Almost a month old, but still relevant to the process of decently nominating and appointing people to federal judgeships.

Walter Mondale, having written an editorial for a Minnesota daily newspaper of general circulation in the state. Stating a reasoned belief that Al Franken's blocking a overly partisan nominee was simply the right and proper thing for Franken to have done. A sort of "Bravo, Al" item, but with a sagacious explanation of existant protocol and manners, beyond that.

A settled case is going to stay settled? [UPDATED]

Litigation should settle. In settling nobody gets entirely what was desired, but sufficiency means move on to other matters. Turn the other cheek, bury the hatchet, however it might be phrased.

Image is from this reporting.

When the Trump Brand makes news, is it fake news? Real news? Something between reality and fiction, reality and ideals?

_______________UPDATE_______________
The link in the photo caption links here, where early in the item this excerpt occured:

In one email, according to four people who have seen it, the Trumps discussed how to coordinate false information they had given to prospective buyers. In another, according to a person who read the emails, they worried that a reporter might be onto them. In yet another, Donald, Jr. spoke reassuringly to a broker who was concerned about the false statements, saying that nobody would ever find out, because only people on the email chain or in the Trump Organization knew about the deception, according to a person who saw the email.

There was “no doubt” that the Trump children “approved, knew of, agreed to, and intentionally inflated the numbers to make more sales,” one person who saw the emails told us. “They knew it was wrong.”

In 2010, when the Major Economic Crimes Bureau of the D.A.’s office opened an investigation of the siblings, the Trump Organization had hired several top New York criminal defense lawyers to represent Donald, Jr. and Ivanka. These attorneys had met with prosecutors in the bureau several times. They conceded that their clients had made exaggerated claims, but argued that the overstatements didn’t amount to criminal misconduct.

No prosecution seems a bottom line of the Trump-Soho saga. Is old news good news? And, what is a material misstatement of a present fact, which differs from a statement of a future expectation or a future hope? And how does one prove any intent to deceive? All such questions are a part of prosecutorial discretion, and usually are nuanced rather than clear beyond any reasonable doubt.

_____________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
The prosecutor who declined to prosecute was Cyrus Vance, Jr. Cyrus Vance,Sr. was Secretary of State under Jimmy Carter. You can do some web searching. There are Yale and Georgetown ties. Boarding school. Clinton and Trump had a phone conversation at the initiation of Trump running for office. Ferreting out possible ties and concessions is a big ball of sticky taffy, so have a pull.

____________FURTHER UPDATE______________
The Independent published a parallel report.

Guardian:

Here and here.

WWAWAPSS?

What Would Abigale Whelan and Peggy Scott Say? Their Republican Pennsylvania choice hating colleague "doing as he says?"

Sponsor divisive BS, vote always in lockstep with party leadership - that seems the way of the two ladies; reelected; who knows why?

And, last, ongoing marketing of the "Trump Brand" and a target audience of shoppers - seemingly Whelan contemporaries in age and spirit? Same smile.

Shop Now, suckers. Guess who's waiting and what mischief may follow.

BONUS QUESTION: Should Donald J. Trump remind you of Rufus T. Firefly? In terms of mood and capability to make Freedonia great again?

Hegseth. Less would be more.

Does he kneel for his FOX paycheck? He seems to bark on command. Here, here and here.

Well? He and Sarah Palin should hold a dumb-in. Like a sit-in, but aimed differently. And,

Bad joke? Fake news? Or Oh-my-God real?

Tom Price was honed in his vision to serve the most needy. His motto, "Neediness begins at home."

YouTube, this link.

How about early on the enthusiastic HHS staff crowd's enthusiasm? Off and on, the video showing the audience. Heartwarming, there's no other word for it. A lead-in intro, watch that person into future appointment mischief. Price speaks. Pence speaks. Suits especially seem in tune. Some, but not all audience suits. Watch the crowd shots, few as they are. Tepid applause? You decide.

This link. This one. Another. In terms of that first link, its headline, go back to the video, at about 7 min min into it, talk of individual coverage cost, and at 8:20 or so, mention of a "patient centered" healthcare approach as if Tom Price, not Romney and Heritiage Foundation invented it. This websearch.

More spreading, here. Finally --
Tune time.

UPDATE: History has a way of staying on the books, despite it's turns and tricks and the irony of rebranded backlash rhetoric. Pence is more a biblical scholar and story teller than an accuracy focused historian, while Price knows travel more than travail.

FURTHER: This online analysis; linked to in a NYT Krugman item. Krugman wrote:

The essence of Obamacare, as of Romneycare, is a three-legged stool of regulation and subsidies: community rating requiring insurers to make the same policies available to everyone regardless of health status; an individual mandate, requiring everyone to purchase insurance, so that healthy people don’t opt out; and subsidies to keep insurance affordable for those with lower incomes.

The original Heritage plan from 1989 had all these features.

These days, Heritage strives mightily to deny the obvious; it picks at essentially minor differences between what it used to advocate and the plan Democrats actually passed, and tries to make them seem like a big deal. But this is disinformation. The essential features of the ACA — above all, the mandate — are ideas Republicans used to support.

FURTHER: The essence of both Romney's and Obama's half-assed things is NOT taking the profiteering insurance leeches out of the equation; NOT standing tall on Big Pharma to cease gouging; NOT policing bill kiting by the HMO providing network. NOT, NOT, NOT. Zero as a real answer to the long overdue need of a nation for Single Payer Healthcare As A Right just as civilized nations back in the 20th Century started to provide their populace, as a sane and humane thing.

More on Tina Liebling for Governor - given a timely Strib item.

Here, Strib publishing, "Legal marijuana debate will light up 2018 campaign -- A full-throated debate over full legalization in this state has seemed to be a question of when, not if. September 29, 2017 — 6:44pm," by Lori Sturdevant; stating in part:

Ever since Colorado allowed the legal sale of weed five years ago and the Minnesota Legislature said yes to medical marijuana two years later, a full-throated debate over full legalization in this state has seemed to be a question of when, not if.

An answer is emerging: 2018. Five of the six most active DFL candidates to succeed the retiring DFL Gov. Mark Dayton have said they favor legalizing marijuana for more than medical use. Only State Auditor Rebecca Otto says she’s opposed.

Per usual in a culture war skirmish, the Republicans in the race are lining up on the other side. All four of the top announced candidates say they oppose legalizing pot.

My bet: That difference won’t be campaign background noise. It’ll be an everyday talking point, with each side employing it in the belief that it can usefully distract voters from messier matters while inspiring them to go to the polls and smite the culturally clueless opposition.

I base that prediction on observations both ancient and recent. Through the years, Minnesotans have been as prone as other Americans to get revved up and choose up sides over matters like religion, race, reproduction, guns, gender roles, immigrant assimilation and, quite often, intoxicants.

[...] “A lot of people in our generation realize that the prohibition of marijuana is a failed policy,” agreed DFL gubernatorial candidate and state Rep. Tina Liebling, [...]. “It’s definitely true that a lot of younger people want this changed. But support for legalization is broader than we might think.”

Liebling would know. Among the five DFL candidates for governor who want pot prohibition ended, she’s the one to have introduced a bill to that effect in the Legislature. She’s an attorney from Rochester who says she has seen in her criminal defense work the detrimental impact of the nation’s war on drugs on people’s lives.

“I’m not saying that marijuana is harmless,” Liebling said, who added that she’s not a user herself. “But there are a lot of things in life that are not harmless that we allow to be sold.” Legalization would bring a number of benefits, she said. “People could know what they are buying, where it came from and how potent it is. I believe we could also do a better job of keeping it away from kids.”

[...] Liebling cited estimates that Minnesotans are already spending a jaw-dropping $700 million a year buying pot on the black market, where there is no age limit on sales.

And where there are no taxes paid. Last year, Colorado collected $200 million in tax revenue on marijuana sales.

[links in original] And as with abortion, the Repbulicans who give lip-service to freedom and liberty, are aligned against yet another liberty of free choice. Go figure that. Words can confuse, policies are clear.

After learning more about Liebling, her early and steadfast backing of the Bernie Sanders presidential bid, and visiting her campaign website, she is who I intend voting for during caucusing DFL [while actually an independent unless/until the party renounces superdelegates and moves off the dime to the left of Republican lite]. And if there is a primary with Liebling in it, she'd have my vote there also.

Becky Otto, before Thissen announced, was an early choice, but her wrong straddle on legalization along with Thissen's entry into the contest and learning more about Liebling puts her in third place in my outlook. She'd be a fine governor, nobody can really doubt that, but so would Liebling or Thissen - indeed anyone who could fog a mirror and not be Republican would do. But the three, Liebling, Thissen, and Otto seem sound - Otto's primary appeal - to me and perhaps others - being who her enemies in the DFL are starting early in the alphabet, at "B" to late in the alphabet, "T." (hint: Home, Home on the Range)

........................

Earlier Strib April 2, 2017, reporting on Liebling's announcing her candidacy, here; Liebling's Wikipdia page, here; and Liebling's campaign website:

https://www.tinaliebling.com/

ISSUES: https://www.tinaliebling.com/issues

VOLUNTEER: https://www.tinaliebling.com/volunteer

DONATE: https://www.tinaliebling.com/donate

Tina Liebling and Husband, Dr. Mark Liebow
Presumably both favor Universal Healthcare as a right

Last; see the sidebar LIEBLING item, click the image and read - ON THE ISSUES LIEBLING RINGS A PERFECT TEN!