Oh Boy It Never Ends: April 2020

Thursday, April 30, 2020

MAN WITH A PLAN

I like MAN WITH A PLAN. It stars Matt Le Blanc and Liza Snyder. Liza was the best thing about YES, DEAR -- the only dependable laugh getter. She's great on this show as Andi. The cast also features Kevin Nealon as Matt's brother, Stacy Keach as his father and Swoosie Kurtz as Matt's mother.

Matt, of course, we al know and love as Joey on FRIENDS. And on tonight's episode of MAN WITH A PLAN? Aisha Tyler guest starred. She was Dr. Charlie Wheeler on FRIENDS. Tonight, she was the therapist that Matt and Liza went to in order to determine whether or not a boat was needed. As always, Aisha delivered. I think I like her work best on ARCHER.

Anyway, Matt's got a hit sitcom but most of that cast hasn't done that well. Jennifer Aniston is a movie star so she's fine. Lisa Kudrow's WEB THERAPY is a show that only gets better with repeat viewings.

That still leaves David Schwimmer who was disappointing even on WILL & GRACE and Matthew Perry who is just awful on all of his flop shows. He was half-way tolerable on THE ODD COUPLE.
Courtney Cox had COUGAR TOWN but she really hasn't had much since and Busy's really soured me on COUGAR TOWN, sorry. I can't stand Busy Phillips.

MAN WITH A PLAN is laugh out loud funny. And the cast is great. The current season, on CBS by the way, just started this month so you've got plenty of time to check it out if you've never seen it.

CBS has some strong sitcoms. Along with MAN WITH A PLAN, I like BOB HEARTS ABISHOLA and THE NEIGHBORHOOD and MOM and CAROL'S SECOND ACT.

But CBS also has some of the worst sitcoms around: THE UNICORN, for example, should be axed immediately. It is an awful show, just disgusting. CBS should really stick to multi-cam sitcoms. That's where they pull in their big audiences.

Going out with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Thursday, April 30, 2020. It's all just so disgusting.

March 24th, Tara Reade came forward with allegations that Joe Biden assaulted her in 1993 when she was working in his Senate office. He made it through March without ever speaking on the topic and it appears he'll make it through April again.

It's disrespect. It's disrespect and it's insulting to any survivor. It's Joe Biden saying, "I want the most important job in the land but I don't have to talk about a rape allegation." Why? Because it's not a serious topic to him. It never has been. Forget the talking points, he's no friend to women. Friends to women don't tell other senators that Anita Hill was lying. Friends to women don't refuse to call witnesses who can support Anita Hill. Friends to women don't refuse to apologize to Anita Hill. Joe's just another Bob Packwood. Maybe he got some on the side via consent but Tara's not the only woman he assaulted. There are now three other women considering coming forward.

Over a month where he refused to address the topic because it's not a 'real' topic to him because he doesn't respect women.

At THE DAILY BEAST, Erin Gloria Ryan offers "I Take Tara Reade's Allegations Against Biden Seriously and I'm Still Voting For Him. Here's Why."

Stop, Erin, we know why. You're a whore. You're gutter trash.

If you take allegations of assault seriously, you don't then announce you're voting for the man accused of assault. What you're saying is, "Every victim who thinks you survived? You didn't. Because you don't matter to me. I will vote for your attacker because you mean nothing. You think a rapist made you feel bad? I'm going to publicly support your rapist and drive home the point that a man can get away with any crime in the world."

Erin's a whore.

B-b-b-but these are our only choices -- Donald or Joe!!!!!

No they're not the only choices. First of all, Joseph Kishore and Gloria La Riva have already won their party's presidential nomination. Second of all, Howie Hawkins and Dario Hunter are vying for the Green Party nomination while Adam Kokesh is seeking the Libertarian Party's presidential nomination.

So there are other choices. Even within the Democratic Party, there are other choices. Joe Biden does not have enough delegates to win the nomination currently. He was always a weak candidate. People who take Tara's allegations seriously, pay attention Whore Erin, should be pressuring the Democratic Party leaders to line up behind another candidate. We don't need Joe. We don't want Joe.

