Patterico's Pontifications

6/9/2015

Marco Rubio And His Fabulously Extravagant “Luxury Speedboat” (UPDATE: Rubio’s Response To NYT)

Filed under: General — Dana @ 6:03 pm

[guest post by Dana]

Marco Rubio’s financial history is the latest focus of the New York Times’ effort to smear analyze candidate Rubio. As such, the paper of record claims that Rubio, upon receiving an $800,000 advance for his book, splurged on an $80,000 “luxury speedboat”.

Except that isn’t entirely accurate:

Rubio spokesperson Alex Conant sent POLITICO a link to a website showing the make and model of the boat Rubio owns: an EdgeWater 245CC Deep-V Center Console. The manufacturer, Edgewater, notes that the boat is perfect for “safety-minded family boaters and avid anglers.” In a place like Miami, home to billionaires and stars who have multimillion-dollar yachts, an “$80,000 luxury boat” can seem like a contradiction.

Rubio’s campaign said his boat purchase included two new 150-horsepower 4-stroke Yamaha engines, a relatively standard amount of horsepower. According to eBay, each engine could cost as much as $16,000 — making the value of the boat hull itself less than $80,000.

Here is the “luxury speedboat” – commonly known as an offshore fishing boat:

Untitled-1

Further, according to the NYT, the Rubios shockingly “struggled under the weight of student debt” until it was paid off.

What a couple of suckers. Am I right, Lee Siegel?

At the least, they could have started a foundation. I hear those are fairly profitable.

Clearly, these Rubios are not creative thinkers.

And just an fyi: John Kerry’s yacht is 87 times more expensive, and over 3 times the size of Rubio’s “luxury speedboat”.

Dana

UPDATE: Marco Rubio is now fundraising off the New York Times’ hit pieces (traffic tickets and personal finances). Seems to be working out well for the campaign:

[T]he Rubio campaign attributes $100,000 in online fundraising in the past five days to a backlash against NYT articles about Rubio’s driving record and personal finances.

Here is Rubio’s letter sent to supporters:

Untitled-1

R.I.P Vincent Bugliosi

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:59 am

A great man has passed:

The man who prosecuted one of the most notorious American criminals of the 20th century before writing the definitive history of those crimes is gone.

Vincent Bugliosi, who put Charles Manson behind bars, has died of cancer at 80.

“He was a workaholic,” his son, Vincent Bugliosi Jr., said, as NBC 4 in Los Angeles reported. “What was remarkable was he always found time for everyone who needed work.”

Bugliosi’s track record as a Los Angeles prosecutor was remarkable: convictions in 105 of 106 felony jury trials, including 21 murder cases.

Bugliosi wrote or co-wrote several books, including some that are famous (Helter Skelter) and others that were less well known but equally compelling (And the Sea Will Tell). I read them all — up until the 2000s, when his books became ore about wild political claims than the detailed and compelling narratives he had previously written. (I’m going to ignore those in this post and concentrate on the many positive aspects of the man’s life.)

I admired Bugliosi greatly as a prosecutor. His tenaciousness and preparation were a role model for any Deputy D.A., especially one working in Los Angeles. One day I was looking at the dust jacket on one of Bugliosi’s book, and I realized that I had tried (and obtained convictions in) more murder cases than Bugliosi. It was a jarring but proud moment that felt like one of the larger milestones of my career, to realize that in some sense I had measured up to someone I had idolized.

That said, few if any will ever match Bugliosi’s nearly undefeated record in felony trials generally, a record that says something about the forcefulness and persuasiveness of his manner. Bugliosi was always dead convinced of his position, but he didn’t simply win through attitude and bluster. If you had an issue with the prosecution’s version of events, he would come back and knock you in the head with, not one, not two, but a good five reasons why that objection was ridiculous. And his reasons would make sense. And he would proceed to destroy your other arguments in the same way.

Bugliosi accomplished something important with the prosecution of Charles Manson — a feat which may seem easy in retrospect, given Manson’s evident criminal lunacy on display in prison, but which actually required detailed investigation and a clear, meticulous presentation. Remember, Manson wasn’t even at the scene of the Tate murders, and did not kill anyone personally in the LaBianca murders.

I attended a book signing for “Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy,” which is essentially the Bible of the Kennedy assassination. I can’t claim to have read it all, but I have looked up the passages addressing some of the more common conspiracy theories. Each is comprehensively addressed in Bugliosi’s withering, fact-based style.

I had the good fortune to attend a book signing for this book when it came out. My mom was in town, and we both watched Bugliosi address the questions from the conspiracy theorists who formed an unsettlingly large part of the audience. They seemed unhinged, and I frankly worried for his safety. Still, it was the closest thing conceivable to personally watching him in trial. He had a full command of all the facts and let them have it between the eyes every time.

