close

Althouse | category: police

home

Althouse

a blog by Ann Althouse

althouse.blogspot.com

"Iran has abolished the morality police, according to an announcement by the attorney general carried on state media..."

"... following months of protests set off by the death of a young woman who was being held by the force for supposedly violating the country’s strict Islamic dress laws. The decision, reported by state news outlets late Saturday night, appeared to be a major victory for feminists who have sought for years to dismantle the force and for the protest movement ignited by the death of the young woman, Mahsa Amini, 22, in September. The unrest has amounted to one of the biggest challenges in decades to Iran’s system of authoritarian clerical rule and the decision to scrap the morality police was the government’s first major concession to the protesters. The morality police 'was abolished by the same authorities who installed it,' the statement by Attorney General Mohammad Javad Montazeri said...."

The NYT reports.

Very good news!

"I know this may sound radical, but we all agree that theft is not OK...People are trying to connect our work to a pro-cop or anti-cop agenda... Most of us just want to get people’s bikes back."

Said Bryce Turner, 27, a member of a Facebook group that tracks down stolen bikes in Burlington, Vermont, where the police force was reduced by 30% after a ballot measure influenced by the George Floyd incident.

Turner is quoted in "The Bike Thieves of Burlington, Vermont/A hunt for stolen goods has put citizens and business owners in the center of a debate about policing and a growing, sometimes violent, problem with crime" (NYT).

Mr. Turner has personally recovered more than a dozen bikes — many of them from City Hall Park. The newly renovated park reopened to the public in October 2020... Mr. Turner and the others in the group say they believe the bikes that end up in the park are being sold in exchange for drugs. “It’s an open-air drug and bike market,” he said of the park.
They believe that the theft is part of a broad black-market operation, and point to a pickup truck that has been photographed around town, hauling a stack of bikes in the back, under a tarp. The police say that they have seen online reports of the pickup but that they have no probable cause to pull the vehicle over.
Still, the bike group perceives a growing sense of lawlessness in the park. One day in August, Mr. Turner was walking past a group of people in the park when someone punched him in the back of the head. Seeing no police officers around, he found a firefighter nearby and told him about the assault. “He called it in to the police, but he basically said nothing is going to come of this,” Mr. Turner said. “The cops have their hands full.”

"Even a holiday which celebrates debauchery, irreverence, and immature or dark humor should have no place for words or actions of hate."

"This deranged individual was looking to create fear and anxiety. We don't believe that he is a student, rather an outside provocateur."

Said Rabbi Mendel Matusof said, quoted in "UW-Madison releases statement after Adolf Hitler costume seen on State Street" (WKOW).

Here's a Reddit discussion — replete with a photograph of the person wearing a Hilter costume on State Street. I found that via this other Reddit discussion, where somebody says, "If it's any consolation, I was told by a bartender on State Street that the dude got his ass kicked."

UPDATE: Channel 3000 quotes the police report, which makes 3 important points:

1. Wearing a Hitler costume is protected speech, so no crime has been reported. 

2. Even though "no reports received by MPD rise to the level of a prosecutable crime," it nevertheless identified the person and interviewed him. 

3. It turns out that this person "has a cognitive impairment due to a past traumatic brain injury."

ALSO: Who called the police on a guy in a bad costume? Did anyone call the police on the person who beat up this mentally impaired person?

"Police cameras show confusion, anger over DeSantis’ voter fraud arrests/Local police carrying out the arrests were patient, understanding — almost apologetic."

The Tampa Bay Times reports. 

Here's the video: 

There really is some unfortunate confusion with a 2018 statute permitting voting even if you've been convicted of a felony but not if the felony was murder or a sex offense.

I want to see voting laws enforced, but the laws shouldn't be a trap for the unwary. I feel sorry for these people and you can see that the police officers feel sorry for them too.

"Only an optimist would look around right now and feel convinced that there existed such a thing as a 'reasonable person'..."

