Monday morning, Ok. Overnight, Trump’s new lawyer announced that he’ll be refusing the subpoena to explain Russian electoral interference, a man ate a hamburger and another was hit in the groin. #News.
Donald Trump’s lawyer Rudy Guliani (yes, really) may ignore Russian probe.
When I read the title of this piece on the newswire, I thought it was a misprint: “Donald Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani says President could ignore subpoena in Russia probe”. It seems to be an odd thing to be an actual thing. But, a thing it is as ex-Noo Yawk Mayor Rudy Guliani is now Donald Trump’s personal presidential lawyer. Now, the presidential lawyer is not a Trump invention (although it sounds like something he’d make up), as Barack had one too, but the reason why I had to Google that was because I don’t remember Obama’s people loudly stating that the Prez can loudly ignore the long-awaited (and much threatened) subpoena to discuss the Russian interference in the US election.
Guliani flatly planted: “We don’t have to. He’s the President of the United States…we can assert the same privilege as other presidents have.” To that end, Lawyer Rudy has not ruled out taking that fifth amendment (which is defined thusly: The Fifth Amendment prohibits government officials from abusing their authority during legal proceedings. It also protects individuals from self-incrimination. When an individual chooses to plead the fifth, he/she cannot be required to answer any questions or provide any information that may incriminate him/her.)
Now, this poses two problems. A) Because it enables the following assumption:
Avenatti on Giuliani’s interview: “An absolute, unmitigated disaster for Rudy Giuliani and the president… I think it is obvious to the American people that this is a cover-up; that they are making it up as they go along.” (via ABC) pic.twitter.com/VRd4SYfugb
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) 6 May 2018
The Fifth Amendment protects defendants in a court of law. It doesn’t protect people in the court of public opinion. The fact that Rudy Giuliani stated @realDonaldTrump may take the Fifth Amendment suggests Trump has done bad things that he wants to hide from the American people. https://t.co/d05CL12Pj6
— Ted Lieu (@tedlieu) 6 May 2018
And B, because it directly contradicts what Donald said back in 2016, attacking Hillary for taking the Fifth during a congressional investigation into her use private email server as secretary of state, stating: “The mob takes the Fifth Amendment,” Mr Trump said. “If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?”
Man eats 30,000th Big Mac, sets record, populace straight.
Anyone who sat through the two-hour long body shaming that was Super Size Me will be mildly familiar with the dude who ate a Big Mac every day, because it’s part of that balanced individual’s balanced diet. Now, Morgan Spurlock might have packed his camera away, and moved to the world of One Direction and limp sexual harassment apology notes, but the Big Mac dude continues in earnest. In fact, Don Gorske has recently polished off his 30,000th morsel, beginning his daily odyssey all the way back in 1972. He completed this feat under the eyes of strangers, staff, and the dorks from Guinness. Which must have been a strange experience. Who watches someone eat? Just one more bite to go, folks!
It’s one for the history books. He’s done it. Local folk hero Don Gorske has eaten his 30,000th Big Mac. Let the record show it took place 3:30pm at the Fond du Lac @McDonalds. He cautions this may be his last milestone, projecting 40,000 would come in 2032. #SuperSizeMe #WISN12 pic.twitter.com/4rJ5lTCYui
— Nick Bohr (@NickBohrWISN) May 4, 2018
He seems a man of great, simple devotion. Both in keeping his culinary and follicle preference since the dawn of the 1970s. Congratulations to you Don. Perhaps, and I’m just throwing this out here, but I’ve long suspected those who live a simple life, those not crippled by a desire to change the world, or add consonants to their title are living life properly. A constant repetition of a single daily act that makes you happy. Perhaps that’s it. Maybe the meaning of it all is finding your subjective Big Mac.
Journalism dies thanks to a baseball to the groin. Cue zany sound effect.
Sometimes the importance of a story is not what it is, but rather how it is reported. For instance, everyone remembers (or remembers it from a YouTube hole they fell into) how the death of JFK was announced back in 1963. Walter Cronkite obviously decaying from the impossible news he feels he has no choice but to share, retrieving his glasses from his stooped head, presenting the coldest of facts in the numbest of tones. Memorable, yet awful. An articulated moment that will live forever.
With that in mind, yesterday another shot was fired, this time from the loft of a pitcher’s mound, striking catcher in the hairiest of knolls, consigning another American immigrant icon to the dirt. How it was reported, however, is worth mentioning.
How old media vs new media tackle a delicate situation. pic.twitter.com/XX6xWElt2z
— Paul McLeod (@pdmcleod) May 6, 2018
RIP Journalism, you old goat.