I once wrote Bugliosi a letter asking where I could find the full-length version of the mock trial of Lee Harvey Oswald that he did with Gerry Spence. He wrote me back a two-page handwritten note that I still have somewhere, saying that he would lend it to me, but he was using it to write “Reclaiming History.” (I ended up purchasing an abbreviated version on DVD that I commend to anyone interested in watching Bugliosi the trial attorney in action, and/or to anyone interested in the Kennedy assassination. Bugliosi and Spence question many of the actual witnesses from the case, and it truly is a slice of history.)

I can’t immediately find that note, which I still have somewhere, but tonight, if I can figure out how to keep the image from being on its side, I’ll update the post with the signature page from my copy of “Reclaiming History.” (I’ll put the sideways version I have now in the comments.)

R.I.P.

UPDATE: Here is the beginning of that mock trial. It’s worth watching.

Salon Sneers At Jerry Seinfeld’s Take On Political Correctness Because Hurt Feelings

Filed under: General — Dana @ 7:52 am

[guest post by Dana]

Comedian Jerry Seinfeld doesn’t like political correctness. He really doesn’t like it:

“I don’t play colleges, but I hear a lot of people tell me, ‘Don’t go near colleges. They’re so PC,'” said Seinfeld.

He continued, “I’ll give you an example: My daughter’s 14. My wife says to her, ‘Well, you know, in the next couple years, I think maybe you’re going to want to be hanging around the city more on the weekends, so you can see boys.’ You know what my daughter says? She says, ‘That’s sexist.’”

Seinfeld said college students don’t understand racism and sexism. “They just want to use these words: ‘That’s racist;’ ‘That’s sexist;’ ‘That’s prejudice.’ They don’t even know what the f—k they’re talking about.”

And just like humorless college students everywhere taking themselves way too seriously, so also do the adults at Salon:


(via Iowahawk Twitter)

And just so you know, according to Salon, Clint Eastwood’s Caitlyn Jenner joke was “insensitive”. So please wipe that grin off your face.

–Dana

Hillary Clinton’s Women’s Empowerment Project Accepted Millions In Donations From Powerful Man Accused Of Sexually Abusing Women

Filed under: General — Dana @ 6:30 am

[guest post by Dana]

The Clinton Foundation is back in the news. Once again, and to nobody’s surprise, it’s nothing good:

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s “No Ceilings” women’s empowerment project at the Clinton Foundation accepted a $5 million commitment last December from a Swiss billionaire even as his lawyers were fighting in federal court to hide his darkest secret — a long record of sexually abusing women.

Ironically, the “No Ceilings” women’s empowerment project was established because “even today, persistent stereotypes and barriers keep women from equal access, representation, and compensation in our communities and around the world.”

Hansjorg Wyss, whose net worth is estimated at 6.1 billion dollars and longtime Democratic supporter and patron of liberal groups, was accused of “brutally” and sexually abusing his employee, Jacqueline Long. At issue in federal court was her 1.5 million dollar settlement of the suit brought against him.

Upon discovering Wyss’s donation to the Clinton Foundation, Long attempted to warn them, but to no avail:

Long sent the Clinton Foundation a letter and supporting documents last December to warn the former secretary of state and first lady about Wyss. The envelope, which had been opened, was returned to Long. Written in bold on the outside were the words, “Will Not Accept.”

According to the report:

Long filed a police report with the Morris Township Police Department on April 3, 2011, following an especially brutal sexual assault by Wyss at the Governor Morris Hotel when she tried to break off the relationship.

“He sexually assaulted me – me screaming no (to) stop it,” she wrote in her own hand writing in a statement to police that was obtained by TheDCNF.

She charged that he “almost suffocated me by putting his fist in my mouth. I struggled and pushed. I thought for sure he was going to kill me,” she wrote to police. She also charged he roughly penetrated her with a vibrator.

Long filed a 2012 EEOC complaint against Wyss, charging she “has been the victim of sexual harassment, a sexually hostile work environment, quid pro quo discrimination and sexual discrimination,” according to a copy of the complaint obtained by TheDCNF.

Further, Wyss faced another complaint back in 2000:

Diane E. Bailey, another former Wyss employee, filed a federal lawsuit against Wyss in 2000, charging that he created a hostile work environment for women at Synthes, then a U.S. subsidiary of a Swiss medical devices corporation.

Bailey described an incident in which Wyss showed Synthes’ employees a slide show from a vacation and repeatedly pointed out pictures of male sex organs that were included.

Although Bailey lost her case claiming employment discrimination, the judge noted that the sexually offensive incidents she cited were “undisputed by the defendants.” The defendants included Wyss personally, his company and his foundations

Note: Wyss was the CEO of the firm as well as its major stockholder.

The Clinton Foundation has declined to respond to inquiries about the foundation’s failure to vet big donors, and about accepting the sizable gift from Wyss.

Clearly, as long as the check clears, Hillary doesn’t care where foundation money comes from or who is behind the donations. Because empowerment.

–Dana


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1888 secs.