"... let alone one who could be used as a standard in legal cases. But if you stop believing in reasonable people — even a person who is occasionally, initially fooled by something parodic — you stop believing that democracy is possible. If you don’t believe that most people are ultimately reasonable, why on Earth would you want them to be in charge of everything? Democracy, like parody, presumes that people are capable of noticing when someone is trying to dupe them. I have to think this is among the reasons autocrats distrust parody; not just because it shows them in a bad light, but because its underlying assumption is that people can see what is in front of them."

Writes Alexandra Petri, in "Parody is an act of optimism" (WaPo), after The Onion filed an amicus brief in a Supreme Court case, Novak v. Parma, about a man who was prosecuted for putting up a website that was a parody of a police department website.

Here's the brief. Excerpt:

Americans can be put in jail for poking fun at the government? This was a surprise to America’s Finest News Source and an uncomfortable learning experience for its editorial team.

Indeed, “Ohio Police Officers Arrest, Prosecute Man Who Made Fun of Them on Facebook” might sound like a headline ripped from the front pages of The Onion—albeit one that’s considerably less amusing because its subjects are real....

The Sixth Circuit’s decision in this case would condition the First Amendment’s protection for parody upon a requirement that parodists explicitly say, up-front, that their work is nothing more than an elaborate fiction. But that would strip parody of the very thing that makes it function....

Tu stultus es. You are dumb. These three Latin words have been The Onion’s motto and guiding light since it was founded in 1988 as America’s Finest News Source, leading its writers toward the paper’s singular purpose of pointing out that its readers are deeply gul- lible people.

The Onion’s motto is central to this brief for two important reasons. First, it’s Latin. And The Onion knows that the federal judiciary is staffed entirely by total Latin dorks: They quote Catullus in the original Latin in chambers. They sweetly whisper “stare decisis” into their spouses’ ears. They mutter “cui bono” under their breath while picking up after their neighbors’ dogs.

So The Onion knew that, unless it pointed to a suitably Latin rallying cry, its brief would be operating far outside the Court’s vernacular. The second reason—perhaps mildly more im- portant—is that the phrase “you are dumb” captures the very heart of parody: tricking readers into believing that they’re seeing a serious rendering of some specific form—a pop song lyric, a newspaper article, a police beat—and then allowing them to laugh at their own gullibility when they realize that they’ve fallen victim to one of the oldest tricks in the history of rhetoric. See San Francisco Bay Guardian, Inc. v. Super. Ct., 21 Cal. Rptr. 2d 464, 466 (Ct. App. 1993) (“[T]he very nature of parody . . . is to catch the reader off guard at first glance, after which the ‘victim’ recognizes that the joke is on him to the extent that it caught him una- ware.”).

It really is an old trick. The word “parody” stretches back to the Hellenic world. It originates in the prefix para, meaning an alteration, and the suffix ode, referring to the poetry form known as an ode.

Interesting! I did not know that... or is that a joke and I am dumb? I checked the OED — which is an anagram for "ode" — and The Onion's etymology is correct.

One of its earliest practitioners was the first-century B.C. poet Horace, whose Satires would replicate the exact form known as an ode—mimicking its meter, its subject matter, even its self-serious tone—but tweaking it ever so slightly so that the form was able to mock its own idiocies.

This is not a mere linguistic anecdote. The point is instead that without the capacity to fool someone, parody is functionally useless, deprived of the tools inscribed in its very etymology that allow it, again and again, to perform this rhetorically powerful sleight-of-hand: It adopts a particular form in order to critique it from within. See Farah v. Esquire Magazine, 736 F.3d 528, 536 (D.C. Cir. 2013).

