changed the law to ease restrictions, the push to the Supreme Court is part of an ‘industrial-strength influence campaign’ to get the conservative majority to rule in favor of gun owners.”

    The brief was filed on behalf of Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Richard Durbin (D-IL), and Kirsten Gillibrand, (D-NY), who all took issue with recent conservative majority rulings.”


  7. Un-American.


    “Every Democrat in the Senate Supports a Constitutional Amendment That Would Radically Curtail Freedom of Speech

    The Democracy for All Amendment aims to mute some voices so that others can be heard.”

    “Every Democrat in the Senate is backing a constitutional amendment that aims to overturn Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the 2010 decision in which the Supreme Court lifted legal restrictions on what corporations and unions are allowed to say about politics at election time. That would be troubling enough, since Citizens United, which involved a film that was banned from TV because it was too critical of Hillary Clinton, simply recognized that Americans do not lose their First Amendment rights when they organize themselves in a disfavored way. But the so-called Democracy for All Amendment goes much further than nullifying one Supreme Court decision. It would radically rewrite the constitutional treatment of political speech, allowing Congress and state legislatures to impose any restrictions on election-related spending they consider reasonable.

    “To advance democratic self-government and political equality, and to protect the integrity of government and the electoral process,” Section 1 says, “Congress and the States may regulate and set reasonable limits on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to influence elections.” By allowing restrictions on money spent by anyone to influence elections, that provision would nullify a principle set forth in the landmark 1976 case Buckley v. Valeo.

    In Buckley, the Supreme Court upheld the Federal Election Campaign Act’s limits on campaign contributions, which it said were justified by the desire to prevent “corruption and the appearance of corruption.” But the Court overturned FECA’s limits on spending by candidates and on independent spending by individuals and groups. Those limits, the Court said, “place substantial and direct restrictions on the ability of candidates, citizens, and associations to engage in protected political expression, restrictions that the First Amendment cannot tolerate.”

    The rationale for that conclusion is not, as critics often claim, that “money is speech.” The point, rather, is that people must spend money to communicate with large numbers of their fellow citizens. Limits on spending therefore restrict their ability to exercise their First Amendment rights. If the government banned computers and smartphones, that would clearly violate the First Amendment—not because computers and smartphones are speech but because they are necessary to participate in online debate.

    The Democracy for All Amendment would ditch this understanding of the First Amendment and instead rely on legislators’ self-restraint in deciding which limits on spending are “reasonable.” Courts reviewing the resulting rules would have precious little guidance in deciding when they went too far.”


  8. It’s time to end this abuse.


    “Meanwhile, This Is What LGBTQ Organizations Are Doing to Society”

    “Virtually every week, there seems to be another issue that preoccupies the country. But while our attention is focused on President Donald Trump, Google, Charlottesville, Russia, impeachment, Jeffrey Epstein, the next elections, racism, a trade war with China, the #MeToo movement or something else, LGBTQ organizations are quietly going about their work dismantling ethical norms, making a mockery of education, ruining innocent people’s lives and destroying children’s innocence. If you think this is overstated, here are some examples:

    The LGBTQ Dismantling of Women’s Sports

    Last month, a transgender weightlifter won multiple gold medals at the 2019 Pacific Games in Samoa. Laurel Hubbard of New Zealand won two gold medals and a silver in the three heavyweight categories for women weighing more than 87 kilograms, or 192 pounds. Hubbard is physically male.

    Last year, two biologically male sophomores at different Connecticut high schools competed in female division of the state open track and field competition. They came in first and second place in the 100- and 200-meter dashes.

    Because the Western world cowers before LGBTQ demands, no matter how unfair they are to women athletes, men who deem themselves female must be allowed to compete against women. They almost always win.

    The Dismantling of Male and Female — Even at Birth

    As reported by the Associated Press: “Parents also can choose (gender) ‘X’ for newborns. New York City is joining California, Oregon, Washington state in allowing an undesignated gender option on birth certificates. A similar provision takes effect in New Jersey in February.”

    What percentage of Americans believe children are lucky if born to parents who will not identify them at birth as male or female? On the other hand, how many of us think such parents are engaged in a form of child abuse?

    The Dismantling of Children’s Innocence and Parental Authority

    The Associated Press also recently reported that “California has overhauled its sex education guidance for public school teachers, encouraging them to talk about gender identity with kindergartners.”

    Tatyana Dzyubak, an elementary school teacher in the Sacramento area, objected: “I shouldn’t be teaching that stuff. That’s for parents to do.”

    But parents and parental authority have always been a thorn in the side of totalitarian movements. Therefore, dismantling parental authority is one of the primary goals of the left, of which LGBTQ organizations are a major component.”