At JACOBIAN, Andrew Sernatinger explains:

Days after Bernie Sanders announced that he was suspending his campaign in the 2020 Democratic primary, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) tweeted its position: “We are not endorsing Joe Biden.” Liberal journalists and prominent Democrats weren’t happy. Two full-length articles soon targeted DSA’s decision, including an open letter by members of the original Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and a polemic by Harold Meyerson suggesting that non-endorsement was the path to becoming “a sect of blinkered Trotskyists thrilled by their display of callous, moronic rectitude.”
But the decision was democratically decided by DSA after serious deliberation and debate, and it is the stance all socialists should take. Socialists should not endorse Joe Biden.
I say this as the author of the resolution that was proposed and approved at DSA’s 2019 biennial convention, the highest decision-making body of our organization, with over a thousand delegates representing roughly fifty-five thousand members. Leading up to the convention, members submitted resolutions for consideration. Among those resolutions was my own, R15: “In the Event of a Sanders Loss,” which stated: “Be it therefore resolved, the Democratic Socialists of America will not endorse another Democratic Party presidential candidate should Bernie Sanders not prevail.”
As I explained at the time, it was important to decide proactively what we would do in the likely scenario that Sanders was not the Democratic nominee: “When the pressure of the election season is in full swing, it will be tempting to fall in line with the host of organizations calling for support of the Democrats. There isn’t a win here. As an organization, DSA should make it clear that we will not endorse corporate politicians, especially as this will create divisions among our own membership.”
Delegates first moved to include this resolution on our agenda in July, then heard the motion at convention, debated, and passed it. The floor overwhelmingly voted in favor of the resolution.
The convention affirmed that this was an important question to consider in 2019, and then democratically decided that the position of Democratic Socialists of America is that we would support Bernie Sanders but no other Democratic nominee. Far from blocking the will of the membership, DSA used the highest decision-making body with the most representatives of the organization to decide on its position.

The process for making this decision was a democratic one. But beyond a question of process, there’s the more basic political question: Why would a socialist organization endorse a neoliberal, warmongering politician like Joe Biden?

The resistance to Joe was always tremendous. That was before Tara came forward, long before. He is not a good choice. He can't speak coherently in an interview. Despite being 'rested' for weeks now, he still loses it and stumbles and fumbles through friendly interviews. He's not up for a presidential campaign. It's time to dump him. If the party fails to, don't come whining after the election about how Joe lost because of this or that -- Joe's a loser and that's a known right now.

Again, he's a loser.

And when you factor in Tara Reade -- and you do have to factor her in -- there's no reason to stick up for Joe Biden.

Over at NPR, the laughable Asma Khalid tries to act like she's a reporter -- this after her failures (intentional) last week. This go round, she's 'reporting.' How? She interviews one of the women Rich McHugh spoke with last week who was told about the assault by Tara. That's 'reporting' for Asma. She also notes -- without crediting Ryan Grim -- the phone call Tara's late mother made to THE LARRY KING SHOW back in 1993. In other words, she gathers up the work of others and passes it off as her own.

Most laughable moment? When she declares, "A lot of the women speaking up here defending Joe Biden are echoing the message that we've heard from Biden's campaign. They point to his strong legislative record of supporting women, and they say that women have a right to be heard, but they believe this specific allegation just did not happen."

Are they echoing it, Asma?

As we noted yesterday, Ruby Cramer and Rosie Gray (BUZZFEED) report:

While Joe Biden has remained publicly silent about a sexual assault allegation made against him, his presidential campaign has sought to coordinate and unify Democratic messaging on the matter, advising surrogates earlier this month to say that the allegation “did not happen.”
The Biden campaign circulated talking points among top Democratic supporters shortly after the New York Times published a story earlier this month about the allegation by Tara Reade, a former staff assistant in Biden’s Senate office who says he assaulted her in 1993.
With good news and bad, talking points are standard fare on presidential campaigns. In substance, the private guidance largely hews to the sole public statement on the matter from Biden’s deputy campaign manager, Kate Bedingfield.
But the messaging shows that while Biden has stayed quiet on the allegations on the eve of his nomination, aides were taking the claims seriously enough behind the scenes to coordinate messaging among other Democrats to try to cast the matter as one that’s been thoroughly vetted and determined to be unfounded.

