July 25, 2019 6:05 AM HomeMorning ReadsMorning Reads – Thursday, July 25, 2019 Morning Reads – Thursday, July 25, 2019 By Jessica Szilagyi Morning Reads 32 Comments Peaches The Erica Thomas incident wasn’t national news, but that never stops our outrage-hungry media.Gwinnett doing Gwinnett things. Rural broadband estimates = $3+ billion.The complicated math behind buying a college education in Georgia.Georgia’s Coast is Not an Ashtray.DC Appellate Lawyer to Defend Georgia Abortion Ban. Jimmy Carter GOP blocks election security bill after Mueller testimony. Ginsburg doesn’t support an expansion of SCOTUS.That’s certainly a unique way to obtain records.Cannabis companies explain to Congress why denying them banking access is bad for law enforcement.Requesting a parking permit pay get public school kids randomly drug tested.Writer connects abortion fight to opioid crisis.After a terribly stupid decision, the school district has backtracked.The fact that you even asked that question, you’re fake news.” Sweet Tea Do you screen while you eat? 88% of Americans do. $437,500 for a pair of Nike shoes?Lowest # ever for medical students opting for primary care.Consider ditching Tesla and Boeing. Share this:TwitterFacebookTumblrRedditEmailPrint Related About Author Jessica Szilagyi 32 Comments Will Durant Don’t know about Tesla. As to Boeing, they have too much Uncle Sugar in them to decline long term. Buy low… July 25, 2019 7:46 AM Log in to Reply Grindelwald https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-vetoes-congress-to-force-through-saudi-arabia-arms-sales?via=twitter_page Whatever you gotta do to kick millions of Americans off their health insurance and get those sweet sweet tax cuts, amirite? July 25, 2019 7:52 AM Log in to Reply alpha male Best hot take of the day yesterday courtesy of the inestimable Trey Gowdy- “ the person who learned the most about the Mueller report from the hearings today appears to be Robert Mueller himself”. Drop. The. Mic. July 25, 2019 10:59 AM Log in to Reply Grindelwald Yes, let’s question the mental acuity of Robert Mueller while paying no mind to a certain someone’s inability to string together a series of coherent thoughts. Go read a Trump interview or speech transcript and get back to me on who doesn’t understand what. July 25, 2019 12:52 PM Log in to Reply alpha male This was not the Mueller report or the Mueller investigation and even you now damn well know it. Let’s begin calling it what it is, the Weismann investigation/report. A completely biased farce which blew up and became the biggest political own goal of the last generation. July 25, 2019 1:14 PM Log in to Reply NoParty4Me Benghazi was bigger and nastier and resulted in 0 convictions. Would you like the score for Mueller? https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/21/us/mueller-trump-charges.html July 25, 2019 1:27 PM Log in to Reply alpha male Ummmmm, there was no “ Mueller”. It was all Weismann et al. Oh, and you linked to a fake news outlet as far as I am concerned. July 25, 2019 2:33 PM NoParty4Me Indictments, convictions, pleas, jail sentences… It’s all public record., Weisguy. But then, you don’t have public records in Russia. Go back to trolling Bernie’s Facebook page. July 25, 2019 3:00 PM Grindelwald Of all the folks on Mueller’s team, why is the Daily Stormer crowd obsessed with Andrew Weissman. Couldn’t have anything to do with his religion or the Jewishness of his last name, could it? For the record, Weissman was the lead prosecutor on dozens of fraud and money laundering cases involving organized crime families, led the Justice Department’s task force on Enron and prosecuted over 30 cases arising out of the fraud and financial crimes that company committed, and served as head attorney for the FBI and head of DOJ’s criminal fraud section. When it comes to qualifications as a prosecutor, investigator, or just as a general attorney, he’s imminently more qualified than any person asking questions on that panel yesterday or anyone working inside the White House or on Trump’s personal legal team. When you say “durr Weismann wrote the report” what you’re really saying that the report and investigation were led by one of the foremost experts in complex financial fraud, money laundering, and computer crimes. July 25, 2019 3:02 PM alpha male OK, you asked for it. So I am here to set the record straight. As for Weismann himself, it is not his record , including what he did to Arthur Andersen, that is at issue. It is the fact, as you well know, that he is a virulent democrat. But no, it is not just him. So for your viewing pleasure : on this investigative team there were 17 attorney investigators. Of those 17, 13 were registered democrats. There were zero, yes, ZERO registered Republicans. Of those 17 attorneys, 9 actually contributed money to the democrats. Again, ZERO contributed to the gop. And several, such as Weismann, were hard core. Weismann actually attended Hillary’s “ victory” party in 2016. Now, prior to yesterday, you leftists refrain was,” yea, but Mueller is a republican and he ran the show”. Guess what Champ? That dog died yesterday. You have NO retort now. So the question becomes, in whose world is such a one sided investigation credible? Or even allowed. How in hades did this ever happen? July 25, 2019 3:44 PM NoParty4Me Your little imaginary fantasy sports league, made