Prosecution and defence lay out opening statements on first day of Conrad Murray manslaughter trial in Los Angeles More than two years after Michael Jackson’s death from an overdose of a powerful surgical anaesthetic, the irrepressible circus surrounding the King of Pop was back in full swing as the personal physician who attended to him in his dying hours stood trial for involuntary manslaughter. Fans with gold “MJ” armbands and T-shirts bearing the silkscreen likeness of their idol crammed the courthouse in downtown Los Angeles for a glimpse of courtroom entourage and a shot at one of the few open seats in the public gallery. Bloggers, gossip columnists and news crews were also out in force, just as they were at Jackson’s child molestation trial in 2005 and at the rehearsals for the ill-fated final tour – hauntingly named This Is It – that never took place in 2009. Inside Judge Michael Pastor’s courtroom, lawyers for the prosecution and the defence laid out their opening statements – one asserting that Conrad Murray was single-handedly responsible for Jackson’s death and the other placing the blame squarely on Jackson himself. In attendance were Jackson’s parents, Joe and Katherine, and his magician, Majestic Magnificent. The mood, however, was appropriately sombre. David Walgren, representing the district attorney’s office, offered a brisk narrative using a video monitor with still photographs, charts, extracts from voicemail and other recordings. “The acts and omissions of Michael Jackson’s personal doctor, Conrad Murray, directly led to his premature death at the age of 50,” Walgren said. “He … repeatedly acted with gross negligence, repeaedly denied appropriate care to his patient … it was Dr Murray’s repeated incompetent and unskilled acts that led to Michael Jackon’s death.” Grim photos of Jackson lying dead in a hospital bed were juxtaposed with a picture of the singer rehearsing the day before his death. Walgren offered evidence showing that Murray ordered a staggering 15.5 litres of the surgical anaesthetic propofol in the last two and half months of the singer’s life. Walgren alleged that Murray relied on the drug – which Jackson referred to as his “milk” – to get the singer to sleep every night, even though it has no known application as a sleeping aid, and routinely administered it without monitoring equipment to check Jackson’s response. The prosecutor described how Murray realised he had lost his patient – apparently while he was on the phone to a cocktail waitress he regarded as his girlfriend – on the morning of 25 June 2009. This was just moments after he emailed an insurance agent for Jackson’s upcoming tour and said that press reports of health problems were entirely “fallacious”. Walgren said Murray did not ask his girlfriend, Sade Anding, to call the emergency services. Nor did he ask Jackson’s personal assistant, Michael Williams, when they spoke about 20 minutes later. Instead, according to the prosecutor, Murray said “Mr Jackson had a bad reaction” and urged Williams to come over to the star’s plush hillside mansion right away. When the paramedics who eventually arrived asked Murray what he had given Jackson, he made no mention of propofol. Nor did he mention it to the emergency room team at UCLA Medical Center where Jackson was pronounced dead shortly after. Only two days after Jackson’s death, according to Walgren, did he acknowledge to the police that he had administered the drug – and then said he had injected just 25 mg, diluted with another drug called lidocaine. “The evidence will reveal that much more than 25mg was given to put Michael Jackson to sleep,” Walgren told the jury. Murray himself, crisply dressed in a pale shirt and blue tie, showed no reaction as Walgren painted him as a man willing to abandon his medical responsibilities to earn a lucrative $150,000 per month paycheck. He was equally impassive as Walgren described his activities in the minutes after realising Jackson was dead. The prosecutor characterised him as a man frantic not to be caught. Walgren described how Alberto Alvarez, who also worked for Jackson, came into the upstairs bedroom where Jackson’s lifeless body was laid out on the all-white bed covers and saw Murray administering CPR with one hand. Murray, according to Alvarez’s testimony, told him to grab a bag and started filling it with medicine vials and a saline bag which he told Alvarez to get rid of. Alvarez was also struck by the sight of a catheter running out of Jackson’s penis – a urine-collecting device usually used on patients knocked unconscious for major surgery. A jug of urine sat on a chair, and the jacket and trousers Jackson had worn to a rehearsal the night before lay strewn on the floor. For the defence, Ed Chernoff – from Murray’s home of Houston, Texas – took issue with almost every assertion from Walgren. He alleged that, just before he died, Jackson swallowed eight bottles of a drug called lorazepam, enough to knock out six adults. Chernoff also asserted that Jackson gave himself a dose of propofol on top of that, while Murray was out of the room, creating a “perfect storm in his body that killed him instantly”. “There was no CPR, no doctor, no