They're not "echoing" it, Asma, they're reciting the talking points -- written talking points -- coming out of the Biden campaign. Why is it so hard for Asma to tell the truth?

I know she blames rape on the victims. I know that. NPR friends have explained just how ridiculous she is. She should have been pulled from the story long, long ago. Hell, she never should have been assigned to it in the first place based on comments she's made about rape victims to her co-workers.

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is not working for New Yorkers. She has made that clear. We're no longer interested in press releases from her office. She stated yesterday, "I support Vice President Biden." Thanks for clarifying. You don't support women. You don't support victims. You're seat in the Senate is nothing but a position for you to use to advocate on behalf of Joe Biden.

Thanks for clarifying. I'm sorry now that I had your back when Claire was going after you. Trust me, I won't have your back again. You've made your choice.

It's not a feminist position, let's be clear. The feminist position for those sympathetic to Joe Biden would be: I'm not supporting anyone at this point because these allegations need to be addressed, vetted and deliberated over in the public square.

Saying, "I'm voting for him anyway"? That's saying that Tara doesn't matter. Your sister doesn't matter. Your daughter doesn't matter. Your mother doesn't matter. No woman matters. It's saying that our job, as women, is to support a rapist.

The hideous Alyssa Milano has an interview with DEADLINE. Why? To pretend her career isn't over. Alyssa has been under pressure for her hypocrisy. After the low, low numbers for her recent podcast, she realized she'd damaged her 'brand.' So on Monday, she wanted to insist to Tara "I see you, I hear you." But she's still supporting Biden.

That's the very definition of rape culture.

A man is accused and women rush to prop him up. They are the zombies who stand by their husbands at press conferences while the men explain why they cheated or raped or did whatever they did.

Alyssa can't maintain this position and pretend to care about women.

We're not going to do a lengthy quote again from my comments regarding Bob Filner. I considered Bob a friend. I did not rush out with, "I'm supporting Bob!" I said the women deserved to be heard and I didn't put my finger on the scales by saying, "I support Bob!" I made clear that if what was accused happened that there was no excuse for it.

Alyssa's not doing that.

She's making clear the opposite.

There is an excuse for it -- that's her argument. The excuse is that we 'need' Joe. No one needs Joe Biden. And for her to refuse to say, "I'm stepping back"? That's outrageous. She's outrageous.

She is not a leader of anything. She is not a feminist. She is not a friend to survivors. She's made it clear that if a woman steps forward, she will lie about them.

Alyssa did lie about Tara. She smeared Tara.

And her attempt to rescue her 'brand' by saying, "I see you . . . I hear you"?

That's nonsense. Where's her apology? Where's her, "I'm sorry I lied to Andy Cohen and told the world that Times Up and I discussed you and we agreed that you were not telling the truth." That's what she did.

Alyssa's a whore. After Joe's next assault, Alyssa will probably show up offering to clean Joe's penis of any physical evidence -- knowing Alyssa, to clean it with her mouth.

Rose McGowan is a truth teller. Alyssa is not. From Rose McGowan:

I’m really sad, and I’m really tired. I normally share thoughts, but tonight it’s emotion.

I agree with Rose. This is an awful time. Women are being devalued yet again and by other women. We are told that the Democratic Party is the party of women -- and certainly women make up a significant number of voters in the party -- but it's time to shut up and support a rapist?

I don't think so.

The Democratic Party needs me, not the other way around. I am not a servant nor a slave to a political party. And I'm certainly not going to take orders from politicians -- people, who please remember, are our servants and work for us.

At POLITICO, an adviser to a woman being considered as Joe Biden's running mate states, "The #MeToo movement was an over-correction to decades of ignoring women and not believing them. And what we’re seeing now is a result of that over-correction."

It's the death of #MeToo. What a proud moment for Alyssa Milano and the other hacktresses who tried to hop that train. They didn't help real victims. They tried to spin it around and make it about money -- why, oh, why can't I get millions for a movie even though no one ever pays to see me in any movies and I'm older and uglier and had to flee to TV?

