THE BLACKLIST wrapped up its season last Friday. There will be another season but when that will start is a big guess. This episode was being filmed when the pandemic made them shut down production. So for scenes that had not been filmed yet, they utilized animation. That was a wise choice and made for a visually interesting episode.
The big point of this episode? Elizabeth has chosen. She has chosen her mother over Raymond. Raymond set a trap. If Elizabeth was loyal to him, she would not tell her mother. Elizabeth told her mother so she could change the meeting. She did not change anything as Elizabeth later found out. Elizabeth was upset: Why? She explained to Elizabeth that it was a trap and if she had changed anything Raymond would know. The key her is that he suspects and they know he does.
It was a good episode. So now Elizabeth and her mother are teaming up against Raymond which had me wondering whatever happened to Elizabeth's half-sister? Remember when they were teaming up (right after Tom died)? Jennifer was her name. I can't remember if she was the daughter of the fake Raymond Reddington (the character James Spader plays) or the real Raymond whom Elizabeth shot dead.
Now for the real world where the writing is still fiction. This is Susan Davis' 'reporting' for NPR:
The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee voted along party lines Wednesday to subpoena documents and depositions from Blue Star Strategies, a consulting company that worked with the Ukrainian energy company Burisma when Hunter Biden served on its board.
"We need to get to the truth about the Bidens' relationship with Burisma, and these hearings will provide the Senate with the full picture," Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., said.
Democrats on the committee said Republicans were chasing conspiracy theories and bolstering Russian disinformation efforts by using their power to investigate the Biden family instead of the government response to the coronavirus pandemic, which falls under the committee's jurisdiction.
Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., called the investigation "a charade that would be silly if it were not so insidious."
Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., the top Democrat on the panel, cited a letter from Blue Star Strategies that said a subpoena was unnecessary.
"At every opportunity we have indicated to the Committee that it is our intention to cooperate. At no time have we ever stated or indicated in any way that we would not cooperate. Therefore, we are puzzled, despite our willingness to cooperate, why the Committee is proceeding to vote on a subpoena," the letter said.
We also get this:
Andrew Bates, spokesman for Biden's campaign, accused Sen. Ron Johnson, the committee's chairman, of "running a political errand" for the president and wasting time during the COVID-19 outbreak on a "previously debunked smear against Vice President Biden."
"Sen, Johnson should be working overtime to save American lives — but instead he's just trying to save the president's job," Bates said.
3 Democratic sources and only one Republican source. That is fair and balanced? That is worthy of our tax dollars? I am a Democrat. I go back to JFK. He is the first one I 'voted' for. (I was too young to vote, I am referring to in our high school mock election.) But more than being a Democrat, I am someone who believes in fairness.
We have 3 people in the article telling us how wrong the whole thing is (as well as a sentence that calls it "chasing conspiracy theories") and only one single sentence from someone supporting the investigation.
Does NPR think this is fair? Does Susan Davis think this is fair?
This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
The same criminals keep showing up. If you watch long enough, they'll continue to show up. Case in point? Katha Pollitt. Apparently, she doesn't have an ex-boyfriend to stalk anymore and has exhausted even her own interest in typing bad sentences that she swears are poetry. So she tells you that she doesn't believe Tara Reade this morning -- and she says it at THE NATION -- and goes on to endorse Joe Biden.
Remember that editorial at THE NATION? How they wouldn't endorse anyone who voted for the Iraq War? They put that editorial on the cover -- the first paragraphs ran on the cover of the issue. They were real big talkers, weren't they? They just couldn't do.
And they still can't.
And Katha? She's been a whore for years. Not just a stalker, but a whore. One word: Abeer.
Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi. From THIRD's "Justice for Abeer and her family?:"
On March 12, 2006, in their family home, Qassim Hamza Raheem and Fakhriya Taha Muhasen and their five-year old daughter Hadeel Qassim Hamza were murdered. Their fourteen-year-old daughter Abeer was raped and murdered and there was an attempt to burn her body to hide what had happened.
We covered Abeer's story extensively and repeatedly. We covered the Article 32 hearings, we covered the case in the civilian courts, we covered it over and over. She was gang-raped by US soldiers. This isn't in debate, they turned on each other to get a plea deal. They plotted to break into her home in order to gang-rape her. They murdered her parents and her sister while they raped her and then they killed her. They weren't done though. Having killed her, they now tried to burn her body in the house to destroy evidence.