paramedic, no machine that was going to revive Michael Jackson,” Chernoff said. “He died so rapidly, so instantly, he didn’t have time to close his eyes.” In contrast to the prosecution’s presentation, with its reliance on documents and charts, Chernoff appeared to be in the realm of plausible scenarios rather than verifiable fact. He offered just one low-tech card on an easel, with two questions written on it: “How did Michael Jackson get to the point?” and “What happened when Dr Murray was out of the room?” Unfortunately for him, the “Michael” in Michael Jackson was spelled wrong. United States Michael Jackson Michael Jackson trial Andrew Gumbel guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Health Lottery set up by media tycoon Richard Desmond has been criticised for not giving enough money to charity Express newspapers chief Richard Desmond has been urged to increase the amount of cash his new “health lottery”, launched on Tuesday, will raise for good causes after the sweepstake was branded a “disgraceful development” by a leading charity figure. The new lottery – run by Desmond’s Northern & Shell, which also owns Channel 5 – offers a £100,000 top prize for matching five numbers out of 50. Tickets will cost £1, with 20.3p of the price going back into local health projects across the country. Charity organisations warned that this was the bare minimum that a lottery provider could donate from ticket sales – whereas the National Lottery gives 28p in every pound to good causes. Sir Stephen Bubb of the Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations told the Guardian it was a “disgraceful new development”. He pointed out that the operator would raise only £50m a year – compared with National Lottery operator Camelot, which gave £270m to health causes a few years ago. Given that Camelot announced record ticket sales of £5.8bn last year, it is estimated the amount going to health charities is now closer to £350m. “This whole thing is deeply unhelpful,” said Bubb. “[Richard Desmond] is giving less to charity and also can make a profit from people who think they are giving to charity. They will force charities to duplicate a whole bureaucracy that has grown up after 17 years of the National Lottery. It will just take away business from Camelot’s lottery which gives more money to health.” Ben Kernighan, the deputy chief executive at the National Council for Voluntary Organisations , said that he “understood that when a lottery starts up there are upfront costs. Once you reach a certain volume of sales those costs are not there and we would expect providers to maximise the amount going to good causes.” He added that Desmond was “offering just above the legal minimum in terms of contribution. We’d like that to increase over time. Really the best way to give to charities is to do so directly”. Desmond’s company argues that the new lottery will grow the market – with the live draw to be shown on ITV1 and Channel 5 each Saturday from 8 October. Players matching three numbers will win £50 and those with four numbers will get £500. Martin Hall, chief executive of the new venture said: “The health lottery game is a fresh new alternative which has one single good cause at its heart – health. “We will be offering people the opportunity to win a life-changing amount of money while at the same time contributing to tackling real health issues in their own communities. “It is an exciting new launch which will benefit every community in Britain.” Richard Desmond Express Newspapers National Lottery Newspapers & magazines Health Randeep Ramesh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Health Lottery set up by media tycoon Richard Desmond has been criticised for not giving enough money to charity Express newspapers chief Richard Desmond has been urged to increase the amount of cash his new “health lottery”, launched on Tuesday, will raise for good causes after the sweepstake was branded a “disgraceful development” by a leading charity figure. The new lottery – run by Desmond’s Northern & Shell, which also owns Channel 5 – offers a £100,000 top prize for matching five numbers out of 50. Tickets will cost £1, with 20.3p of the price going back into local health projects across the country. Charity organisations warned that this was the bare minimum that a lottery provider could donate from ticket sales – whereas the National Lottery gives 28p in every pound to good causes. Sir Stephen Bubb of the Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations told the Guardian it was a “disgraceful new development”. He pointed out that the operator would raise only £50m a year – compared with National Lottery operator Camelot, which gave £270m to health causes a few years ago. Given that Camelot announced record ticket sales of £5.8bn last year, it is estimated the amount going to health charities is now closer to £350m. “This whole thing is deeply unhelpful,” said Bubb. “[Richard Desmond] is giving less to charity and also can make a profit from people who think they are giving to charity. They will force charities to duplicate a whole bureaucracy that has grown up after 17 years of the National Lottery. It will just take away business