  9. This has to be driving the left stark raving mad. 🙂


    “California: ‘resistance’ state has donated more to Trump than to most Democrats in 2020 race

    President has raised $3.2m in California this year, analysis finds – more than Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders”

    “Residents of California, the self-fashioned “resistance” state that has sued the Trump administration more than 50 times, has donated more money to the Trump 2020 campaign than to most Democratic candidates in the 2020 race.

    Donald Trump raised $3.2m in California since the beginning of this year, according to campaign finance data analyzed by CalMatters, a not-for-profit news organization focused on California issues.

    Trump beat out everybody in the field except for Senator Kamala Harris, who raised $7.5m, and Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who raised $5.1m. Harris, who is California’s junior senator, has been leading in donations from the state since launching her campaign in January.

    Trump bested even the former vice-president Joe Biden, the frontrunner in the Democratic primary, and Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, who have strong support throughout the state.

    Although affluent donors in Beverly Hills, Orange county and San Diego contributed significant sums – and together constituted a majority of California funds in Trump’s campaign war chest – 92.8% of donations came from small donors contributing less than $100. Many of these small donations came from the central region of the state, which tends to skew more conservative.

    Trump’s prowess among small donors in California is striking, with the president besting Sanders in this field. Sanders, who raised $2.2m in California, 89.6% of which consisted of contributions of less than $100, has spoken repeatedly about the power of the people fueling his campaign through small donations.”


  10. If AOC’s rhetoric is responsible for those shots then Trump is responsible for El Paso. Neither of course is true.

    The difference between FOX and MSNBC is simple; the latter was a guest while the former were hosts. Invasion cannot be taken as a metaphor in this context as migrants are crossing the border. They are physically entering the US. Using the word invading instead of crossing deliberately inflames the audience creating fear and the specter of war. This is irresponsible of both network and the hosts. In ths MSNBC example, the terms can be used metaphorically in this context, however, the responsible thing woyld be to disavoe the guest and not reinvite him.


  11. Are they Bill Clinton’s rules or new rules? The article is ambigous. Its not like attaching the name Clinton to it will placate the left….he was cente right and partially responsible for the American gulag.

    In any case these rules will affect hardly anyone.it appeals to Trump’s base and trolls the opponents. Trolling has replaced governing in the Republican party. Legal immigrants access govt services far less than citizens and studies overwhelming show immigration to be positive economic force.

    The cost-benefit analysis of illegal immigration is probably impossible to assert. And much of the costs are completed by employers not the migrants. The owner of the Mississippi plant was responsibls for social security fraud not the employees. He also was found to be guility of sexual harassment and wage theft. The arrival of ICE actually allowed him to evade financial compensation. ICE should have detained him instead of the migrants.

    This raises another point, would the costs of illegal immigration be simply due to their status as illegal? Perhaps making them legal would solve many problems.


  12. US democratic institutions are not very representative of the people. Due to various factors; the Senate, the President and Court do not represent tbe majority. The House is also distorted. Now some distortion is acceptable as geographic size needs to play a role and the minority must have some influnce in order to buy in. Without this, thr minority would stress the democravy. However when the majority is almost completely shut out, the stress is worse.


  13. Definitions matter and Invasion is accurate. Your friend is wrong.



    an instance of invading a country or region with an armed force.
    “in 1546 England had to be defended from invasion”

    synonyms: occupation, conquering, capture, seizure, annexation, annexing, takeover, appropriation, expropriation, arrogation; More

    an incursion by a large number of people or things into a place or sphere of activity.
    “stadium guards are preparing for another invasion of fans”

    synonyms: influx, inundation, inrush, rush, flood, torrent, deluge, stream, avalanche
    “every year the valley suffers an invasion of cars”

    an unwelcome intrusion into another’s domain.
    “random drug testing of employees is an unwarranted invasion of privacy”


  14. And who takes part in an invasion?
    An invader.


    plural noun: invaders

    a person or group that invades a country, region, or other place.
    “it is a country that has repelled all invaders”
    synonyms: attacker, raider, plunderer, pillager, marauder, looter; occupier, conqueror; assailant, assaulter; intruder
    “the northern frontier was overrun by invaders”

    intruder, trespasser, violator, encroacher, infringer
    “she held herself stiffly, repelling any invader of her personal space”


  15. From World Magazine’s “the Sift” for today …

    Epstein guards falsified records on the night of his death
    by Harvest Prude
    Posted 8/14/19, 11:49 am

    Two guards on duty the night billionaire Jeffrey Epstein died in jail are under suspicion of falling asleep, failing to check on the inmate for about three hours, and falsifying the records afterward.

    Epstein is believed to have committed suicide early Saturday at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, where he awaited trial for sex trafficking of underage girls. …

    … The U.S. Department of Justice placed the two guards on administrative leave and temporarily reassigned the warden of the jail. Falsifying records can be a federal crime. At the direction of U.S. Attorney General William Barr, the FBI and the Justice Department opened federal inquiries into how the billionaire managed to kill himself while in custody. …


  16. DJ,

    You know how this goes…… 🙂

    Fell asleep?…….

    Or drugged by a Clinton operative?….. 🙂


  17. But when we refer to a group invading our country, it is usually understood as that first definition – “an instance of invading a country or region with an armed force.”


  18. I disagree. Hundreds of thousands in just the last few months, many traveling in caravans with forward operating bases to camp, feed, and clothe along the way. It’s the very definition of an orchestrated invasion. And it’s clearly a force with the intent of violating our borders and laws. Just because there are no guns, doesn’t mean it’s not an invasion. Your friend grossly oversimplifies it. This should be pretty clear by now.

    And until recently, they were understood to clearly be invaders overrunning our southern border.

    But now everything’s offensive.

    No thanks, not playing that game.


  19. And when seeking to repel invaders, walls work well.

    And those look like invaders running from authorities to me.


  20. The latest word or phrase to join the banned list…..

    “Get in line” is now racist.

    It joins the other recent redefines including such favorites as…..


    “Send her back”



    It’s all racist now, and so are you if you have ever, or may ever, vote Republican. You can play this game. I’m not. I will continue to call a clown a clown, and an invader, an invader.


    “Biden jumps into damage control after upsetting Latino leaders

    Biden echoed a conservative talking point in the last Democratic debate, saying undocumented immigrants need to “get in line.””

    “Joe Biden’s presidential campaign is quietly playing cleanup with dozens of immigration activists and Latino leaders — weeks after upsetting them by using what they considered loaded language to describe his views on immigration policy.

    Biden said at the July 31 Democratic debate that undocumented immigrants need to “get in line” and that the country has been right to “cherry-pick” high-skilled immigrants, notably those with advanced degrees.

    That language, more commonly used by conservatives, triggered widespread criticism from immigrant rights activists, some of whom said the former vice president was echoing “Republican talking points” on how migrants are admitted to the United States.

    The campaign quickly embarked on damage control. Aides assuaged aggrieved activists, and Biden had a closed-door meeting with Latino leaders in San Diego before his speech at the UnidosUS conference last week.

    “It is unacceptable for a candidate vying to be the Democratic nominee for POTUS to use language like that used by VP Biden when talking about immigration during the second debate,” said Mayra Macías, executive director of Latino Victory. “We immediately reached out to the campaign and were told it was being addressed.””


    Just be aware, this is who some seem so willing to allow to redefine the language.


  21. Kizzie is of course correct but Im having a hard time liking her statement. Weird.

    The Epstein case is probably a case of error but that won’t stop the speculation. So far I’ve heard variants of Clinton, Trump, the British royal famiy or some type of combination. The newest rumour blames the Mossad. In September I’m sure my students will blame the illuminti.

    One comedian joked that Clintons couldnt mastermind a suicide in a high max prision since they couldnt even get into Wisconsin let alone a prison. However I think Trevor Noah of the Daily Show made the best points. The real conspiracy is not the suicide but what allowed him to operate freely all these years. Secondly, he pointed out how undestaffed and overworked correction officers are. Its no wonder they fell asleep as 60 hr weeks with multiple overtime hours isn’t unusual. Sometimes they are so understaffed they have prisoners watch the prisoners on suicide watch.


  22. Karen the force acquires it’s arms after it gets here.

    Anon. it is because it defies logic to believe that a high valued subject with such a record could commit suicide without outside help.
    Someone said on TV that he used a bed sheet and tied it ty something and leaned so that it choked him to death.
    The body won’t let someone take breath away until it dies.
    The most important thing to your body is the next breath. You will always take it if you can.
    That’s the reason they broke the legs of the two prisoners on the cross. If possible, they would push up for one more breath. Even on a cross.


  23. Aj. I didnt notice until after I posted strangely the page does say I’m logged in.

    I’m surprised he had a sheet since he was in the SHU. I agree its suspicious given he had nothing to hang from. However, I like simple explanations… overworked guards falling asleep on the job is simple and easy to understand. As for the mechanics of the hanging I would need more info. As said before, the real conspiracy is how did he operate with impunity for so long.


  24. From what I read, he hung himself while kneeling, which sounds odd.


    “Jeffrey Epstein was found hanging in his lower Manhattan jail cell with a bedsheet wrapped around his neck and secured to the top of a bunk bed, The Post has learned.

    The convicted pedophile, who was 6 feet tall, apparently killed himself by kneeling toward the floor and strangling himself with the makeshift noose, law enforcement sources said Monday. He hadn’t been checked on for several hours, sources said.”


    Smells fishy.


  25. As I recall, Robin Williams was not suspended in air when he hung himself. He hung himself on a door or door frame somehow.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.