This was a major War Crime. It was carried out by US soldiers. Yet US citizen Katha Pollitt wasn't interested and had to be shamed and mocked (by us and by Alexander Cockburn who -- for the record -- actually wrote about Abeer). Under duress, faded 'feminist' Katha stop composing bad verse long enough to offer this, "Think of Abeer Qassim al-Janabi, the 14-year-old girl raped and then murdered with her family by US soldiers in Mahmoudiya in March last year."
That sentence so exhausted her, that single sentence, that she never, ever returned to the topic. But she wants you to think she's a feminist -- a real one -- even though people in the Middle East who know of her (not a huge number) see her as another Jewish woman who won't call out attacks on Muslims -- whether it's in Iraq or Palestine or wherever.
That's just one of many reasons not to trust Katha. There's also the fact that she's paid to share what she believes is an opinion. When JOURNOLIST was published, some lost jobs. Katha should have lost her job. She's paid to provide her opinion. NATION readers have every right to assume she's being honest. But there she was e-mailing about how Sarah Palin was very effective -- and that worried her -- but days later, in her paying job, she's smearing and attacking Sarah Palin.
She's paid to express her opinion and, thanks to the published e-mails, we know she was impressed by Sarah Palin yet she wrote something completely different.
2016ers need an education if they're claiming Hillary faced hideous sexism. She didn't. In 2008, she did. You had Barack flipping her off to the amusement of many, you had Barack talking about how "periodically" when Hillary's "feeling blue" "the claws come out." You had cable 'news' mocking her -- there are video compilations on YOUTUBE, look it up. You had Hillary "nut crackers." You had Matthew Rothschild -- at THE PROGRESSIVE, at THE PROGRESSIVE -- being delighted by the fact that a group against Hillary had initials that formed a swear word (the c-word).
And while all this was going on, while so many of us were calling this nonsense out -- Delilah Boyd was, Carolyn Kay was, numerous women who would form PUMA were -- Katha was, as she admitted in a column, staying silent. She didn't want to hurt 'the cause.'
She's not a feminist.
She's fat and ugly and lives in New York so she pretends she's a feminist. But a feminist doesn't stay silent for 'the cause' when the cause is not feminism.
In her garbage this morning she not only tells you that she doesn't believe Tara Reade that Joe Biden assaulted her, she also wants you to know that, even if she did believe Tara, she'd still vote for Joe.
Due to her complicated history with truth, it's hard to tell whether Katha means what she says or if she's just once again helping 'the cause.'
Here's another thing feminists don't do: They don't vote for rapists.
Stop the bulls**t. Second wave feminism was all about making rape and domestic violence -- both are terrorism, let's use today's terms -- serious issues. They weren't serious once upon a time. With rape, for example, you'd better be a virgin and you better have been dressed modestly and had nothing to drink.
If you look at the recent coverage of Tara, you'll see that the rape culture we thought we had defeated -- we being feminists -- is re-emerging.
I'm not surprised that fat and ugly, weird nose and chicken fat face Katha doesn't get it. Again, if you're an ugly eye sore posing as an 'intellectual' in NYC, the easiest path is to pose as a feminist.
Rape isn't okay.
The Kathas are useless bitches. They want you to know that a second term of Donald Trump --
If you don't want a second term of Trump, you need to be fighting for the Democratic Party to get a better candidate. The history shows that anything can happen at a convention and anything can happen before a convention.
That's not me rooting for Bernie. He's a fake ass, he betrayed everyone. Yes, I do know and like Gavin Newsom and Andrew Cuomo, but I'd be fine with anyone who wasn't senile, hadn't voted for the Iraq War and wasn't accused of assault.
I don't think that 'dream list' is too much to ask for. I'm not even asking for Medicare For All from the nominee -- even though it's what America needs.
My three demands are very basic and shouldn't be considered controversial.
Here's the other thing.
Katha preaches in her column all the awful things Donald's going to do in a second term. First off, many of those things were done when Barack Obama was president and Katha didn't give a damn. When someone she likes destroys families with deportations, she looks the other way or finds some justification for it. When it is someone she doesn't like doing it, she assumes the worst.
More to the point, Democrats just went along with continued spying on the American people. At a time when Donald is president. They're okay with that.
Katha's fears go to the fact that you don't have a Democratic representatives who will stand up for anything.
Oh, dear goodness! The Supreme Court!!
I can remember when Democrats in the Senate could block Supreme Court nominees. These days, only the Republicans know how to fight a nominee.
All of the fears she lists are valid fears -- if we live in a monarchy. But we don't. The president is the head of the executive branch. There are three co-equal branches of our government. If the legislative branch did its job we wouldn't have to worry.