The real women in the real world got no help because the Mira Sorvinos aren't about helping women. They're about justifying their bad choices. As Ava and I observed in 2018's "MEDIA: Male norms, Russia hate and lots of excuses -- it's the 90th Academy Awards:"

But we couldn't ponder that too long because Mira Sorvino was insisting that "everyone is getting a voice to express something that's been happening forever -- not only in Hollywood, but everywhere."

Really?

Everyone?

Because the victims without money and fame still have to struggle, Mira, you know, the way you struggled after winning an Academy Award for comedy, struggled to become a dramatic actress and were soundly rejected because you didn't have the chops for it or the smarts to stick to comedy?

Harvey destroyed Mira's career?

We kind of think THE REPLACEMENT KILLERS, SUMMER OF SAM, MIMIC and WISEGIRLS beat him to the punch.

So the already famous and well off got to ride the #MeToo train to further attention and now that a person with an actual assault comes forward, Tara Reade, it's time for Alyssa and others to shut the movement down.

Rose had skin in the game, Alyssa never had anything. She tried to ride it and anything else to give her failed career some traction. When a woman really needs MeToo, when she needs actual support, it's time to say, "I hear you but I'm still voting for Joe."

Which says it doesn't matter. Rape doesn't matter. Assault doesn't matter. None of it matters. It's a hideous message to send to women. It's appalling and outrageous. It's shameful.

You do that to pimp Joe Biden all you want, but don't you dare tell me or any other survivor that because you're whoring that we have to too. No, I don't have to whore. And I'm not going to. I understand Rose's frustrations and I share them.

Leigh Gilmore (WBUR) observes:

The MeToo movement should mean that we do not have to stake our political salvation on silencing survivors. That's a lousy bargain for everyone — and survivors should not be shamed into accepting it. I am not at all convinced we sacrifice the greater good of maintaining Biden’s candidacy by sacrificing a willingness to hear Tara Reade. That is a feel-good untruth — a lie based in a political calculation that we are stronger when survivors are silent about the harm men do. This bad faith is far worse than bad timing.

Many have questioned Reade’s motivations, including those who don’t want to push her allegations back into the shadows that MeToo has done so much to illuminate. After all, the allegations are not new. So why are we hearing about them now? If her claims were investigated when Biden was vetted as Obama's VP pick, why were they not disqualifying?

Reade's allegations recall the belated airing of Christine Blasey Ford's claims about Brett Kavanaugh and why FBI background checks failed to follow up on the whispers around the Supreme Court justice's youthful drunken behavior. And Blasey Ford came forward, as did Anita Hill, when the timing was both political and urgent.

Does anyone believe such allegations are unlikely to come forward in the future? How will we deal with them then? Will it be any better if we don’t figure out how to hear Reade now?

No, it won't.

Jeffrey St. Clair Tweets about Stacey Abrams ridiculous repeating of the Biden campaign's talking points:

Stacey has passed the first phase of her audition. For her next challenge, she will explain why Biden's vote for the Iraq War was actually a vote against the Iraq War.

American women don't matter to Joe Biden supporters, why should we be surprised that they don't care about the Iraqi people who have seen their country destroyed?

The following sites updated:

Wednesday, April 29, 2020

BLINDSPOT

That's Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Ridin With Biden." That went up today. May 7th?

That's when BLINDSPOT returns on NBC with new episodes.

Here's a promo.

This will be the show's fifth and final season.

Here's another clip.

It looks like an exciting season.

It reminds me a lot of NIKITA's last season (which QUANTICO ripped off, let's be honest).

Going out with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Wednesday, April 29, 2020. Joe Biden's been issuing talking points and that's apparently all Stacey can repeat publicly, shameful women in Congress refuse to speak out, and much more.

Tara Reade has accused Joe Biden of assault. The dimmest of the dim is Nancy LeTourneau. Where does she work? THE DNC organ WASHINGTON MONTHLY. She's not just a whore, she's really, dumb whore. Apparently ignoring the evidence that has emerged over the last seven or so days was Nancy's guiding principle. Whores like Nancy don't seem to grasp that they may fool some in the present but that women will not forget this and that she's destroyed her own career because this moment will be her defining moment when people look back. "What Is Disturbing ABout Nancy LeTourneau's Allegations" -- to steal the title to her own bad article (no link to gutter trash) is that she's hoping you're stupid.

"After choosing to remain anonymous to other reporters, two of Reade’s friends confirmed to Rich McHugh that she had told them about the assault at the time." Who writes that stupidity but a whore named Nancy? They didn't choose to remain anonymous. They were never asked by the press. That's why they came forward. Nancy's not just a whore, she's a lying whore. Women will not forget. Sure, some delusional bitches will applaud her right now (maybe her media crush Joan Walsh), but this is career suicide. She better start penning some opus about how women are destroying the world because this article means her only future is as anti-woman writer who plugs her books on FOX NEWS.

Yesterday, Hillary Clinton endorsed Joe Biden and CNN's Chris Cilliza is heartbroken that Joe didn't use the opportunity to 'address' Tara's allegations:

Biden and his side are operating under the assumption that if they don't give Reade's allegations any more than the statement offered by deputy campaign manager Kate Bedingfield -- in which she denies Reade's claims -- then this will all go away shortly. There's plenty of reason to believe that is not, in fact, the case.

Talk about whoring. You don't get to be a bigger whore than Chris without a lamp promising you seven wishes. Joe refuses to speak publicly. That doesn't mean he "and his side" are not doing anything.

Nancy LeTourneau's awful article reads like it was written by his campaign. It was certainly shaped by them as so much of the coverage has been. Ruby Cramer and Rosie Gray (BUZZFEED) report:

While Joe Biden has remained publicly silent about a sexual assault allegation made against him, his presidential campaign has sought to coordinate and unify Democratic messaging on the matter, advising surrogates earlier this month to say that the allegation “did not happen.”
The Biden campaign circulated talking points among top Democratic supporters shortly after the New York Times published a story earlier this month about the allegation by Tara Reade, a former staff assistant in Biden’s Senate office who says he assaulted her in 1993.
With good news and bad, talking points are standard fare on presidential campaigns. In substance, the private guidance largely hews to the sole public statement on the matter from Biden’s deputy campaign manager, Kate Bedingfield.
But the messaging shows that while Biden has stayed quiet on the allegations on the eve of his nomination, aides were taking the claims seriously enough behind the scenes to coordinate messaging among other Democrats to try to cast the matter as one that’s been thoroughly vetted and determined to be unfounded.

It's time to stop that. If you want to end rape culture, you end it. That means no one who's accused gets to hide behind skirts and coordinate the coverage.

Every Thursday, we highlight women in Congress. We didn't last Thursday. I finally got around to doing it over the weekend. I'm not sure if we'll bother this week.

Tara Reade is credible. Not credible? The various senators and reps who refuse to speak up. That's Senator Patty Murray certainly. That's also Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. With Kirsten, I do get it. She spoke out for survivors and took a lot of crap for it. First from a female senator no longer in the Senate but on CNN constantly. Then she got attacked for speaking out against Al Franken's outrageous behavior. In fact, that harmed her a great deal when she was running for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. If Kirsten had run a stronger campaign, it wouldn't have. Her enemies among the party were demonizing her. She wasn't defending herself and she wasn't projecting strength. Her weakest point was her speaking voice. She sounded too young, too immature and if we're talking about what hurt her campaign, we need to start there. But I get her being shy to step up to the plate again. I do. But that's no excuse if you believe in the cause. I love Patty but there's no excuse for her to be silent. Or for Hirono or any of them. They weren't silent with regards to someone they were afraid would sit on the bench so why be silent about someone who might end up president?

As Democrats, in fact, it's their duty to stop this nominee so that a stronger nominee can represent the party.

It's shameful that so many women in Congress refuse to speak out.

It's shameful that Hillary endorsed Joe as all this is going on. But it's Hillary's pattern. She put up with Bill's lying and cheating and she let herself be publicly humiliated more than once. She saves her real rage -- to this day -- for Barbra Streisand and continues to believe that Bill slept with her. Why that woman, Barbra, is the breaking point, I have no idea. But she also backed Brett McGurk -- a Bully Boy Bush loyalist who couldn't keep it in his pants. Then there's Philippe Reines who, as the late journalist Michael Hastings noted, had a history of harassment. There's Hillary's close ties to Harvey Weinstein and the way she tried to bully Ronan Farrow into not pursuing the Weinstein story. In fact, most of the men around Hillary have one scandal after another of their abuse of women. She's attracted to them and they to her. So it's not real surprise that Hillary would endorse Joe.

But the silence from these other women is shocking.

Marty Johnson (THE HILL) reports:

Former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams (D) on Tuesday night defended presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden when asked about sexual assault allegations from Tara Reade, a former Biden aide who has alleged that the then-senator sexually assaulted her in a secluded part of Capitol Hill in 1993.

"I believe that women deserve to be heard and I believe they need to be listened to, but I also believe that those allegations have to be investigated by credible sources," Abrams, who is said to be on the shortlist to be Biden's running mate, told CNN's Don Lemon.

"The New York Times did a deep investigation and they found that the accusation was not credible," she added. "I believe Joe Biden."

Oh, look, she's using the talking points -- Ruby and Rosie publish the talking points at the end of their article about the talking points. Oh, Stacey couldn't do her own work. There's a surprise, right?

Is Stacey a lesbian? 46 and never married? There's nothing wrong with being a lesbian but, as Olivia Pope told the unmarried politician on SCANDAL, people can relate to gay, they can't relate to celibate. And if she's a closeted lesbian, that is an issue. We don't need closet cases a heartbeat away from the presidency. We also don't need some loser who can't even win a statewide office as vice president. I think even Amy Klobuchar would agree with that. Certainly, Kamala Harris would as well. Both women have won statewide races.

Stacey's a state legislator. That's all she's ever been. She doesn't have the experience to sit in a Cabinet, let alone be a vice president -- especially to a man in poor health.

Stacey on the ticket means Joe's campaign spends weeks and weeks defending her. They don't have the time, they don't have the energy. But Joe is stupid enough to ignore that warning -- same way he's ignored every other.

And when Stacey spits up known talking points? She needs to be challenged on it. She needs to be told, "Yes, Stacey, we've read that talking points. Do you have anything yourself to say or do you need to be programmed ahead of time?"

MJ Lee (CNN) reports:

A former neighbor of Tara Reade, a woman who has accused Joe Biden of sexual assault, has come forward to say that Reade told her about the alleged assault in the mid-1990s. The account, purportedly told to the neighbor within a few years of the alleged incident, marks the first detailed and on-the-record corroboration of Reade's allegation against the presumptive Democratic nominee for president.

Lynda LaCasse told CNN in a phone interview Monday that she remembers stepping out of her two-bedroom home in Morro Bay, California, to sneak in a cigarette break away from her children. It was 1995, perhaps even early 1996, based on her recollection. LaCasse said she often sat outside on her stoop smoking Virginia Slims, and that on this particular day, she cried as she discussed with Reade a custody battle for her kids.

Reade began to cry too, LaCasse said.

"She started talking about Joe Biden. And I didn't really know much about Joe Biden," she said. LaCasse said that Reade told her that when she was working in Washington some years prior, Biden "had pushed her up against a wall and he put his hand up her skirt and he put his fingers inside of her, and she was dealing with the aftermath of that."

Sam notes Rebecca's Traister's article at THE CUT. We'll quote from the article tomorrow, I'm just short on time this morning.

In Iraq, the protests against the Iraqi government continue. MEMO reports:

Iraqi protesters gathered in Tahrir Square in the capital Baghdad after the government scaled back some of its anti-coronavirus measures during the month of Ramadan, Anadolu Agency reported

The protesters held photos of Prime Minister-designate Mustafa Kadhimi with a red “X” on his face in rejection of his candidacy for the role.

Activist Ghassan Adel told the news agency that “any transitional government that brings with it party quotas is rejected not only in Tahrir Square, but in all the country’s protest arenas”.

Adel, who had been protesting in Tahrir Square for months, said: “The masses are stronger than tyrants, parties and politicians,” adding that “this government will not pass. If it is passed, we will overthrow it with escalatory measures.”

The following sites updated:

Tuesday, April 28, 2020

Michael Moore?

I am not a Michael Moore fan. If he self-destructed, I wouldn't shed a tear. He's annoying and cloying.

But the attacks on the new film that he produced? I'm not going to join in stoning him. I will see the movie myself and form my own opinion.

Here's a video of RISING discussing the film.

If you need a negative piece on Moore's film (again, he produced it, he did not direct it), you can refer to COMMON DREAMS -- though you would probably do better referring to the comments to the COMMON DREAMS article.

There are many things that I do not like about Michael Moore. I hate him as a talk show guest. He's craven and has no back bone. He's begging, 2004, Ralph Nader not to run, getting on his knees and begging, is a moment I cannot unsee.

He is sexist and I don't forget the way he stabbed Mumia in the back.

If he got slammed for what he actually did, I'd join in. But I don't think his documentary is what some of those slamming him say it is. I think he's holding people accountable -- like Bill McKibben -- who need to be held accountable and he's being slammed for that.

I'm not a Michael Moore fan. But, again, if I'm going to slam him, it's for what he's done. I think the attacks on Moore's film are attempts to conceal the points that he is making, an attempt to distract from the serious issues he's raising.

Going out with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Tuesday, April 28, 2020. ISIS grows more active in Iraq while we all need to ponder how a man accused of rape can claim he's 'eletable'?

March 24th, Ryan Grim (INTERCEPT) reported on Tara Reade going to Times Up to get assistance as she came forward to accuse Joe Biden of assaulting her. One month and four days later and Joe Biden has still not made a public statement to any news outlet. Instead, he's hid behind a series of women including the nut job who should have been disqualified by a working press. (I noted her conflicts in the "Tara Reade and coronavirus roundtable" we did.) The media has assisted Joe by refusing to ask him when they interview him. There is nothing else newsworthy about Joe's campaign currently but people like Anderson Cooper ignore the topic over and over. In fact, Anderson has interviewed Joe twice since the allegation surfaced and both times refused to ask a question about it.

The media has practiced a double standard and wallowed in hypocrisy. Of THE NEW YORK TIMES smear job on Tara, April 12th, Naomi Wolf Tweeted:

As a feminist I just note that the wording around this accusation in

@nytimes

is more skeptical and guarded than in the same paper’s reporting on women accusing Trump. Should be a nonpartisan single standard for reporting allleged sexual abuse.

The hypocrisy was noted on FOX NEWS.

Lara Logan: Well, to me, Sean, it says something very disappointing: That people who claim the moral high ground, claim to have some degree of moral authority, don't really care about the principles at all because the principles should survive politics, they should survive ideology, they should survive everything. And I know, in my own case, it's hard, in a way, even listening to it. Not because I haven't come to terms with it but because I know as someone who was raped, I know all the people, men and women, over the years, who've come to me with their own stories of what they've been through. And the one thing I was concerned about through the entire MeToo movement and Kavanaugh and everything else is that the voices of the real victims would be lost as everybody was rushing in the frenzy to use this moment for their own gain.

Yesterday, Rich McHugh (BUSINESS INSIDER) reported:

In March, when a former aide to Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden accused the candidate of sexually assaulting her in 1993, two people came forward to say that the woman, Tara Reade, had told them of the incident shortly after it allegedly occurred — her brother, Collin Moulton, and a friend who asked to remain anonymous for fear of retribution.
Now two more sources have come forward to corroborate certain details about Reade's claims. One of them — a former neighbor of Reade's — has told Insider for the first time, on the record, that Reade disclosed details about the alleged assault to her in the mid-1990s.
"This happened, and I know it did because I remember talking about it," Lynda LaCasse, who lived next door to Reade in the mid-'90s, told Insider.
The other source, Lorraine Sanchez, who worked with Reade in the office of a California state senator in the mid-'90s, told Insider that she recalls Reade complaining at the time that her former boss in Washington, DC, had sexually harassed her, and that she had been fired after raising concerns.

