32 Comments

Agreed that we don’t know enough to decide whether the search/raid was overreach. I do hope, however, that those who conclude a warrant was justified in this case aren’t the same ones who yell about judges and courts being “illegitimate”.

Expand full comment

Are you referring to the composition of the US Supreme Court?

Expand full comment

Or whatever court is run by a Trump appointed judge.

Expand full comment

No, the Supreme Court is a unique and disgraceful example of republican Fuckery

Expand full comment

For the umpteenth time, I’m not a Trump fan and I’m pro-choice. One man’s Fuckery (with a capital F even) is another man’s using the rules to his advantage. Your side attempts to do it all the time. But you know, I’m really tired of such uncivil discourse from a guy who apparently never belonged at a family newspaper. I’m done. I know you won’t miss me, but once the echo reaches a certain level in your little chamber, you might miss hearing reasoned points of view that are different from yours. Pro-rated refund please. Bye now.

Expand full comment

Well, you never know what's going to set people off! We're all adults here and "fuckery" is just a pretty good word to describe how Mitch McConnell trashed custom and violated the spirit of the Constitution to deny Obama a Supreme Court appointment 2016 on the grounds that an election was 9 months away, and then rushed through Trump's final appointment to the Court just weeks before the 2020 election, which accounts for a highly consequential partisan tilt to the court. Would you prefer "jiggery pokery"? Would that strike you as civil discourse? And I've been perfectly happy to have you posting here in my "little chamber." I haven't deleted one of your comments. And yes, I push back on this "both sides"-ism that posits that Republicans and Democrats have equal respect/disrespect for small-d democratic ideals and, now, the rule of law. And you usually are stout enough to push back. Now the word "fuckery" has knocked you clean off your feet? Tsk.

Expand full comment

Eric - I'm an overseas military veteran who no one has ever accused of being prudish, but I can do without vulgarity. I just feel that course language materially contributes to the onslaught of incivility in our political discourse. We can advocate our views with great passion without course language for emphasis.

Expand full comment

Have you ever weighed in on the postal service still delivering mail six days per week? It's archaic but seems to be a third rail to voters. If I was in charge I'd set a date five years from now to reduce it to three or four days which would save money.Save a government agency money.What a concept.

Expand full comment

Or better yet. Make the Post Office a fully independent, non-government corporation. That way they can make business decisions without having to fight with politicians. This would be little things like setting postage rates that cover costs, setting operating hours and locations, and offering new products. Allowing politicians to routinely meddle for their own benefit is the surest way to maintain inefficient, money losing operations with the added benefit of poor service.

Expand full comment

The United States Constitution vests the power to manage postal services (postal routes, locations of offices, etc.) but doesn't allow Congress to eliminate or privatize it.

Expand full comment

Maybe. But they have already set up the USPS as a corporation that is wholly owned by the US government with an independent governing board. They have already delegated the responsibilities to the USPS board and the board routinely makes changes, eliminations, and additions in facilities and routes. The pols jump in to meddle in operations and policy when they see it as politically advantageous. I expect that it could be established as a regulated monopoly, like utility companies. But maybe that really isn't much better.

Expand full comment

Article I Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to "establish Post Offices and post Roads," but I don't know offhand if "establish" means "manage" or "maintain as a government entity," or what if anything the courts have said if that definition has been tested.

In 2010 I wrote this: >>>>The postmaster general of the United States floated the idea of eliminating the delivery of mail on Saturdays to help boost our nation's sagging postal bottom line.

In 1957.

Tribune news archives show the idea came around again in 1962, 1975, 1977, 1981, 1987, 1992 (when Postmaster General "Carvin'" Marvin Runyon suggested going to four-day-a-week home delivery), 2001 and 2009. And no doubt there were other years when, out of sheer weariness, we didn't bother to note the re-emergence in Washington of this perpetual nonstarter.

But what was once a threat — in April of 1957 the outcry was so great when mail service was suspended for one Saturday that Congress restored it the following Monday — is now a promise.

Earlier this week, U.S. Postal Service officials, facing a shortfall of more than $7 billion this year and $238 billion in losses over the next decade, proposed a 10-year recovery plan that includes saving an estimated $40 billion by eliminating Saturday delivery.

Public use of the postal system peaked in 2006 when we mailed 213 billion items, according to USPS spokesman Dave Lewin. In the wake of the economic downturn and the increased use of electronic communications for everything from issuing party invitations to paying bills, that number dropped to 177 billion last year, and analysts expect it to fall to 150 billion by 2020, Lewin said.

So I offered this idea online: Keep Saturday delivery. Get rid of Monday through Friday.

Really. Take stock of what the postal carrier has brought you so far this week. How much of it is genuinely urgent? How much of it couldn't wait until Saturday for your attention, or couldn't have been delivered or transmitted more efficiently by some other means?

At my house it's been Newsweek and Sports Illustrated, though, arguably, with different publication deadlines, both publications could be fresh on Saturday. Readers who responded to this query when I posted it online said it was their Netflix DVDs that just couldn't wait.

Obviously, I didn't hear from any of the millions of Americans who for one reason or another don't have regular access to the Internet and so rely far more heavily on the mail than my family or online readers.

The results of my click poll — only 13 percent of 950 respondents indicated opposition to a reduction in mail service — were therefore even less scientific than usual. A Gallup Poll taken last June showing 66 percent support for the elimination of Saturday delivery almost certainly is a better reflection of public opinion.

And only 7 percent of my respondents OK'd the one-day-only idea.

So. Get rid of Monday through Friday? Not really.

But it is a place to start thinking unsentimentally about the role of mail service in a society where technology is making cards, letters, catalogs and come-ons more obsolete every day. Soon enough, those news magazines will be delivered to tablet computers, those DVD orders will be uploaded wirelessly to your home and all your checks will be deposited directly into your account.

Postal Regulatory Commission Chair Ruth Goldway testified last November to a U.S. House subcommittee that "reducing service is detrimental to mail growth and to public perception of the value of the mail system."

William Burrus, president of the American Postal Workers Union, was more thunderous in letter released in June: "Six-day delivery is deeply ingrained in the American culture," he wrote. "If enacted, history will record this act as the first step in the dismantling of the United States mail system."

Oh, stop, wait a minute. The mail system survived the transition to six-day from seven-day delivery in 1912 and the elimination of twice-a-day residential delivery in 1950. It will survive, it can only survive, if it adapts to changing realities.

If we can finally break this 53-year logjam and dump Saturday delivery once and for all, history will record this act as the first step toward solvency for the United States mail system in the 21st century.>>>>

Expand full comment

Illinois I-57 signage destination: I nominate Metropolis!

Expand full comment

I was thinking Champaign/Urbana. And I think Metropolis is actually on I24. But I also always like to see unusual names - like Onarga.

Expand full comment

Georgy Girl has kind of a Pavlovian effect on me since the first time I ever heard it was when it was used in an episode of Chris Elliot’s short lived, mostly lame but occasionally brilliant early 90s sitcom Get a Life. The premise of that show, you’ll recall was that Elliot portrayed a thirtysome year old paperboy who lived at home with his perpetually bathrobe clad parents (his father played by real life dad Bob Elliot of Bob and Ray fame). An example of the show’s brilliance was in the season two premiere in which Elliot’s character announces that he’s moving out, followed by a montage of life affirming scenes in which he prances about and basks in the glory of the great suburban outdoors, all while Georgy Girl plays on the soundtrack. If you can find a clip of this scene, please look it up; there was no bigger laugh in the entire series than the moment when Elliot encounters an adorable little girl pushing a small baby carriage down the sidewalk…….

Expand full comment

Eric, I've always been a fan of The Seekers. Judith Durham's haunting soprano, and their beautiful harmonies, filled many hours in Ann Arbor. In addition to "Georgie Girl", try "Morningtown Ride" (a children's song") and "I'll Never Find Another You". BTW- my name should show as ChuckB, not just AT&T-Yahoo Mail!

Expand full comment

Despite its signs, I-294 does not go to Wisconsin or Indiana; basically, it's entirely within Cook County. But that's how you get to Wisconsin or Indiana. The Interstate network is continental in scale, so it's reasonable for its "targets" to be places that a long-distance driver would know or aim for. Thus Memphis for I-57.

But yeah, at least in my Chicago-based social circle, most of us associate I-57 with Champaign/Urbana, and it would be reasonable for the signs to say that too.

I just had a conversation with a Lake County (IL) native who said that for ages she thought Wisconsin was west of Illinois, because of the signage on I-94.

Expand full comment

Where is the famous, long-time commenter Occam's Razor when his insights are so obviously warranted?

Expand full comment

Sitting here basking in the glory of seeing my name so many times.

Expand full comment

Did not know the name of the beguiling lead singer of the Seekers, but did remember the Seekers. The death of Judith Durham made me go to binging everything Seekers and Judith Durham, and like you discovered the wonderful "Carnival is Over." Amazing what YouTube offers. Tom Springfield was so important to the group.

Expand full comment

Sounds like you agree with the earlier Trump in inferring that Clinton’s aids were up to no good and were hiding behind the fifth.

My inference, especially in something the defense sees as politically motivated, is that the defendants aren’t going to participate at all in what they consider revenge.

Expand full comment

I do, in fact, draw a negative inference from those people taking the Fifth, which you are NOT entitled to do just because you don't trust the motives of the prosecutor (the prosecutor can offer use immunity for the testimony, so there is that). You can only invoke the Fifth when your answers would risk incriminating you. Negative inferences are common sensical, and judges must all the time remind jurors not to hold it against a person who doesn't testify in his or her own behalf.

Expand full comment

I had forgotten what the Clinton investigation was that provoked pleading the fifth. It was in both the Benghazi and servergate hearings. At the time, Democrats and the media downplayed its significance as purely political : “Democrats say that not too much should be read into Pagliano's decision not to give documents or testimony to the Benghazi Committee, which they argue is conducting the investigation solely to hurt Clinton's chances of winning the presidency.” Sounds familiar.

Expand full comment

I agree mostly, but there are so many legal nuances. A person might take the Fifth to avoid providing information that is peripheral to the specific charge. Failing to do that can bring charges like 'lying to the FBI' about actions that are not illegal. Also, in the present case with Trump, there are parallel criminal and civil litigations (which is very unusual) where it would be impossible to predict how information might be used across the two cases. Of course, the general public is free to make political judgements and draw inferences as they please. I think that the NY cases are shaky at best and arguably political, but there are possible Federal cases that will pass the test of non-partisan and significant.

Expand full comment

It may be the case that politically something fishy could be going on at the Mar-a-Lago estate, but we just don’t know until the weight of the evidence is in; but even then, political spin will likely make an adversarial media-circus out of what the findings may-or-may-not be, and all this may just end up being another insipid dose of par-for-the-course pablum dished up for an apathetic audience.

Expand full comment

Thanks to Johanna Zorn for the recommendation of Mother Country Radicals. Many of these retrospectives dull the sharp edges of the times or apply a hazy veil of nostalgia. I've only listened to the first episode, but I was a young teenager at the time and this one rings true. Zahd Dorhn doesn't shy from the radicalism ("Revolutionary violence is the only way") and casual misogyny of the Weathermen and similar groups but also put them in contrast to the Vietnam War and civil rights struggle. He declares that he's more interested in the complexities of human behavior than idealism and that comes through. But that must have been difficult, given that he's largely talking about his own parents. It also offers another reminder of how these conflicts still echo today. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Expand full comment

Eric, something that you might need to add to the 'I was wrong list'. I have recently seen a number of people shaking hands. Including me, when I met a nice couple the man offered his hand, which I immediately shook and then his wife did the same. I also haven't seen any fist bumps or elbow bumps lately. The fear/stigma may be wearing off. But I bet if I had offered a fist, the other guy would have switched without any sense of ill manners. Especially since they were young and I'm old.

Expand full comment

I also listened to the Mincing Rascals and was not surprised by your reaction to Nascar. They have been trying to build a Chicago audience for years. There have been several oval locations. https://wgntv.com/sports/nascar_in_chicago/nascars-history-of-racing-in-the-chicago-area/

Nascar also expanded to road courses some years ago and runs four or five per year. Chicago will be the first street course and replaces the Road America road-course race. Most street courses also have supporting races of sports cars or trucks to add interest and multiday ticket sales. There are also ticket sales for pit passes and qualifying; so it is more than just the race. Nascar claims Chicago is a 'top 3' market for their fans. The course was designed by the iracing racing simulation company and was designed to have good passing zones. They even ran a simulation race with real Nascar drivers last year to test the layout. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX4OsQIUrTg

I agree that the process and the deal that Lightfoot made are lousy.

Expand full comment