up by placing everyone on a special “team,” does not undo all the evidence, indictments, guilty verdicts, plea deals, fines and jail time. You don’t get to undo ‘facts’ simply by creating fake derogatory associations and declaring them null and void on a blog. Your Russian handlers aren’t feeding you credible arguments to troll this site. July 25, 2019 4:02 PM alpha male What facts did I get wrong? You did not dispute one single stat I gave. Because you can’t .You obviously don’t understand what a “ fact” is. Which is not surprising as you are the clown who actually posted on this site that it was the gop that hired Christopher Steele. No wonder you are a leftist NoParty. You are an idiot. You prove that daily. July 25, 2019 4:07 PM NoParty4Me Why is it so important for you to obsessively “label” everyone? Discussing “labels,” name calling me, or anyone else a “label” doesn’t really doesn’t contribute anything to the reality of any topic here. No one can correct you here either, you just claim their source is “fake news.” July 25, 2019 4:22 PM alpha male [spoiler title=” “] Your name needs to be No clue, rather than no party. You are unable to deal in facts. You make up your own facts. You continually prove you are unable to engage substantively. I provided statistics. Which are, ahem,facts. And yes, the New York Times is absolutely fake news as far as I am concerned. They, like you, prove it daily. July 25, 2019 4:46 PM Grindelwald You guys, I think this investigation was unfair to Russia. Of the 17 lawyers on Mueller’s team NOT ONE of them was Russian. In fact, every single one was American! Of course they’re gonna blame Russia. We should let Russia investigate and tell us whether Russia attacked our democracy. July 25, 2019 6:42 PM bethebalance Actually, Republican Rosenstein ran the show. But it wouldn’t have changed your opinion on the investigation if every one of the attorneys were all Republicans. They would have just been labeled as part of the Deep State Republicans. Wouldn’t have mattered to your opinion if the Russians expedited all those indicted. Or if there were more campaign-related convictions for Trump’s circle. Even if there was admissions of conspiracy with Russians. Would have written that off as political outsider mistake or something. So…no point in even a discussion with such, much less expect support for attempts to pursue justice or highest standards for campaigns and elected officials. July 25, 2019 5:14 PM alpha male BS. Rosenstein was NOT on the Mueller team. He had nothing to do with the investigation. The fact you have to flat out lie says everything. The fact that this was completely a democrat operation and folks like you won’t admit it even now is disgraceful. July 25, 2019 6:26 PM bethebalance Sure, duh.de. Rosenstein didn’t authorize anything. Mueller provided no input on anything either. The Republican lawyers probably didn’t even get a chance to say or do anything. But I’m content to let the IG report speak for itself when it comes out. Not that will change any hearts or minds either. I heard the IG once voted for Jimmy Carter. July 25, 2019 6:31 PM Grindelwald There was already an IG report about Strzok and potential bias among the FBI team that initially handled the Trump investigation. Gowdy and Jordan even had a big televised hearing (2 of them, actually). Both where absolute duds and the IGs report wasn’t the smoking gun Republicans promised it would be. How do I remember this? Because beta bro over here was pounding his chest about the IG report and, when asked to provide actual page cites, he clammed up and ran away. July 25, 2019 6:36 PM Grindelwald Hey dingus. He was the Deputy Attorney General, he was literally Mueller’s boss. But yeah, you are totally the guy we should trust about how the DOJ operates not the guy who [checks notes] actually worked at the Justice Department. July 25, 2019 6:32 PM alpha male Rosenstein was COMPLETELY hands off the investigation and you know it. According to you then, Trump himself was running the investigation. He was Rosenstein’s boss chump. How damn stupid are you? And after reading your stuff, I would believe my basset hound worked at the DOJ before I believe you did. Even if it was for a corrupt AG. If the situation was reversed you would be screaming. And if you deny it, you are flat out lying. July 25, 2019 6:45 PM Grindelwald I think I’ve made my knowledge and expertise pretty clear to folks around here, so I’ll let them be the judge of my credibility. Rosenstein was COMPLETELY hands off the investigation and you know it. How do you know? Again, I can call on my experience actually working for DOJ to give me a sense of how major counterintelligence investigations are staffed and run. You, on the other hand, have whatever you heard from Sean Hannity, a man who used to bring Michael Cohen on his TV and radio programs as a “legal expert.” At the end of the day, I feel pretty confident in the understanding Rosenstein was anything but “completely hands off.” July 25, 2019 7:37 PM Grindelwald With all due respect, this is the dumbest f—ing thing I’ve read all day (and I saw some guy on twittter claiming KFC was better than Popeye’s). As for Weismann himself, it is not his record , including what he did to Arthur Andersen, that is at issue. And what, pray tell, did he do to Arthur Anderson? I mean, don’t get me wrong, I’m