Parody leverages the expectations that are created in readers when they see something written in a particular form. This could be anything, but for the sake of brevity, let’s assume that it is a newspaper headline—maybe one written by The Onion—that begins in this familiar way: “Supreme Court Rules . . . ” Already, one can see how this works as a parodic setup, leading readers to think that they’re reading a newspaper story. With just three words, The Onion has mimicked the dry tone of an Associated Press news story, aping the clipped syntax and the subject matter. The Onion could go even further by putting that headline on its website—which features a masthead and Latin motto, and the design of which parodies the aesthetics of major news sites, further selling the idea that this is an actual news story.

Of course, what moves this into the realm of parody is when The Onion completes the headline with the punchline—the thing that mocks the newspaper format. The Onion could do something like: “Supreme Court Rules Supreme Court Rules.”

The Onion could push the parody even further by writing the joke out in article format with, say, a quote from the Justices in the majority, opining that, “while the U.S. Constitution guarantees equality of power among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, it most definitely does not guarantee equality of coolness,” and rounding off by reporting the Supreme Court’s holding that the Court “rules and rules totally, all worthy and touched by nobody, in perpetuity, and in accordance with Article Three of the U.S. Constitution. The ability of the President and Congress to keep pace with us is not only separate, but most unequal.”

Ha ha ha. Put the 9 Justices in order from most to least likely to laugh at that paragraph.

That's a real Onion headline, by the way — here — as we see in a footnote. It's from 1997, and I believe I remember it from back then (a quarter century ago!).

As can be seen, the Associated Press form is followed straight through into the article. That rhetorical form sets up the reader’s expectations for how the idiom will play out — expectations that are jarringly juxtaposed with the content of the article. The power of the parody arises from that dissonance into which the reader has been drawn. Farah, 736 F.3d at 537.

Here’s another example: Assume that you are reading what appears to be a boring economics paper about the Irish overpopulation crisis of the eighteenth century, and yet, strangely enough, it seems to advocate for solving the dilemma by cooking and eating babies. That seems a bit cruel—until you realize that you in fact are reading A Modest Proposal....

Importantly, parody provides functionality and value to a writer or a social commentator that might not be possible by, say, simply stating a critique outright and avoiding all the confusion of readers mistak- ing it for the real deal. One of parody’s most powerful capacities is rhetorical: It gives people the ability to mimic the voice of a serious authority—whether that’s the dry news-speak of the Associated Press or the legalese of a court’s majority opinion—and thereby kneecap the authority from within. Parodists can take apart an authoritarian’s cult of personality, point out the rhetorical tricks that politicians use to mislead their constituents, and even undercut a government institution’s real-world attempts at propaganda. Farah, 736 F.3d at 536 (noting that the point of parody is to “censure the vices, follies, abuses, or shortcomings of an individual or society”) (cleaned up).

Time and again, that’s what has occurred with The Onion’s news stories. In 2012, for example, The Onion proclaimed that Kim Jong-un was the sexiest man alive. China’s state-run news agency republished The Onion’s story as true alongside a slideshow of the dictator himself in all his glory. The Fars Iranian News Agency uncritically picked up and ran with The Onion’s headline “Gallup Poll: Rural Whites Prefer Ahmadinejad To Obama.”

Domestically, the number of elected leaders who are still incapable of parsing The Onion’s coverage as satire is daunting, but one particular example stands out: Republican Congressman John Fleming, who believed that he needed to warn his constituents of a dangerous escalation of the pro-choice movement after reading The Onion’s headline “Planned Parenthood Opens $8 Billion Abortionplex.”

The point of all this is not that it is funny when deluded figures of authority mistake satire for the actual news—even though that can be extremely funny. Rather, it’s that the parody allows these figures to puncture their own sense of self-importance by falling for what any reasonable person would recognize as an absurd escalation of their own views. In the political context, the effect can be particularly pronounced. See Hustler Mag., Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46, 53–55 (1988); see also Falwell v. Flynt, 805 F.2d 484, 487 (4th Cir. 1986) (Wilkinson, J., dissenting from denial of rehearing) (“Nothing is more thoroughly democratic than to have the high-and-mighty lampooned and spoofed.”)