from Camelot’s lottery which gives more money to health.” Ben Kernighan, the deputy chief executive at the National Council for Voluntary Organisations , said that he “understood that when a lottery starts up there are upfront costs. Once you reach a certain volume of sales those costs are not there and we would expect providers to maximise the amount going to good causes.” He added that Desmond was “offering just above the legal minimum in terms of contribution. We’d like that to increase over time. Really the best way to give to charities is to do so directly”. Desmond’s company argues that the new lottery will grow the market – with the live draw to be shown on ITV1 and Channel 5 each Saturday from 8 October. Players matching three numbers will win £50 and those with four numbers will get £500. Martin Hall, chief executive of the new venture said: “The health lottery game is a fresh new alternative which has one single good cause at its heart – health. “We will be offering people the opportunity to win a life-changing amount of money while at the same time contributing to tackling real health issues in their own communities. “It is an exciting new launch which will benefit every community in Britain.” Richard Desmond Express Newspapers National Lottery Newspapers & magazines Health Randeep Ramesh guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Lord chief justice says if other crown courts had circulated alternative tariffs it would have been a ‘recipe for chaos’ A Manchester judge who made influential comments on sentencing offenders in the immediate aftermath of the August riots has been criticised by the appeal court. If other crown courts had circulated alternative tariffs for various crimes it would have been a “recipe for chaos” in the judicial system, the lord chief justice, Lord Judge, warned. Disapproval of the comments by Judge Andrew Gilbart QC, the recorder of Manchester, came from all three judges sitting in the appeal court on Tuesday as they began considering the first cases to come before them from the summer disturbances. The hearing follows concerns expressed last month by senior legal figures that some prison terms imposed on rioters were unduly harsh. The former director of public prosecutions, Lord Macdonald, cautioned that the courts risked being swept up in a “collective loss of proportion”. Opening the appeal cases, the judges – Lord Judge, Lord Justice Thomas and Lord Justice Leveson, said they would view BBC television news coverage of the riots before they decided whether any of the sentences handed down were disproportionate; they would only watch material already broadcast. Nine men and one woman are appealing against what their lawyers allege was the “manifestly excessive” length of their custodial sentences. None are challenging their convictions. Only three of the appellants – Lorriane McGrane, a 19-year old Territorial Army soldier, from Peckham, south-east London, Enrico Vanasco, a 25-year-old chef from Manchester and Hassan Koyuncu, an 18-year-old from north London – appeared in court. Two of the appellants, Jordan Blackshaw, 20, from Northwich, Cheshire, and Perry Sutcliffe-Keenan, 22, from Warrington, Cheshire, had posted notices on Facebook inviting people to participate in riots in their home towns. Both received four years in prison. Their lawyers told the court that what their clients had done was “monumentally foolish”, “hugely stupid” and “hugely shortsighted”. Gareth Roberts, representing Blackshaw, said the judge imposing the sentence “had failed to consider the leading authorities in relation to riot sentences [set] following the Bradford riots [in 2001] where sentences of four years were given to those carrying crossbows and wielding scaffolding poles.” But the lord chief justice implied that the appeal court viewed this summer’s disturbances as more serious because they were far more widespread. “[The Bradford cases] are not guideline cases,” he said. “The Bradford riots were confined to Bradford. One of our concerns is that these were nationwide. At the moment we are inclined to consider that we should take that into consideration.” Addressing the ‘guidelines’ formulated by Gilbart in Manchester as the courts began to process offenders, the appeal court justices were equally dismissive. Leveson, who is also chairman of the Sentencing Council, said: “What concerns me is that the judge … started to give sentence ranges … for offences with which he was not concerned. That’s not even something this court does.” Gilbart has previously said that he did not disregard sentencing guidelines. Thomas described the tariffs for offences set out as “wholly alien to the common law” and a new departure. The riots were not “unprecedented”, the appeal court judges added, citing the 1981 Toxteth disturbances which sparked copycat riots in other English cities. Among the 10 cases before the appeal court is that of Stephen Carter, 26, of Salford, who received 16 months for picking up a bag of clothes hidden in bushes during Manchester’s riots. The clothes had been looted from nearby shops. He had committed the offence, his counsel, Helen Richardson said, within the sight of police officers. Sentencing for offences of dishonesty were “disproportionately enhanced,” she told the court. “The premium added for offences of dishonesty [as opposed to violence] was too high in the circumstances.” Another appellant, David Beswick, 31, a coach driver from Eccles, is appealing against his 18 month sentence. He had been caught with a TV in his car. He told the police at the time that if his vehicle had not run out of petrol, it “might have been a different story”. David Perry, QC, for the crown, acknowledged that it was not the function of a crown court judge to formulate guidelines but he said: “Underlying [Judge Gilbart's] concerns was consistency. The problem facing the judges was extremely difficult. “It wasn’t an easy sentencing exercise. … There was a structural problem. There’s a tension between consistency at the time of sentencing and afterwards when the court of appeal first has an opportunity to see what is the right approach.” According to figures released by the ministry of justice, three-quarters of those appearing in court for riot-related offences had criminal records. Judgment on the 10 appeals is expected next week. UK riots Court of appeal Crime Police Manchester Lord Justice Leveson Facebook Owen Bowcott guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …NoW’s former chief reporter taking defunct tabloid’s publishers to an employment tribunal, claiming he was a whistleblower A News of the World reporter at the heart of the phone-hacking scandal is taking the defunct tabloid’s publishers to an employment tribunal, claiming he was a whistleblower. Neville Thurlbeck, the paper’s former chief reporter, is claiming that he was unfairly dismissed by Rupert Murdoch’s News Interrnational. There is scheduled to be a preliminary employment tribunal hearing in east London this Friday. It has only just come to light that Thurlbeck – who had been behind a string of high-profile exclusives at the News of the World – had been fired by the company. News International said: “We will vigorously contest this case.” Thurlbeck was arrested in April on suspicion of unlawfully intercepting mobile phone voicemail messages but remained on the payroll of the paper until recently, possibly this month. Thurlbeck has been a key figure in the phone-hacking scandal – his name appeared on an email sent to private investigator Glenn Mulcaire which contained a transcript of messages left on a mobile phone belonging to professional footballers association chief executive Gordon Taylor. This “for Neville” email took centre stage in July when Rupert Murdoch and his son James appeared before MPs who believed it was evidence they knew phone hacking was not limited to one “rogue reporter” at the paper. Both the Murdochs denied this was the case. Employment law experts say it is only possible to use the Public Interest Disclosures Act – which protects whistleblowers from losing their jobs – in particular circumstances. Ruth Neil, of employment law firm Stone Joseph, said that there are “very specific rules” in terms of what an individual whistleblower can claim under the act. She said to use it as a defence it was necessary to have reported any alleged wrongdoing to another person in authority, such as a police officer or other public servant. A source familiar with the matter said Thurlbeck’s use of the whistleblower’s defence was “an extraordinary tactic to deploy”. Neil said that it can be used as a defence if confidential information is disclosed about an employer, which is normally a breach of common law. If he wins his case it will also entitle him to unlimited damages. Normally compensation for unfair dismissals are capped at £68,400. The sums involved in whistleblowers’ cases can be enormous by comparison. An NHS manager unfairly dismissed “as a whistleblower” over plans to relocate cancer services out of his county was awarded £1.2m in compensation. Last week Thurlbeck was at the centre of a privacy action in France relating to a 2008 “exclusive” concerning Formula one boss Mosley who was awarded £60,000 in 2008 after winning his privacy action against the Sunday tabloid in the UK. In a separate development, Thurlbeck answered police bail along with two former News of the World journalists, Ian Edmondon, the paper’s former assistant editor (news) and reporter James Weatherup. Thurlbeck and Edmondson were bailed until March. Thurlbeck could not be reached for comment. Phone hacking News of the World National newspapers Newspapers Rupert Murdoch Newspapers & magazines Employment tribunals Work & careers Lisa O’Carroll guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Frank Luntz really is great at conning the American public with words. He’s the king of conservative catch phrases which are most excellent when you try to fool swaths of people with false narratives.You’ve probably heard the term ” right to work ” state. To the ordinary person it might sound like a participating state is guarantying their constituents cushy jobs with pensions, health care benefits, free barbecue and two weeks of vacation time to start. They also might think it’s the 28th amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Anyway, all the braggadocio you hear on Fox and Fox Business about how totally awesome it is if you reside in a “right to work” state because you’ll be gainfully employed and then those nasty unions can’t destroy your lives and corrupt your children’s morals. So how’s that working out for them now? thereisnospoon: Right To Work One of the favored conservative talking points during this prolonged recession (and yes, it is one long continuous downturn for most Americans, regardless of how GDP-obsessed economists cook the growth numbers) has been that unemployment in mostly Southern, so-called “right to work” states has been stronger, while unemployment in more progressive states has been higher. These talking points, of course, have totally ignored the myriad factors involved in creating those statistics, including that most of those jobs tend to be near minimum wage; that low real estate prices, not business-friendly and jobs-friendly policies, are often driving growth in those areas; that many of the gains in these states are due to energy-related booms rather than core economic successes; and that the comparative lack of social safety nets in many of those states often makes life more difficult even for those who have been lucky enough duckies to get one of those low-wage jobs. But even with those advantages, it looks like the “economic miracle” in the right-to-work states won’t be a conservative talking point much longer : When the unemployment rate rose in most states last month, it underscored the extent to which the deep recession, the anemic recovery and the lingering crisis of joblessness are beginning to reshape the nation’s economic map. The once-booming South, which entered the recession with the lowest unemployment rate in the nation, is now struggling with some of the highest rates, recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show. Several Southern states — including South Carolina, whose 11.1 percent unemployment rate is the fourth highest in the nation — have higher unemployment rates than they did a year ago. Unemployment in the South is now higher than it is in the Northeast and the Midwest, which include Rust Belt states that were struggling even before the recession. For decades, the nation’s economic landscape consisted of a prospering Sun Belt and a struggling Rust Belt. Since the recession hit, though, that is no longer the case. Unemployment remains high across much of the country — the national rate is 9.1 percent — but the regions have recovered at different speeds. Now, with the concentration of the highest unemployment rates in the South and the West, some economists and researchers wonder if it is an anomaly of the uneven recovery or a harbinger of things to come… read on Unfortunately, truth doesn’t matter to conservative operatives, he beltway media and Roger Ailes so you won’t hear anything about the struggles of these “right to work” states in context with their policies of banning unions which creates lower paying jobs. Bill O’Reilly has been opining this sentiment all year long: ‘ Even though the country is in dire economic trouble, largely because of liberal policies, they simply will not acknowledge that .’ See, it’s our fault even when it isn’t. We can’t handle the truth. In Conservative-ville, Ronald Regan never tripled the federal debt , George Bush left America with a surplus, Obama raised federal taxes to historic levels and Al Gore attacked Iraq.
Continue reading …One man rescued by ambulance service but another killed at Kellingley colliery A miner has died after a roof collapsed in one of Britain’s deepest remaining mines. Emergency services were called to Kellingley colliery, in Knottingley, North Yorkshire at around 5pm after the incident in the 800 metre deep pit. Two men were trapped and, following a rescue operation, UK Coal said that one of the men died and the other was receiving treatment after he was trapped by the leg. An emergency call was made shortly before 5pm after the two men reportedly became trapped up to their waist by debris. A specialist hazardous area response team from the Yorkshire ambulance service, whose members are trained to work underground, played a key role in the operation. The team was joined by fire crews and doctors. Gareth Williams, managing director for coal mining for UK Coal, said: “UK Coal can confirm a fall of roof occurred at 4.35pm which trapped two of our colleagues. “Colleagues successfully recovered one of the two employees trapped by the lower leg. He is now on the surface. “UK Coal regrets to confirm the second colleague was confirmed dead by our own team, despite our best efforts.” Williams said the company’s thoughts were with the families of the miners. The fatality comes after four men died in a flooded south Wales colliery earlier this month in the UK’s worst mining disaster for 30 years. Kellingley colliery has been the site of a number serious accidents in the past, some fatal. Ian Cameron died at the colliery after an equipment failure in October 2009 while Don Cook died in a rock fall in September 2008, At the time, UK Coal received summonses from the Health and Safety Executive relating to four deaths in separate incidents at its collieries. UK Coal evacuated 218 workers last year after methane gas seeped into the area and ignited. The colliery supplies local power stations and produces some household coal. UK Coal Mining Ben Quinn guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Chancellor faces widespread scepticism to enlarging eurozone bailout fund among German public and her own MPs Germany pledged support to Greece today in a desperate effort to shore up the eurozone, but fell short of revealing the package of measures that the markets hope will be enough to save the single currency. The chancellor, Angela Merkel, pledged solidarity at a meeting with her Greek counterpart, George Papandreou, just two days ahead of a crucial vote in the German parliament on the expansion of the bailout fund, which is regarded as the first step to increasing the firepower of the eurozone countries enough to buy up bonds and buttress troubled banks. However, conscious of animosity among the majority of German voters towards helping the less prudent nation, Merkel attached strings to her support, calling on Greece to “do its homework” in implementing painful cuts and reforms. The pair who avoided any talk of a Greek default, orderly or otherwise, or of any multitrillion-euro rescue plan, ahead of a dinner in Berlin on Tuesday night. Even so, stock markets rebounded strongly on hopes that the deal that emerged over the weekend at the International Monetary Fund meeting in Washington – to “leverage” the spending power of the €440bn (£382bn) bailout fund to €2tn, in conjunction with lending from the European Central Bank – was being worked on behind the scenes. But before the European Financial Stability Facility can be beefed up, the bailout fund’s strengthened mandate must be ratified by parliaments across the eurozone. On Thursday the Bundestag will vote on whether to increase the powers of the EFSF – the forerunner of the permanent rescue facility, the European Stability Mechanism, due to come into force in 2013. However, three out of four Germans are against the move, which would raise the country’s contributions to the pot from €123bn to €211bn. Some parliaments do not vote until the middle of next month and also face opposition from a sceptical public. Support from Germany’s opposition Social Democrat (SPD) and Green parties mean the bill is almost certain to pass. The question is whether Merkel will be able to command the so-called “chancellor majority” using only votes from her increasingly shaky coalition. She needs 311 of her coalition’s 330 MPs to vote for the bailout if she is to go it alone and prove she is still in control. Failure to do so could not only trigger the collapse of the government but harm the entire European project, analysts said. But there is scepticism. Carsten Schneider, a politician from the SPD, said it was “not acceptable” that the government was already adapting behind the scenes the very plans the Bundestag was being asked to vote on on Thursday. “Parliament will be systematically circumvented if [these] plans are not laid on the table before the vote,” he said. One rebel from the chancellor’s Christian Democratic party (CDU) said he believed the bill would solve nothing. “I’m voting ‘no’ on Thursday because I am of the view that in the best-case scenario, this expanded bailout fund will merely buy us time. It won’t solve the problems in the long run,” said Wolfgang Bosbach, an influential MP who chairs the parliament’s committee on internal affairs and who is not known as a eurosceptic. “The question needs to be answered: how we are going to deal in the long term with those states in the eurozone who are hopelessly indebted and are not in the position to finance themselves.” He said he was refusing to bow to demands from party whips to toe the line but admitted the pressure was there. He said he expected “five to 10″ other MPs from the CDU or its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU), to vote against the government. Several politicians from the Free Democrats (FDP), the other coalition party, are also expected to rebel. They were meeting on Tuesday afternoon to debate the forthcoming vote. The Greek prime minister had travelled to Berlin to bolster support for his beleaguered nation. Papandreou gave an impassioned address to leaders of German industry, appealing to his European partners to help him tackle the country’s debt crisis. “I promise you, we Greeks will soon fight our way back to growth and prosperity after this period of pain,” he said. Papandreou said he understood the reluctance of taxpayers in other European Union countries to help his country out of its crisis but said it was not an investment in the mistakes of the past, rather in the success of the future. “The eurozone must now take bold steps toward fiscal integration to stabilise the monetary union. Let’s not allow those who are betting against the euro to succeed,” he said. In her own speech to the Federation of German Industries (BDI), Merkel pledged her support. “We will provide all the help desired from the German side so that Greece regains trust,” she said. “If the stability of the euro is at stake – and the experience of the last few years [tells us] that the difficulties of one country endanger our common currency – then that obliges us to show solidarity within the common currency. “We will help if the country does all it can in terms of its own homework,” she said, also reiterating her opposition to common debt issuance in the eurozone – the much-discussed eurobonds. A poll this month showed that 76% of Germans are opposed to granting any further aid to Greece and the mass-market Bild newspaper reflected public hostility to further bailouts by insisting Merkel should be tough on Papandreou. “This is what you have to tell the Greek prime minister to his face, Frau Merkel,” wrote the paper, listing demands ranging from ensuring taxes were paid to getting rid of the bloated state apparatus and “thinking the unthinkable” – namely default, a debt restructuring and even leaving the eurozone. European debt crisis Germany Europe Angela Merkel Euro Europe European monetary union European Union Greece Helen Pidd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Click here to view this media Oh look, personal use fundraiser and pro-tort reform non-candidate Sarah Palin paid money to her lawyers to threaten a frivolous lawsuit . Palin said through a letter via her attorney that author Joe McGinniss and Crown Publishing, the Random House division which released “The Rogue” this month, published a book filled with “lies and rumors presented as fact.” So if she sues, McGinniss’s lawyers get to search her personal records for findings to defend their client. And she has to prove that he lied . Also, in keeping with her narcissistic MO, she threatens to sue all the time . Very few people have defended McGinniss and his book. And frankly, I don’t care who Palin screwed (and yeah I don’t think the euphemism “slept with” is at all accurate) or even what drugs she took back in the ’80s. Let’s face it: Palin has become incredibly boring. Those salacious details are the only thing keeping her even vaguely interesting, and very few people care enough any more to even look at the perpetual car wreck that is her personal and family life. There are better reality shows on the teevee. What Palin is doing now is hardly relevant, except that she’s screwing the political process by abusing campaign finance laws with her stupid bus tour and the unethical “PAC” that funds it, and she’s screwing the national political dialogue by pretending she has any qualifications to participate in it. Those issues are relevant. McGinniss’s hatchet job and her resultant pearl-clutching are not. And her fake outrage lawsuit threat? Yawn.
Continue reading …During an appearance on Morning Joe , Tuesday, Newsweek editor Tina Brown made an off-hand remark about Barack Obama, conceding that the politician “wasn't ready” to be President. Brown has previously attacked Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives for daring to oppose the Obama While discussing whether New Jersey Governor Chris Christie will change his mind and run for President, the former New Yorker editor blurted, ” Actually, I just hope he doesn't, because in the end, you know, his tremendous misgivings, maybe he is right. I mean, We had this with Obama. He wasn't ready, it turns out, really .” [See video below. MP3 audio here .] On December 31, 2009, Brown mocked Rush Limbaugh, who just hours earlier had been taken to the hospital with chest pains, as a “bad fairy” who ruined the magical story of Obama. She portrayed the radio host as “the bad fairy at Sleeping Beauty's christening” and added, “…Rush Limbaugh utters the words, 'I hope you fail.' 'I hope he fails,' he said, and from that moment, the sort of the Pandora's box opened.” Her full quote on Limbaugh: TINA BROWN: It's got to be that incredible inauguration of Obama….You started the year with this huge festival of hope and renewal and everything is going to be so different now, and then, like the bad fairy at Sleeping Beauty's christening, Rush Limbaugh utters the words, 'I hope you fail.''I hope he fails,' he said, and from that moment, the sort of the Pandora’s box opened, and the rest of the year has been just this big discord and toxic atmosphere in politics and partisan divide and people shouting at each other and the Tea Parties and death panels.” -Brown announcing her choice for the most important moment of 2009 on NBC's Today December 31, 2009 a few hours after Limbaugh went to the hospital with chest pains. For more on Tina Brown, see the MRC's Profile in Bias . A transcript of the September 27 exchange follows: 7:27am EDT TINA BROWN: But if he doesn't feel ready to run- Actually, I just hope he doesn't, because in the end, you know, his tremendous misgivings, maybe he is right. I mean, We had this with Obama. He wasn't ready, it turns out, really . MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Got four little kids. BROWN: Maybe Christie isn't ready. Maybe he feels like everybody wants him to but perhaps he does need longer. ANDREA MITCHELL: But, Tina, you could also argue that he might have a better chance at this moment of becoming the president of the United States than being re-elected governor of new Jersey and given all of the problems of running that state.
Continue reading …