Each day, Tara's case gets stronger and yet no one wants to ask Joe Biden the question they need to. Is that a ground rule?

Are they getting access by guaranteeing not to ask Joe about the rape allegation?

The media watchdogs are largely napping. The right-wing NEWSBUSTERS has followed this story. The left-wing CJR has. But FAIR, COUNTERSPIN? They won't say a word.

Joe won't say a word. We know why. He fears litigation. He's pulling the Bill Clinton strategy. Juanita Broadrrick accused Bill of rape (I believe her). Bill hid behind a spokesperson and never himself spoke to the allegation. That's what Joe's doing now.

With Bill, he was a lame duck president. It was 1999. He could ride it out and did. Joe's asking people to vote for him. This isn't something he can ride out.

Tara's case gets stronger with every day.

The calls for Joe to drop out mount.

This is not a strong candidate for November. Joe needs to go. He was never more than an empty suit and now he's facing credible charges of assault. He's been unable to defend himself for over a month. How does this argue for him doing well in November?

He's offering nothing but tired plans from the past which failed. His only argument has been that he's 'electable.' He's now accused of rape and does not look like a sure thing at all.

Turning to Iraq, Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) reports, "A militant wearing a suicide vest struck an intelligence bureau in northern Iraq on Tuesday, wounding at least three members of the security personnel, Iraqi officials said, blaming the attack on the Islamic State group." Margaret Griffis (ANTIWAR.COM) adds, "ISIS attacked the Rutba home of a district councilman. Talal Al-Absi was killed, and his son was abducted."

As ISIS grows more active, Iraq has no real prime minister. The 'acting' prime minister resigned last year. Adil Abdul Mahdi was inept and resigned at the end of November. All these months later, Iraq still does not have a prime minister.

And let's be clear, the post is supposed to be filled long enough for elections to be called. No one is saying that the new prime minister needs to serve a lengthy term.

Struan Stevenson (UPI) offers:

Iraq's prime ministerial merry-go-round continues to spin apace. Spy chief Mustafa al-Kadhimi, director of the country's National Intelligence Service, is the third prime minister designate this year, following the withdrawal of Adnan al-Zurfi, the previous prospective candidate, after he failed to secure enough support to form a government.
Al-Zurfi had tried to step into the shoes of Mohammed Tawfiq Allawi, who suffered a similar fate, leaving Iraq under the tremulous caretaker control of Adil Abdul-Mahdi, the crooked former prime minister and puppet of the Iranian mullahs, who was forced to resign last November amidst widespread protests.
Under the Iraqi constitution, a prime minister designate has 30 days to secure the backing of parliament for his new government. This has been the stumbling block for each of Abdul-Mahdi's chosen successors so far, as they have attempted to gain the approval of the wide range of deeply divided and sectarian factions that make up Iraq's Majilis.

Recently, former prime minister and forever thug Nouri al-Maliki hosted a 'party' at his house where various Shi'ite politicians plotted how to defeat Allawi.

Khaled Yacoub Oweis (THE NATIONAL) reports:

A parliamentary supporter of Iraq’s latest Prime Minister-designate Mustafa Al Kadhimi cast doubt on whether he could form a Cabinet, in the first acknowledgement from the allied camp of the secular nominee that he is in political trouble.
Shirwan Mirza of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) told Iraq’s official news agency late on Sunday that Mr Al Kadhimi, an intelligence chief supported by Washington, could fail like his two predecessors.
Mr Mirza said Mr Al Kadhimi was hoping to be approved by parliament before the month of Ramadan.
“The Cabinet talks are ongoing but have not reached a result so far,” Mr Mirza said. “Al Kadhimi was supposed to present his cabinet before Ramadan but some political groups withdrew their support for him.”
The Kurdish parliamentarian was referring to pro-Iranian Shiite players linked with militia powers who dominate the legislature and who had initially indicated that they would let Mr Al Kadhimi form his Cabinet.

Mr Mirza said if Mr Al Kadhimi does not suffer “the same fate” as his predecessors”, parliament could convene a physical vote-of-confidence session despite the coronavirus.

The following sites updated:

Oh Boy It Never Ends