What A Strange Position For A Professor of Law To Take

If you start clicking on links at the bottom web articles you can find yourself in some strange places. I recently (likes a few minutes ago) ran across this article by Steven Lubet who is allegedly a law professor at Northwestern.

The Conservative Legal Community Is Grasping at Straws to Defend Donald Trump

Okay, stop right there. I have to know. Are the straws paper or plastic?

Nevermind, I guess it’s not important.

The defense of Donald Trump has taken some strange turns lately, as allies and supporters have constantly had to change their positions—sometimes in a matter of days or hours—in order to justify the president’s shifting moods and explanations. Perhaps the greatest contortion, however, has come from an unexpected source.

Steven Calabresi, the highly respected constitutional law scholar—and my colleague at the Northwestern University Pritzker Law School—recently published an essay claiming that the House of Representatives’ impeachment proceedings are “violating the president’s constitutional rights” to “confront the witnesses against him” in a “speedy and public trial.” To reach this conclusion, Calabresi has to misapply the unambiguous provisions of the Sixth Amendment and completely ignore the equally plain terms of Article I’s definition of the impeachment power.

As a co-founder of the Federalist Society and the current chair of its board of directors, Calabresi ordinarily speaks with great authority on behalf of the conservative legal establishment, which makes this misstep all the more troubling. In the essay, Calabresi argues that “Impeachment is a legal proceeding, and just as criminal defendants have constitutional rights in criminal trials so too does Trump have constitutional rights, which House Democrats are denying him.” He then sets out the basic rights afforded to criminal defendants under the Sixth Amendment, and asserts that these rights have been denied to the president by the House of Representatives.

The opening words of the Sixth Amendment—“In all criminal prosecutions”—make it unmistakable that its provisions do not apply to impeachments, which are clearly noncriminal in nature. Impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate cannot result in imprisonment, fine, or any other criminal penalty. Rather, the only allowable consequences are removal from office and disqualification from future office-holding.

A full reading of the Sixth Amendment makes it even more obvious that it cannot, by its own terms, apply to congressional impeachments. Calabresi complains that the House of Representatives has denied Trump the rights of confrontation and public trial, but another provision of the Sixth Amendment guarantees trial by “an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.” Impeachments, of course, are tried by the Senate, per Article I, Section 3, with no requirement of impartiality. There is nothing to keep senators from expressing their opinions in advance of the trial, as Lindsey Graham has done by branding the house investigation B.S. And needless to say, all impeachment trials are held in Washington, D.C., no matter where the alleged offenses occurred.

Gee, if this goober is correct then President Trump would have basically no rights at all. Citizen Trump would have some rights if (when) the Democrats pursue criminal charges after he is booted out of the White House.

What a strange thing for a professor of law to say. Especially a liberal one.* It is a widely held belief in the legal profession that you cannot have too many lawyers in a courtroom. The more the merrier. Defendants already get appointed attorneys, and witnesses often show up with one these days. Soon, jurors, spectators, and court personnel will all be sporting shysters too.

The good professor is a lousy professor. He is technically correct about the language of the 6th Amendment, but he is so, so wrong that it doesn’t matter. It’s like he swerved to miss a tree and hit the forest instead.

Professor Loogie kinda dances around the body of the Sixth Amendment. Here are the rights that Loogie and the Democrats would deny Donald Trump:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Here it is again with the parts that are relevant highlighted:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

One more time:

to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Our political and legal systems are founded on a few basic principles. One of the foundations upon which our political and legal systems rest is the concept of fairness. One of the places this principle pops up is in something we call “due process.”

No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law …


The article “Some Kind of Hearing” written by Judge Henry Friendly created a list of basic due process rights “that remains highly influential, as to both content and relative priority”.[26] These rights, which apply equally to civil due process and criminal due process, are:[26]

1. An unbiased tribunal.
2. Notice of the proposed action and the grounds asserted for it.
3. Opportunity to present reasons why the proposed action should not be taken.
4. The right to present evidence, including the right to call witnesses.
5. The right to know opposing evidence.
6. The right to cross-examine adverse witnesses.
7. A decision based exclusively on the evidence presented.
8. Opportunity to be represented by counsel.
9. Requirement that the tribunal prepares a record of the evidence presented.
10. Requirement that the tribunal prepares written findings of fact and reasons for its decision.


Procedural due process is essentially based on the concept of “fundamental fairness”. For example, in 1934, the United States Supreme Court held that due process is violated “if a practice or rule offends some principle of justice so rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people as to be ranked as fundamental”

If the Democrats have their way, we will see a President involuntarily turned out of office for the first time in our history. We’ve had Presidents assassinated, and some who died in office of natural causes. One guy resigned. Two guys were impeached but acquitted. One would think that Trump must have done something really bad to merit being defenestrated. So what “high crimes and misdemeanors” is Trump accused of?

Quid pro quo.

Lolwut? That’s not even a crime.


Mueller said it didn’t happen.

Obstruction of justice. Bribery. Abuse of power.

At least you’re finally in the general vicinity of the ballpark. Now prove it.

Professor Loogie seems to agree with those who say that, “Impeachment is a political process.” And if so he is correct. The impeachment of a POTUS is a political process to undo the previous election. But it is somewhat more than a vote of no-confidence.

If we had a parliamentary system then Nancy Pelosi would be our leader. Parliaments are elected much like out House of Representatives, and then they choose a leader who will double as their chief executive. Under our system, the President is elected by the states via the Electoral College.

Under our theory of government, all the powers of our government are derived from the people. The majority of the people in 30 of our states wanted Trump to be our President. The Democrats in Congress come mainly from the 20 states that went for Hillary. They were very unhappy when Trump won and immediately began talking about impeachment.