Prior to the 1992 election, 'intellectuals' were saying that the Democratic Party would never again have the presidency. They were saying that they needed to adapt to that and form a stronger Congressional opposition. It doesn't have to be either/or. We should be able to compete for the presidency and to have a thriving opposition to the GOP in the Congress.
We posted Krystal Ball's pathetic rebuttal or 'rebuttal' to some of the nonsense about Tara Reade. Pathetic. The day before, Ava and I wrote "Media: Lies and liars all around." In that, we noted what no one wanted to tell you about PBS's 'investigation.' The 74 people they spoke with were people the campaign gave them.
Instead of Krystal ripping apart the report on that basis she offers that she 'knows' how this works and this was probably all fed to PBS by the campaign and --
Probably? It's right there in the report.
Learn to fight. I'm so sick of this crap.
So 74 Joe Biden supporters all defend Joe. As Carol Burnett's Eunice would say, "Surprise, surprise, surprise."
No one is addressing the charges with one exception.
There's not one!!!!
I'm sorry, I've been to the Senate many times. Am I the only one who has ever noticed renovations?
I have no idea if there was ever an alcove. But I do know that I wouldn't be at all shocked if something that was in the Russell Building in 1993 was no longer, in 2020, there.
I'm tired of all of this. I'm tired of Joe Biden's campaign working overtime to turn Tara toxic. I'm tired of his supporters -- that includes Katha, she's voting for him -- doing the dirty work of bringing back rape culture.
I'm tried of ugly bitches who could never land a man (or a woman) trying to mask their miserable lives and their miserable failures by insisting that they are "feminists."
If you're defending a rapist, you're not a feminist. If you're saying you're going to vote for someone accused of rape, you're not a feminist. If you're smearing a woman who came forward to talk about her assault, you're not a feminist.
You can be many things, but stop pretending you're a feminist.
Katha, you're just ugly.
Leslie Templeton Tweets:
It’s funny how most survivors I talk to believe Tara because they have said nice things about their rapist also and have changed their story due to not remembering everything or withheld information because they felt scared or embarrassed.
I may return to Katha and 'the cause' tomorrow. For now, let's keep a promise I made. I was asked to talk some of Joe Biden's possible running mate.
His brisk walk mate? We know he can't run.
Let me go there first in case he wins in 2020 which means he won't seek re-election in 2024.
Person: It's a shame Joe can't run again.
Me: Yeah, but on a good day, he can still walk.
Okay. VP choice. I'm not going to play let's predict who it is. A) I have no crystal ball and B) everyone I know with the campaign talks of the disorder and chaos they have to endure daily so let's not pretend that they have it together.
I'm also not going to talk what I want. My politics are too far left to be pleased with anyone Joe would actually consider.
The press has spent way too much time on this topic which is why I try to avoid it. It's meaningless. He's going to pick someone and after he does we should look back at all the time and space the media gave this nonsense.
He and Elizabeth Warren do not get along. That's not recent, that goes back years. Joe is not someone who wants to debate or discuss. He's had his ass kissed for too many decades. He wants someone who'll do what he says and do it when he says.
That bumps Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar to the forefront.
Amy has a problem with those who work under her. So does Joe. The media looks the other way except for the random whisper of how no one wanted to tell Joe this or that because he explodes.
Those arguing against Amy, who have his ear, are pointing to her problems with staff. They are not saying, "You know, like the problems you have." Joe, oblivious as always, agrees Amy has a problem with staff interaction -- Amy has a problem -- just Amy.
That leaves Kamala. Kamala knows how to push an issue while not seeming to. She knows work arounds. This allows her to seem more positive with those around her. (That is not meant as an insult.) Kamala also did far less damage on stage when she spoke in the debates. Kamala has the resume. Kamala has the confidence.
If I were advising, I'd say go with Kamala. She also brings with her a very active online presence which the campaign desperately needs.
Gretch the Wretch has thrown herself out of consideration with one bad interview performance after another and a voice that seen as too youthful and high pitched.
Tammy Baldwin -- who would make a wonderful vice president or president -- is not in serious consideration, I am told.
Joe needs to make a choice and it needs to be someone who could run for the presidency in 2024 and it needs to be someone who, if he died in office, could immediately assume the presidency.
That means it comes down to Kamala or Amy. Again, Kamala has the resume, Kamala has her own social media network army, Kamala comes off stronger on camera. There's also Amy's weight. It's not Stacey Abrhams level but when the presidential nominee already raises health concerns, you need a running mate who appears fit.
Who will he pick? Who knows? But of those under serious consideration, Kamala would be the best pick he could make.
The following sites updated: