Teresa Davey is now the third potential candidate.  Thanks to Redheaded Blackbelt for the information.

So far, all three candidates are from the Sohum hills (though Davey is on the north end of the Second District hills).  Will somebody from Fortuna step up or will they just leave the race to the hippies?

Point of clarification – there is no “splitting the vote” in BOS elections.  Nobody gets elected in the primary unless somebody collects more than half of the votes cast, so either the front runner has enough votes to win or he or she doesn’t.  It doesn’t matter how the rest of the votes are split.  And of course, if nobody gets over 50 percent, then there is a runoff between the top two vote-getters in November.  One caveat is that due to a quirk in the law anyone can run in the run-off as a write-in, even if they didn’t participate in the primary, as Johanna Rodoni did in 2008.

In past elections Estelle has done well in the northern portion of the District having built solid relationships with the Chamber crowd in and around Fortuna.  I think they saw her as the best chance to defeat Cliff Clendenen in 2012 as she was pretty much guaranteed a win in Sohum, all she had to do was win big in the conservative areas such as Hydesville and Rio Dell, and do respectably against the favorite son in Fortuna, and she pulled it off and hasn’t looked back.  But since 2008 nobody from the northern part of the Second District has run.  Will Estelle’s coalition hold?  Is she their person?  Or will someone in Fortuna step up?  Fortuna isn’t as conservative as it was a decade ago.  Will a Fortuna progressive run?  I think Estelle’s biggest worry is a more conservative run which could duplicate the 2008 results if one of her progressive opponents does well in changing Fortuna.

And maybe I’m being presumptuous.  Is Davey progressive?  What does that even mean these days?  Nathan Wise is definitely progressive.

Anyway, yes, it’s that time again.  Although it’s much earlier than it used to be.  When a group of Second District progressives drafted Clif Clendenen in 2007, it was nearly fall before he declared.  Actually, I think his kick-off was in December.

Calls for impeachment.  

I’m sure we’ll hear all about how he isn’t a “real Republican” from people who’ve never heard of him until today.

From the local campaign:
Greetings All,
Just a friendly reminder that Bernie 2020 Humboldt’s next monthly meeting is this Sunday, May 19th from noon – 2pm at the Labor Temple in Eureka, 840 E St. Please join us, invite friends/family, and share the Event (link below) on Facebook.
The major items on the agenda include:
  • Bernie’s campaign app, called BERN – how to use it and do we want to start canvassing early with it?
  • Bernie’s next nationwide Community Canvas is June 1st. He wants us to make a big public barnstorm event. We have been tossing around the idea of having a sign making party. Local artists, Pat Kanzler and Susan Morton, who painted signs for Steve Madrone’s Supervisor campaign have made stencils for others to use. We have a spot and tentatively have this planned for the following weekend.
Here’s a link to Bernie’s app, BERN: https://app.berniesanders.com/
Here’s a link to webinar-style training for the BERN app:  https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/422344805034623245
Link to Event page on Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/groups/569116606615198/
In Solidarity,

Don’t read below the fold if you don’t want spoilers!


Read the rest of this entry »

Chuck Rogers and I will discuss trade wars, subpoena wars, wars against space pirates, wars against a woman’s right to choose, and potential war with Iran on All Things Reconsidered tonight at 7:00.

The scary part is that it’s not satire.

Apparently Trump’s attorneys are arguing that Congress has no legal basis for oversight of the Executive Branch.  I’m surprised they aren’t citing Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan as legal authority!


The following comes from MSNBC:


“U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta took some time to test the scope of the argument. The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank highlighted one of the key exchanges from the courtroom:

Mehta, an Obama appointee, probed for the limits of this breathtaking theory but found none: Trump’s finances are not subject to investigation?

“Correct,” Consovoy informed the judge.

Congress can’t verify the accuracy of the president’s financial statements?


If “a president was involved in some corrupt enterprise, you mean to tell me because he is the president of the United States, Congress would not have power to investigate?”

No, Consovoy said, because that’s “not pursuant to its legislative agenda.”

Of course, by this reasoning, Congress’ Watergate investigation was itself illegal. When the judge yesterday asked specifically whether Nixon’s corrupt enterprise should’ve been shielded from congressional scrutiny, Trump’s lawyer hedged, saying he’d “have to look” at some of specific questions surrounding the controversy.

Or put another way, according to the president’s attorneys, the Watergate hearings may have been unconstitutional, but he’d need to do some additional research before giving a definitive answer.”

For the record, the Supreme Court decision to force Nixon to cough up the tapes was decided 8-0.

They are weighing whether their ban on cannabis makes any sense in the changing local economy.

I’m actually with mixed feelings.  I don’t think the emphasis on legal dope growing is good for the County’s future.  We really need something else.

On the other hand, the resistance is purely cultural.

Anticipation mounts.

By request from a regular – this thread is for the topic.  WoP seems to think it’s the Democrats who should fear a Mueller testimony.  Perhaps, but right now it’s the Democratic Party pushing for it and GOP opposed.

This time to the Lumberjack. 

The source said the decision to not indict Kyle Zoellner was based on self-defense, but to their understanding the grand jury’s task was to vote only on murder or manslaughter. On April 19, 2017 Zoellner pled “not guilty” to a charge of murder and was released on May 5, 2017 after Humboldt County Superior Court Judge Dale Reinholsten said evidence was insufficient to hold him.

Buckingham never told the grand jury that Zoellner made a claim of self-defense in the murder of Lawson, according to the source. During the preliminary hearing on May 4, 2017, Arcata Police Department Detective Todd Dockweiler was asked by Assistant District Attorney Roger Reese if Zoellner thought about pulling out a knife because he was getting beaten up. Zoellner said “he wouldn’t do that” and “he would rather take a beating than stab someone,” Dockweiler said. The mention of self-defense was never made.

David Wise, a San Francisco criminal defense attorney, said a grand jury’s objective is to decide whether or not there is probable cause and enough evidence to indict or not indict a person who may have committed a crime. Wise has 26 years of legal experience and went on to say if a defendant never claims self-defense but claims innocence, then that is a decision for a regular jury, not a grand jury.

“They can decide the acts they heard can determine the murder was malicious, but they wouldn’t say it was because of self-defense,” Wise said. “The grand jury is there to decide on either indictment or no indictment, and self-defense never comes into play.”


May 2019
« Apr