aware of the case and the legal issues before the Supreme Court, because it was once part of my day job. But I have a real hard time believing that the guy who wets himself and runs away whenever he’s posed a basic request for citation has any clue what he’s talking about on this one. It is the fact, as you well know, that he is a virulent democrat. No he isn’t. I’d ask you to define “virulent” but I know how shaky your constitution gets when asked direct questions. The lawyers that made Mueller’s team did so because they were the absolute cream of the crop. Like I said earlier, Weismann is the Babe Ruth of prosecuting complex financial fraud cases. He’s prosecuted Republicans. He’s prosecuted Democrats. He’s prosecuted political agnostics. Like any good prosecutor, he follows the facts, wherever they may lead him. Weissman got to where he is because he’s a dogged and talented prosecutor. I challenge you to prove otherwise. More broadly, the notion that Weismann and others can’t impartially investigate Trump because they’re Democrats is, for lack of a better term, the kind of thinking employed by absolute morons. Am I not obliged to pull my car over because the cop who radared me is a Republican? If I commit a crime, am I entitled to have the case investigated by detectives that donated to Bernie Sanders?Prosecuted by a prosecutor who ran as a Democrat? Adjudicated by a judge who went to Hillary Clinton’s election night party and a jury consisting solely of former Obama campaign volunteers? Should we have all-black juries for black defendants? Only white judges for white defendants. Muslim cops who exclusively patrol Muslim neighborhoods? The answer, of course, is no. But you insist it should be otherwise. By the way, I’d note that every line of criticism and conspiracy you spout is cribbed straight front Sean Hannity. Hannity isn’t a lawyer. He’s a college dropout, actually. And his only “real world” experience comes from being a radio DJ. When it comes to questions of how the legal system does and should operate, pardon me for trusting highly experienced DOJ attorneys over a guy who thought Michael Cohen was a good lawyer. July 25, 2019 6:31 PM alpha male Are you denying Weismann was at Hillary’s victory party chump? July 25, 2019 6:47 PM Grindelwald What does it matter? Are you claiming people are incapable of putting aside bias in order to do a job? The last IGs report already dispersed with this juvenile notion. You’d think you’d have learned a lesson. Then again, you probably didn’t read it. July 25, 2019 7:39 PM NoParty4Me Trey Gowdy? The-It’s-not-about-the-Truth-This-is-Politics Trey Gowdy? https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/10/trey-gowdy-stops-pretending-admits-this-is-politics.html July 25, 2019 1:20 PM Log in to Reply Grindelwald If Weissman is the Babe Ruth of prosecuting complex financial fraud then Gowdy is the Babe Ruth of having sham-tastic Congressional hearings explode spectacularly in one’s own face. July 25, 2019 3:25 PM Log in to Reply Dave Bearse Thomas was national in a small way. Bill de Blasio tweeted in support of Thomas. He’s the only candidate with an African American son so he knows truth from fiction without waiting for the facts. Fitting news on the same day that Raymond “Benznio” Scott, a so called victim of Brookhaven police racism, was shown to be a racist doing the same type of thing as Thomas. Democrats sure they know how to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. July 25, 2019 11:00 AM Log in to Reply alpha male Shocker. A democrat fabricating racist claims. Must be a Monday. Or Tues. or Wed Or thurs. Or fri. Or sat. Or Sunday. July 25, 2019 11:28 AM Log in to Reply Sally Forth For sure. A racist behind every bush. Heck, I just realized parents are racists when they tell their sulky teenager “If you don’t like it here, you can leave!” July 25, 2019 11:41 AM Log in to Reply bethebalance Its much easier to understand this error if you consider the past and present circumstances. It’s not just crying wolf out of nowhere. It’s crying wolf after the man on the hill has said “Release the hounds.” Appears it’s fear, plain and simple. But sure, we can’t be controlled by fear. But nor should fear be leveraged by purported leaders. July 25, 2019 12:18 PM Log in to Reply Ellynn Although this is directed to Tech hub cities, the idea of zoning slowing business and population growth can be applied to other fast growing business hubs too. In Savannah, it is difficult to get dense housing built in areas due to two issues, the first being the lack of places to build, and the developers who do find the more desirable of these spaces wanting zoning variances to increase height, and number of units for better profit margins which makes it harder for future development to get local backing for the next housing units. The areas mostly to get an affordable privately owned dense housing location have either bought old public housing tracks who’s land leases have expired in old segregated areas, or old WWII worker housing in the port and industrial areas. How is zoning in the Atlanta metro limiting or shaping potential growth? https://www.axios.com/zoning-cities-affordable-housing-seattle-san-francisco-92de9083-a70a-4c96-a9c9-d2a47043ba36.html July 25, 2019 11:59 AM Log in to Reply Add a Comment Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment.