Comey memo: Is Trump finished?

May 17, 2017 • 9:15 am

The events of yesterday may have given Trump’s presidency a fatal blow. First, it’s come to light that former FBI director James Comey wrote a memo to himself in February, noting that Trump had asked him to stop the FBI’s investigation into Michael Flynn. Flynn, you’ll recall, was Trump’s national security advisor, but resigned when it came out that he likely had improper contact with Russian officials before the election.

The New York Times story below (click on picture to access) suggests, if Comey’s memo is authentic (and it seems to be), that Trump engaged in obstruction of justice. That’s a crime. And it’s an impeachable offense. Here’s what Comey reported when sources read parts of the memo to newspaper reporters (it hasn’t been seen by any of them):

Mr. Comey shared the existence of the memo with senior F.B.I. officials and close associates. The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of Mr. Comey’s associates read parts of it to a Times reporter.

“I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go,” Mr. Trump told Mr. Comey, according to the memo. “He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”

Mr. Trump told Mr. Comey that Mr. Flynn had done nothing wrong, according to the memo.

Mr. Comey did not say anything to Mr. Trump about curtailing the investigation, replying only: “I agree he is a good guy.”

Trump, of course, could claim he never said any such thing. And that’s his line:

In a statement, the White House denied the version of events in the memo.

“While the president has repeatedly expressed his view that General Flynn is a decent man who served and protected our country, the president has never asked Mr. Comey or anyone else to end any investigation, including any investigation involving General Flynn,” the statement said. “The president has the utmost respect for our law enforcement agencies, and all investigations. This is not a truthful or accurate portrayal of the conversation between the president and Mr. Comey.”

Further malfeasance by the President: we now know that he shared intelligence about ISIS with Russian officials in the Oval Office, intelligence that apparently came from Israel and was conveyed to the U.S. confidentially, as part of our intelligence-sharing operations. It was certainly not intended to go to Putin, who could in turn hand it over it to some of his unsavory allies, like Iran. What this will do, of course, is make our allies more reluctant to share secret information with the U.S., for Trump is untrustworthy and capable of giving that information to anyone on the spur of the moment.

It’s barely four months into Trump’s Presidency, and I hope that those who voted for our Chief Moron realize what they voted for.

My question to readers: Will this have any effect on Trump’s presidency; that is, will he be impeached for obstructing justice? Or will he show his Teflon-like nature again, and slough it off?

The down side of impeaching Trump, of course, is that we’d get Pence as President, but even that’s better than The Donald.

Here’s a tw**t from the “Fire the Fool” site, courtesy of Grania:

 

Google Doodle: The fantastic Antikythera Mechanism

May 17, 2017 • 8:30 am

Today’s Google Doodle in most of the world portrays the Antikythera Mechanism, as today is the 115th anniversary of its discovery, at least according to Google.  Wikipedia, however, says it was recovered on August 4, 1901, so figure it out yourself. It wasn’t even studied until 1951, as other artifacts from the wreck were deemed more important:

Whatever the date, this is one of the most splendid devices known from ancient times. Recovered in a wooden box in a sunken Roman shipwreck off Greece, it was in 82 fragments. These reside at the National Archaeological Museum in Athens:

Wikipedia describes its use:

Using modern computer x-raytomography and high resolution surface scanning, a team led by Mike Edmunds and Tony Freeth at Cardiff University peered inside fragments of the crust-encased mechanism and read the faintest inscriptions that once covered the outer casing of the machine. Detailed imaging of the mechanism suggests it dates back to 150-100 BC and had 37 gear wheels enabling it to follow the movements of the moon and the sun through the zodiac, predict eclipses and even recreate the irregular orbit of the moon. The motion, known as the first lunar anomaly, was developed by the astronomer Hipparchus of Rhodes in the 2nd century BC, and he may have been consulted in the machine’s construction, the scientists speculate. Its remains were found as one lump later separated in three main fragments, which are now divided into 82 separate fragments after conservation works. Four of these fragments contain gears, while inscriptions are found on many others. The largest gear is approximately 140 millimetres (5.5 in) in diameter and originally had 224 teeth.

After this was made, we have no record of such complex technology until over 1300 years later–in the astronomical clocks of medieval Europe!

Here’s “Fragment A“, front and back, the most complex piece (captions from Wikipedia):

The main fragment and contains the majority of the known mechanism. Clearly visible on the front is the large b1 gear, and under closer inspection further gears behind said gear (parts of the l, m, c, and d trains are clearly visible as gears to the naked eye). The crank mechanism socket and the side-mounted gear that meshes with b1 is on Fragment A. The back of the fragment contains the rearmost e and k gears for synthesis of the moon anomaly, noticeable also is the pin and slot mechanism of the k train. It is noticed from detailed scans of the fragment that all gears are very closely packed and have sustained damage and displacement due to their years in the sea. The fragment is approximately 30 mm thick at its thickest point.

 

Fragment A also contains divisions of the upper left quarter of the Saros spiral and 14 inscriptions from said spiral. The fragment also contains inscriptions for the Exeligmos dial and visible on the back surface the remnants of the dial face. Finally, this fragment contains some back door inscriptions.

Here are speculative reconstructions, first the front and then the computer-reconstructed back:

The reconstructed front in the Archaeological Museum in Athens:

The back (computer reconstructed):

Here’s an explanatory video featuring Michael Wright who made the replica:

 

And here is the gear scheme as reconstructed by scientists:

Finally, two (of 15) fun facts about the device from Mental Floss (quoted verbatim):

  • Since long before the invention of the digital computer you are undoubtedly reading this on, there have been analog computers. These types of computers range from mechanical aids like a slide rule to a device that can predict the tides. The Antikythera mechanism, which was designed to calculate dates and predict astronomical phenomena, has therefore been called the earliest analog computer.

 

  • Jones and colleagues’ new interpretation of the mechanism is based on the extant 3400 Greek characters on the device, although thousands more characters are likely missing due to the incomplete nature of the artifact. Most notably, in their thorough linguistic analysis, these scholars discovered that the mechanism refers to eclipses’ color, size, and associated winds. The Greeks believed that characteristics of an eclipse were related to good and bad omens. Because of this belief, by building in predictive eclipse technology, the creator of the mechanism was letting the user divine the future.

 

Readers’ wildlife photographs

May 17, 2017 • 7:30 am

Tony Eales from Queensland sent some nice insect photos from the order Neuroptera (lacewings, antlions, and similar creatures). His notes are indented:

Neuroptera are a great group to photograph and have lots of interesting members. I’m still after some of the more spectacular species but here’s a few interesting ones I have photographed.

A large species from a family known as Antlions (Family Myrmeleontidae) known for their pit traps in fine sand and dust. The larvae are heavy and ferocious looking.

An adult “antlion”:

Blue Eyed Lacewings (Nymphes myrmeleonides) are surprisingly large and when flying can be mistaken for large damselflies.

JAC: Here’s the unusual egg case produced by individuals in this group (photo from the Australian Museum):

Brown lacewings (Family Hemerobiidae) are small and have rather hard wings compared to other lacewings.

Green lacewings (Family Chrysopidae) are the most common around here and are very pretty. The larvae get around covered in a camouflage of debris including the corpses of their prey.

One of my absolute favourite photographic subjects are the Mantid lacewings (Family Mantispidae). Discovering they existed they seemed as shocking to me as the platypus must have seemed to 19th century biologists.

Finally a small delicate lacewing that seems similar to me to the green lacewings but I have no idea about the family.

Wednesday: Hili dialogue

May 17, 2017 • 6:30 am

Good morning on Wednesday, May 17, 2017: exactly one week till I engage Le Dawkins in conversation in Washington, D.C. Be there or be square! Also, today the Certified Hand Therapist will inspect my finger to see if the tendon has healed enough that I can discard the damn plastic cast I’ve been wearing for six week. It’s been a real pain, and typing while splinted has produced many errors on this site.

And it’s National Cherry Cobbler Day, a dessert not to be sniffed at. It’s also International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia, and Biphobia.

On this day in 1536, Henry VIII has his marriage with Anne Boleyn’s annulled. She was beheaded two days later. On May 17, 1875, the horse Aristides won the first Kentucky Derby. In 1954, a landmark case was decided on this day: Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that it was unconstitutional to have separate schools for black and white children. On this day in 1973, the U.S. Senate began its televised hearings of the Watergate affair; if you watched you’ll remember them well. Finally, on May 17, 2004, the first legal same-sex marriages were performed in the U.S.—in Massachusetts.

Notables born on this day include Edward Jenner (1749), Erik Satie (1866), Dennis Hopper (1936), and Andrea Corr (1974). Here are the Corrs performing their best-known song, “Breathless”:

Those who died on this day include John Jay (1829), Lawrence Welk (1992), baseball great Harmon Killebrew (I have his autograph on a copy of the journal Genetics, surely a unique item), Donna Summer (2012), and Gerald Edelman (2014). Here is my Killebrew-autographed copy of Genetics; this post describes how I got it:

I met both Killebrew and Edelman when they were in their prime; they are both gone now and I realize that I am soon to follow. Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili is not quite ready for her closeup:

Hili: I suspect that you will have to take this picture again.
A: Now?
Hili: No, when wisteria is in bloom.
In Polish:
Hili: Podejrzewam, że to zdjęcie będziesz musiał powtórzyć.
Ja: Teraz?
Hili: Nie, jak zakwitnie wisteria
Here is Ali, the beautiful cat belonging to a friend of reader Anne-Marie in Montreal:
Lagniappe: A tw**t featuring illusions, spotted and sent to me by Matthew Cobb:

And one found by Grania:

https://twitter.com/EmrgencyKittens/status/864703279204364288

Winners: WaPo 2017 Squirrel Week photo contest winners

May 16, 2017 • 3:15 pm

Here are three winners of the 2017 Washington Post Squirrel Week Photo Contest, held annually by reporter John Kelly. First, the winner:

 

The winner this year is Kristy Casto of Ashburn, Va., twice a runner-up in earlier contests. She titled her photo of a juvenile squirrel looking up at its mother “Just One Bite.”

Kristy is in the Army and works in military medicine. Squirrels visit her deck often, so often that she’s come to know individual animals. “That’s Scrattie Sue and one of her babies,” Kristy said of her winning entry.

Said Kristy: “I have a bazillion squirrel photos. I have kids too, but I don’t have as many pictures of them. My kids will remind me of that.”

Why such affection for an oft-maligned rodent?

“They are super intelligent little creatures,” Kristy said. “Their athleticism and agility is amazing to watch. They have distinct personalities. I’m a student of squirrels now.”

And an award-winning squirrel photographer.  What does Kristy look for when composing a picture?

“It’s easy to get a picture of a squirrel eating or sitting in the tree,” she said. “I try to look for something unusual or different. Any time there’s more than one squirrel, that’s interesting.”

Food of a different sort attracted this squirrel, photographed by Matt Evans of Austin, Texas. “One day while I was on my lunch break, this squirrel came over, climbed up on my table, and stole an entire (large) cookie,” Matt wrote. “He then walked over to a nearby tree, climbed up to a comfortable spot, and ate the cookie while he stared at me.”

Miranda Hovemeyer of Silver Spring, Md., managed to capture just about every version of the Eastern gray squirrel — gray, black (or melanistic) and what looks like an albino. She calls it “A Diverse Squirrel Neighborhood.” [JAC: Where’s the conservative squirrel?]

h/t: Nicole Reggia

Dan Arel: Mainstream atheists are white nationalist bigots

May 16, 2017 • 1:19 pm

Dan Arel, an atheist who advocates punching Nazis, and who has accused me of “normalizing white nationalism” (see here and here). is becoming a C. J. W*rl*m*n clone, constantly excoriating atheists for our supposed bigotry. This is how far people will go when they’ve drunk the Kool-Aid of Regressive Leftism:

https://twitter.com/danarel/status/864205621482012674

You can see more in his Twi**er feed, but it’s not worth my time to show more. Pity: the man has sunk to uttering the craziest canards about “mainstream atheism”. I can’t even think of ONE “mainstream atheist” who could be accused of white nationalist bigotry.

When in doubt, it’s always safe to call those you don’t like “white supremacists.”

“Muslims are the true feminists”: HuffPo lies to itself and its readers

May 16, 2017 • 11:00 am

UPDATE: This article appeared on the new HuffPo, and after writing this piece I realized I’d criticized the identical article a year ago, here. Well, so I’ve done it twice. My takes aren’t the same, so if you haven’t read the other one, read this one instead. Better yet, read both, as the earlier piece, which is shorter, has other information about the “feminism” of sharia law.  The piece shows that PuffHo is brain-dead, killed by Toxic Regressive Leftism.

________

Well, I’m sorry folks, but, like a dog returning to its own vomit, I keep returning to the HuffPo, breaking my vow that I was done with them. The laws of physics dictated otherwise: I could not have done other than write this post. And my also-determined justification for returning to that odious site is that HuffPo may be the premier “clicky” source of news for Lefties, since it is puffier and takes less work to read than, say, the New York Times. Also, the Times is more objective, and even has conservative columnists, so if you’re a Trump-hater or Regressive Leftist who wants confirmation of your biases rather than exercise for your brain, you can reliably find that confirmation at HuffPo.

And here’s their latest, one of the most egregious pieces of doublespeak that I’ve seen, even on that site (click on screenshot to go to the article):

Doesn’t that remind you of headlines like “Assad is the true peacemaker” or “Trump is the true progressive”?

Author Gabby Aossey’s claim is that Muslims are the True Feminists because they choose to respect their bodies by covering them, while Western Feminists disrespect their own bodies by showing their skin. Why, there’s even a Free the Nipple campaign in the West, which according to Aoussey exemplifies the goals of Western Feminists: to show skin. As she says:

As American women, many of us have an idea of what feminists are; freelancing women with all the sexual freedom in the world. But this is exactly the problem with American feminism; it is all about sex and the liberation of our bodies. Certainly, things like abortion and contraception is a part of that freedom, but in today’s society the fight has taken on a much different tone.

Hip Feminist campaigns like Free the Nipple only encourage a gullible behavior of disrespect for our own bodies, leading to everyone else around us disrespecting our bodies as well. If we want to be respected as women and taken seriously in all our endeavors we should look to a new source; Muslim women. Muslim women, as well as Muslim men, see every body as a sacred temple, especially the female body. Opposed to exposing themselves, it is through modesty. When we think of modern feminists we should stray away from the new American trends and start looking to what we have always thought as a contradiction; Muslim feminists.

That’s a gross distortion of feminism in the West, whose goal is, for most, simple equality. While that equality includes the freedom to dress as one will in public, it also includes legal and moral equality: the right to be treated with as much respect as men, and to enjoy the same legal rights.

Now Aossey is willfully ignorant of several things. One, of course, is the fact that Muslim-majority countries, many of them governed by versions of sharia law—which DICTATES that women cover themselves—oppress women. But don’t take my word for it. Observe that in Saudi Arabia, a woman can’t go out with a man who is not her relative, or go out unaccompanied, must wear full covering (not just a hijab) when she does to out, and can’t even drive. In Iran and Afghanistan, women MUST cover themselves, and under sharia law have much more restricted legal rights than men (for one thing, their testimony in court is worth only half of a man’s).

And it’s not limited to those countries. Check out the 2013 Pew Survey of Muslim-majority countries (which didn’t even survey more repressive ones like Iran, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia). Here are some statistics showing the “achievements” of Muslim feminism in the Muslim world:

Even the notion that wearing a veil should be a woman’s choice (in principle, of course!) is universally accepted only in a few Muslim-majority countries, and is widely rejected in Africa and the Middle East (note the absence of Iran and Saudi Arabia):


Here’s true equality!:

Women’s oppression is codified in most instantiations of sharia law. Here are the data on those who favor such a law for everyone in Muslim-majority lands. Feminism my tuchas!

To buttress her flawed argument, Aossey calls up the image of Khadija, Muhammad’s first wife, by all accounts a powerful and independent woman. But that was fourteen hundred years ago! Are women in Saudi Arabia and Iran allowed to have such power now? Are they allowed to say whatever they want? You know the answer. Pointing to historical figures whose personalities may be largely fictional is no way to justify Muslim women as feminists today. That much is obvious.

And what happens to Muslim women who become liberals, leave the faith, or speak out against Islam’s oppression of women: liberals like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Asra Nomani, or Sarah Haider? Are they heroes, like Khadija? You know the answer. They’re vilified—vilified for opposing the legal and cultural inferiority of women under Islam. People like Aossey ignore this in their mush-brained desire to claim that Muslim women are feminists.

And then there’s the small matter of the hijab. Here’s Aossey’s take:

. . . it’s no surprise to see Muslim woman today modeling themselves after these prominent female figures. Muslim girls look towards these instances of strength for guidance in this scary, patriarchal society. These modern women are not afraid to go against the grain in the name of their belief like wearing the hijab to covey their religious devotion. Hijab is the headscarf that is worn by Muslim woman and no; it is not supposed to be forced on them by their fathers and husbands. Wearing or not wearing the Hijab reflects a Muslim woman’s own a personal choice.

What nonsense! In several countries wearing the hijab (or more covering) is the law, not personal choice, and if you refuse, the morality police will beat some sense into you. In other places, including the U.S. and Europe, social pressure by family and peers ensures that veiling is far from a personal “choice”. I’ve written before about what women’s dress was like in places like Egypt, Afghanistan, and Iran before veiling was either common or mandatory. Answer: women didn’t veil as much, and showed a lot more skin. See my posts here, herehere, and here. These days, women must go on websites like My Stealthy Freedom to covertly doff their veils, for they don’t want to wear them!

And remember why veiling exists: it’s based on the presumption that women have to cover themselves to avoid exciting the uncontrollable lust of men, men who would rape them if they saw a knee or even a stray wisp of hair. It puts the onus on women, not men, to prevent sexual assault, and that’s not feminism. In fact, feminists always make the point, correctly, that it’s not women’s responsibility to quash male lust, and they’re right. “Feminist” Aossey, however, has bought into the oppression side:

With all of the pressures in our American society to have a certain physical allure; to have long, luscious hair, a skinny yet curvy body, flawless facial beauty, woman go through hell. With this, we succumb to the pressures that we generally think we are free of; we oppress our natural womanhood with constant worry about how we look to others around us. We do not have the courage to stand up to this societal critique and say ‘my body is not to be ogled at’.

For many Muslim women however, they strive to achieve just that. In this way, they liberate themselves from these everyday pressures. They actually have the courage to say hey, I am not an object of pleasure, I am a woman that commands only respect for who I am and not how I look. They have the power to self-liberate as well as the courage to diverge from the American norms. And they do not get attention from showing off their figure, but they get attention by how they present themselves. Muslim woman get respect and are looked at beyond aesthetics; they are actually taken seriously in their communities.

Isn’t this what feminism should be? Don’t women deserve consistent respect and to actually be listened to without drools or criticisms over our bodies and looks?

That is what the results of feminism should be, but veiling doesn’t achieve that result. Read two articles (this and this) to see how covering a woman does not prevent sexual assault. As Grania said when she saw Aossey’s piece (which, by the way, doesn’t allow readers’ comments):

It’s the woman’s responsibility to protect her temple from the assault of the eyes of evil men who are such dogs that they cannot be trusted. What I want to know is why these candidates for a brain donation aren’t arguing for the full-on niqab? Surely that is the logical next step.

Indeed! Aossey finishes her piece with more nonsense, as if repeating lies makes them more credible:

I realized we have been conditioned to think that American women are the free and that Muslim women are the suppressed, but this is twisted to me. I finally understood who is really oppressed by a patriarchal society and it is us. Woman who wear hijab have freed themselves from a man’s and a society’s judgmental gaze; the Free the Nipplers have not. They have fallen deep into the man’s world, believing that this trend will garner respect.

So I urge my Free the Nipple gal pals to take a look at your Muslim sisters and collaborate with them to create a feminism that treats the female body as a temple and not as a toy. Let us see feminism in a different light—through modesty and the courage to savor our sugar. Let us call on the Muslim feminists of the world.

The female body is not a temple, nor is the male’s. It’s the product of natural selection—the same selection that made us desire members of the other sex.

And can Aossey go out alone, or have an unchaperoned date, or drive? I think so, for she lives in America, not Saudi Arabia. Can she wear anything she wants in public? I think so, for she lives in America, not Iran or Afghanistan. Is her testimony equal in value to a man’s in a court of law? Yes, because she lives in America, not the Middle East. By equating feminism with “modesty”—a modesty forced on women by MEN, often against women’s will—Aossey manages to at once misconstrue and devalue the kind of feminism that calls for simple freedom and equality for women.

I wonder why Aossey doesn’t move to Saudi Arabia, where she must wear a sack so she isn’t oppressed by the “patriarchy.” She’s made the HuffPo look even more stupid and regressive than it already is, and that’s a feat!

h/t: Patrick, Grania