At bottom, parody functions by catering to a reasonable reader—one who can tell (even after being tricked at first) that the parody is not real. If most readers of parody didn’t live up to this robust standard, then there would be nothing funny about the Chinese government believing that a pudgy dictator like Kim Jong-un was the sexiest man on Earth. Everyone would just agree that it was perfectly reasonable for them to be taken in by the headline....

This is the fifteenth page of a convoluted legal filing intended to deconstruct the societal implications of parody, so the reader’s attention is almost certainly wandering.

Ha ha. I could have elided that.

That’s understandable. So here is a paragraph of gripping legal analysis to ensure that every jurist who reads this brief is appropriately impressed by the logic of its argument and the lucidity of its prose: Bona vacantia. De bonis asportatis. Writ of certiorari. De minimis. Jus accrescendi. Forum non conveniens. Corpus juris. Ad hominem tu quoque. Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Quod est demonstrandum. Actus reus. Scandalum magnatum. Pactum reservati dominii.

See what happened? This brief itself went from a discussion of parody’s function—and the quite serious historical and legal arguments in favor of strong protections for parodic speech—to a curveball mocking the way legalese can be both impenetrably boring and belie the hollowness of a legal position.

Well done!!

That’s the setup and punchline idea again. It would not have worked quite as well if this brief had said the following: “Hello there, reader, we are about to write an amicus brief about the value of parody. Buckle up, because we’re going to be doing some fairly outré things, including commenting on this text’s form itself!”

Taking the latter route would have spoiled the joke and come off as more than a bit stodgy. But more importantly, it would have disarmed the power that comes with a form devouring itself.

For millennia, this has been the rhythm of parody: The author convinces the readers that they’re reading the real thing, then pulls the rug out from under them with the joke. The heart of this form lies in that give and take between the serious setup and the ridiculous punchline.

As Mark Twain put it, “The humorous story is told gravely; the teller does his best to conceal the fact that he even dimly suspects that there is anything funny about it.”

Not only is the Sixth Circuit on the wrong side of Twain, but grafting onto the reasonable-reader test a requirement that parodists explicitly disclaim their own pretense to reality is a disservice to the American public.

It assumes that ordinary readers are less sophisticated and more humorless than they actually are. And the stakes here are significant, involving no less than one of many more or less equally important components of social and political discourse. [Citation omitted.]

The Onion intends to continue its socially valuable role bringing the disinfectant of sunlight into the halls of power. See Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 67 (1976) (quoting Louis D. Brandeis, Other People’s Money and How the Bankers Use It 62 (National Home Library Foundation ed. 1933)). And it would vastly prefer that sunlight not to be measured out to its writers in 15-minute increments in an exercise yard.

"Our country’s going to hell. Our country is going to hell," said Donald Trump in his 2-hour Wilkes-Barre speech.

I found a transcript. So let's see if I can find some things to quote.
Our country’s going to hell. Our country is going to hell.

What a theme! We just saw Biden speechifying from what looked like hell (what with that red light), demanding that we join him there, and now here comes Trump, with his own hell theme.

This election is a referendum on skyrocketing inflation, rampant crime, soaring murders, crushing gas prices, millions and millions of illegal aliens pouring across our border, race and gender indoctrination perverting our schools, and above all, this election is a referendum on the corruption and extremism of Joe Biden and the radical Democrat party....

Biden characterized the MAGA Republicans as extremists, and Trump is throwing the "Extremist!" accusation right back at Biden and his party.

As you know, this week, Joe Biden came to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to give the most vicious, hateful, and divisive speech ever delivered by an American president, vilifying 75 million citizens, plus another, probably, 75 to 150, if we want to be accurate about it, as threats to democracy and as enemies of the state. You’re all enemies of the state. He’s an enemy of the state, you want to know the truth.

The same rhetorical move: Biden called my people the enemy, so I call him the enemy. 

The enemy of the state is him and the group that control him, which is circling around him, “Do this, do that, Joe, you’re going to do this, Joe.” Right? I think Philadelphia was a great choice to make this speech of hatred and anger. His speech was hatred and anger. By the way, the next morning, he forgot what he said. You saw that. They asked him about, “Oh, I didn’t think I said that. Did I? I don’t know.”

Did he forget to say why Philadelphia was apt because he was hot to say that Joe forgets. 

How’d you like the red lighting behind him, like the devil?

That's making the point quickly. An he gets back to why Philly is fitting:

But Philadelphia was a great choice, because the city is being devastated under Democrat rule, devastated. Hate to tell you....

He goes on about crime in Philadelphia, then recommends voting for Dr. Oz: 

And Oz will send you the goods. Oz, send them the goods. You know what the goods are? Lots of police officers. That’s what the goods are....

Instead of trying to demonize half of the population, Biden and congressional Democrats should focus on stopping the killing and the bloodshed in Philadelphia and every other Democrat-run city in America, where record death and destruction is taking place every single day. Biden thinks making America great again is bad for our country. Do you believe it? That was in his speech. MAGA. “MAGA,” he says. “We got to stop MAGA.”....

He cries out about the raid on Mar-a-Lago, "a travesty of justice that made a mockery of America’s laws, traditions, and principles":

The Biden administration invaded the home of their chief political opponent.... On a phony pretext, getting permission from a highly political magistrate who they hand-picked late in the evening.... They rifled through the First Lady’s closet, drawers, and everything else. And even did a deep and ugly search of the room of my 16-year-old son, leaving everything they touched in far different condition than it was when they started. Can you believe it? The FBI and the Justice Department have become vicious monsters controlled by radical left scoundrels, lawyers, and the media who tell them what to do, you people right there, and when to do it. They’re trying to silence me, and more importantly, they are trying to silence you. But we will not be silenced, right?

The evil and malice of this demented persecution of you and me should be obvious to all.... We are being assaulted by the same group at the FBI and DoJ that, just a few years ago, declared no reasonable prosecutor would charge crooked Hillary Clinton after she set up a secret illegal server to hide her family’s pay-for-play schemes, crammed it full of classified information, allowed it to be plundered by foreign hackers, you know that happened. And then deleted, acid-washed, 30,000 emails. Think of that. 30,000 emails. And what else did she do? Boom, with a hammer, smashed her phone systems to smithereens after receiving the highest level of subpoena from the US Congress.... Yet now these same people, the exact same people, are sending the FBI storming through the home of their number one political rival. It’s a disgrace, a disgrace like, possibly, never before, our country’s never seen anything like it.... 

Before our very eyes, our beloved country is being taken over by the very people who turn democracies into dictatorships, and into, ultimately, ruination....

There's much much more. I'm skipping a lot. Here's the part about Mark Zuckerberg. This begins confusingly with the words "Last week" but then he's not talking about something that happened last week. He begins what is a long parenthetical and then continues with what happened last week. 

Last week, weirdo, he’s a weirdo, Mark Zuckerberg came to the White House, kissed my ass, kissed my ass. “Sir, I’d love to have dinner. Sir, I’d love to have dinner. I’d love to bring my lovely wife.” “All right, Mark. Come on in.” “Sir, you’re number one on Facebook, I’d like to congratulate you.” “Thank you very much, Mark. I appreciate it.” Weirdo Mark Zuckerberg confessed that in 2020, the FBI went to Facebook and the media and gave them the false narrative that the Hunter Biden laptop from hell was Russian disinformation, even though they knew that was not true.

Here's how to read that: "Last week — [long story] — weirdo Mark Zuckerberg confessed [etc. etc.]"

So they went and they said it was Russian disinformation. By the way, the guy that came in with that stuff just got fired. He perp walked. He was perp walked out of the FBI on Friday. But that doesn’t help us and the election of 2020, does it? That doesn’t help us....

Let me leap way ahead to his report about his body: 

It’s about a hundred degrees up here. I’m sweating like a dog, but I’ll call Dr. Oz. Dr. Oz, am I okay? Doctor, am I okay? He says, yes. He says yes. I was on his show years ago, Dr. Oz, I’m going to introduce him in a second, but I was on his show years ago and he did like an examination of me. I don’t know what the hell I did the show for. I wasn’t like even a politician at that point, but he did an examination in the word said, “He’s extremely healthy, really a very, very fine fit, man, but he should lose 20 or 25 pounds. I was so angry. I didn’t speak to him for years. Remember that? He said, “He was great, but he could lose a couple of pounds.”

He shows anger at the doctor for telling him the truth — on TV. But he takes responsibility for choosing to go on the show, and he kicks himself in public: "I don’t know what the hell I did the show for." It's relatable. Nearly every American knows they could stand to lose some weight.

Here's some good stuff about foreign leaders:

So I got to know a lot of the foreign leaders, and let me tell you, unlike our leader, they’re at the top of their game. These are like central casting. There’s nobody that could play the role in Hollywood, all of Hollywood, nobody can play the role of President Xi China. Nobody could play the role. He’s a fierce person. Putin, fierce, is smart. A lot of times I’ll say somebody’s smart and the fake news will go, “He called President Xi smart.” He rules with an iron fist 1.5 billion people. Yeah, I’d say he’s smart. Wouldn’t you say he’s smart? 

So I’m with President Xi and I got along with him very well.... I said, “President,” He’s president for life, by the way. So I call him King. I say, “King.” He said, “But I am not king.” I said, “You are to me. You’re president for life, it’s the same thing.”... 

But I said, “President, could I ask you a very simple question? Do you have a drug problem?” He looked at me like, “What’s wrong with that? No, of course not.” He goes, “No, no.” He’s like, “What the hell stupid question is that? No.” I said, “You don’t have a drug problem with 1.5 billion people?” 

His big problem is they make the drugs, they send them into our country, that’s their problem. That would’ve been their problem and he was stopping it too, but now they’re sending the fentanyl in at numbers that you wouldn’t believe. Wouldn’t believe it, pouring through that porous border at numbers you wouldn’t believe. I had them very close to stopped. He couldn’t do it. I told him he can’t do it. So, “President, President, you don’t have a drug problem? But why, but why don’t you have a drug problem?” ” We have quick trial.” I said, “What is a quick trial?” “We immediately catch the drug dealer. We give him quick trial and if he is guilty,” which I would say probably they’re batting… Would you say… Oz, would you say they’re about batting 100% or only 99%?” “If the drug dealer is guilty, he is immediately executed. So we have no drug problem in each China”... 

He wants the death penalty for drug dealers in America: 

I’ve told this, and it’s a hard thing to say, because calling for the death penalty stuff, but think of it, they kill 500 people during a lifetime.... We would solve that problem so fast and I’m calling on Republicans and Democrats immediately to institute to get to Washington and institute the death penalty for drug dealers. You will no longer have a problem....

He attacks Fetterman and expresses disgust at the sweatsuit:

Your state’s radical Democrat candidate for Senate, John Fetterman is the most dangerous Democrat. He’s the most dangerous Democrat seeking to join Congress this year in one of the most fringe far left freak shows ever to seek election for any office in any state.... He comes in with a sweatsuit on, I’ve never seen a wear a suit. A dirty, dirty, dirty sweatsuit, it’s really disgusting. I’m a clean freak. I’m a clean freak, Oz, I don’t like those dirty sweatsuits, they’re disgusting.

Fetterman made dress like a teenager getting high in his parents’ basement, but he’s a raging lunatic hell bent on springing hardened criminals out of jail in the middle of the worst crime wave in Pennsylvania history. He wants everybody out of jail, and by the way, he wants to get rid of your police. Fetterman is a defund the police Marxist who’s just pulling the wool over people’s eyes, who literally said that if he had a magic wand and could fix one thing, he would end life sentences without parole for murderers, cop killers, rapist, and other monstrous criminals, that’s what he said. He wants them to get out jail. Get out of jail. “Let’s put Trump in jail. Let’s get these murderers, let these murderers out. Put Trump in jail. That Trump is no damn good. He just works his ass off for this country.”...

Skipping ahead to the end, we're back where we began, with the country going to hell:

We’ve got a Federal Bureau of Investigation that won’t allow bad election changing facts to be presented to the public and a Department of Justice that refuses to investigate egregious acts of voting irregularities and fraud. And we have a president who is cognitively impaired and in no condition to lead our country, and everybody knows it. We are a nation that no longer has a free and fair press. Fake news is all you get and they are truly the enemy of the people. We are a nation where free speech is no longer allowed, where crime is rampant like never before, where the economy has been collapsing, where more people died of COVID in 2021 than did in 2020.... And perhaps, most importantly, we are a nation that is no longer respected or listened to around the world. We are a nation that in many ways has become a joke.... But we are not going to let this continue.... We will stand up to the radical left lunatics and the rhinos and we will fight for America like no one has ever fought before.... There is no summit we cannot reach. There is no challenge we cannot meet. There is no victory we cannot have. We will not bend. We will not break. We will not yield. We will never give in. We will never give up. We will never, ever, ever back down....

"I felt cornered and powerless as law enforcement officers began questioning me while the last of my mother’s life was fading."

"I wanted to be comforting her, telling her how she was about to see her daddy and younger brother as she 'went away home,' as we say in Appalachia. Instead, without it being indicated I had any choices about when, where and how to participate, I began a series of interviews that felt mandatory and imposed on me that drew me away from the precious end of my mother’s life. And at a time when we ourselves were trying desperately to decode what might have prompted her to take her life on that day, we each shared everything we could think of about Mom, her mental illness and its agonizing history. I want to be clear that the police were simply following terrible, outdated interview procedures and methods of interacting with family members who are in shock or trauma and that the individuals in my mother’s bedroom that harrowing day were not bad or wrong.... This profoundly intimate personal and medical information does not belong in the press, on the internet or anywhere except in our memories. We have asked the court to not release these documents not because we have secrets."

Writes Ashley Judd, in an essay in the NYT.

Here are 7 TikToks to amuse me — I mean you — on this Wednesday afternoon. Let me know what you like best.

1. Broadway Barbara has a new perfume.

2. The Martha and Mary story in the manner of the Kardashians.

3. Drunk-calling the police.

4. The secret life hack for thrifting at Goodwill.

5. Your friend who refuses to talk shit. 

6. Is this suggestion that he has a long face correct?  

7. The dulcet tones of the goat.

"We are... publishing the entire video for those who want to see what we obtained... [W]e blurred the identity of a child who exits a bathroom as the shooter approaches the classroom."

"The child runs back to bathroom to hide and was later rescued. We also have removed the sound of children screaming as the gunman enters the classroom. We consider this too graphic. We have also chosen to show the face of the gunman as he enters this school. Our news organization guidelines state that we should not glorify these individuals and give them the notoriety that they seek. We chose, in this instance, to show his face to chisel away at any conspiracy that we are hiding something. This last point included much discussion among our senior leaders.... Some three minutes after the shooting begins, three officers initially respond and run to the classroom door, where there is more gunfire, and the three officers retreat to the end of the hallway and stand behind the corners that provide some cover. For the next hour-plus, officers congregate and amass in the hallway and then more show up. Heavily armed officers from at least five agencies stand in the hallway that lead to the classrooms. These officers carry dozens of high-powered rifles, handguns, vests, helmets, camouflage gear and shields.... After 77 minutes, the video shows the officers breach the classroom."

"Police cameras show confusion, anger over DeSantis’ voter fraud arrests/Local police carrying out the arrests were patient, understanding — almost apologetic."

Report "Althouse"

Are you sure you want to report this post for ?

Cancel
×