Our nation is polarized but still remains intact. Now imagine if the Democrats vote straight party line to pass impeachment in a one-sided process that resembles a Schiff-for-brains committee hearing. The matter moves to the Senate and after the trial the Senate meets in secret to discuss the case, then comes out and votes. The Democrats delight and everyone else’s dismay, there are enough Romney-Republicans who flip and vote to convict that Trump is convicted.

How do you think Trump voters would feel about that?

“Grab the big can of Whoop-ass, we’re going to Washington!”

In the Declaration of Independence, Tommy Jefferson (Great-great-great-great-grandfather of George) said:

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes

Here is my Leftist Troll impersonation:

“You toothless hillbillies are so stzupid. Impeachment is in the Constitution. That means it is constitutional. This is how government is supposed to work., ya racist Nazi morons!”

One of my favorite sayings is, “Having the right to do something does not make it the right thing to do.” The same thing applies to power – having it doesn’t mean you should use it. If the Democrats decide to impeach Trump based on what they have now, the only possible outcomes I can see will range from bad to worse. It is easily foreseeable how it could trigger the dissolution of our union after nearly 250 years.

Here are some basic guidelines for impeachment from “How To Impeach A President Without Triggering A Civil War For Dummies”:

1. Win the support of a clear majority of voters before bringing an impeachment.
2. Let the reason(s) for impeachment find you, don’t go looking for them.
3. Go the extra mile to ensure the process is fair and transparent.
4. Any impeachable offense that is alleged should be serious in nature, and must be supported by strong, reliable evidence.
5. The Federal Rules of Evidence and Procedure should be followed to the extent possible in any Senate proceedings relating to impeachment.

Your evidence for impeachment should be of such a nature that you don’t have to explain it, you merely have to present it to the American people. If your evidence is such that even Trump supporters begin to turn against the President, then you may have a good case. If you layout a one-sided case of the best evidence you have presented under the best possible circumstsnces and the voters’ reaction is “So what?” then your shit is weak.

The Democrats’ shit is weak. What they have is a weak case against Trump for something that isn’t even a crime. What they need is one or more impeachable offenses that even die-hard deplorables would agree deserves impeachment if Trump did it. What they have is a few ambiguous statements by Trump and very weak circumstantial evidence that Trump . . .uh, . . .um, . . . was engaged in diplomacy. I cannot recall another case where similar conduct was found to be criminal.

The only “incriminating” evidence the Democrats have is hearsay. And not just regular hearsay, the Democrats have double, triple and even quadruple hearsay. And their witnesses are clearly biased. Worst of all, their process obviously biased and unfair. Right now the best thing that could happen to the Democrats would be if they lost the impeachment vote in the House. They would piss off the fewest number of people that way. More people would be pissed if they fail to bring it up for a vote than if they vote and lose.

Tomorrow’s witnesses are some alleged legal scholars who don’t even have some hearsay to share. They will testify offer their assholes opinions that that Orange Man Bad.


Meanwhile, Elijah Cummings is still dead.

*Is there any other kind?

About President-Elect Myiq2xu

In 2020 I have seen many things I thought I would never see. I feel like I am living in a George Orwell novel.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

173 Responses to What A Strange Position For A Professor of Law To Take

  1. votermom says:

    Trump MUST be impeached because Biden is corrupt!

  2. helenk3 says:

    the first impeachment based on whispering down the lane evidence.
    about that unbiased jury thingy, that is so yesterday.
    backtrack bunch did the crime, Trump must do the time.
    this professor must have gone to the same school as the professors of journalism. mail order licenses from bumfuck terrority

    • lateblum says:

      I think he is next door neighbor of Rep Jan Schakowsky (D-IL9). They prolly get together to plan on how to screw all those J and Law students at Northwestern and theose of us who live in the real world.

  3. taw46 says:

  4. helenk3 says:


    DC would be a great place for this to start. There is enough BS there to begin

  5. Dora says:

  6. Myiq2xu™ says:

  7. Myiq2xu™ says:

    Dippy Longstalking.

  8. taw46 says:

    I watched this today.

  9. helenk3 says:


    I do not think there will ever again be any trust between the two parties and that is sad and weakens the country

  10. taw46 says:

    • taw46 says:

      The first tweet……

  11. Dora says:

    I’ve never seen this side of him. It’s disgusting.

    • Mothy67 says:

      I knew someone who worked on Ward’s Island in the psychiatric hospital. They house some of the scariest criminal psychopaths there, but also have a dirt cheap rehab. It’s under 50 a day.
      They send people out alone to apply for welfare and when they come back they do a drug test. Makes sense, but they also do a cigarette smoking test. If you smoked on a four hour day pass you are immediately thrown out???? Junkies and meth heads battling for their lives came back clean but had a cigarette and got thrown out. Huh? Nanny bloomberg was mayor when I visited a friend there. How does that make any sense? Throwing homeless addicts out on the street because they had a cigarette?

  12. taw46 says:

    FNC is showing some of the arrivals for the reception at Buckingham Palace, if you are interested. Dropping in and out of coverage.

  13. elliesmom says:

    I wandered over to TalkLeft to see how Jeralyn is doing with Biden as the frontrunner. I remember how anti-Biden she was until Obama picked him for VP, and then she decided she could live with it. Anywho, what I found was a rant about why Trump should be impeached. In her rant she said she wanted Trump charged with “everything he’s guilty of since kindergarten”. Now, while she’s not a constitutional lawyer, more of a jailhouse stalker, I assume she’s taken constitutional law in law school. It’s my understanding the POTUS can only be impeached for things he’s done while in office. Am I wrong?

    • lyn says:

      Hate is a powerful drug.

    • Angie says:

      You are not wrong.
      Also, most every crime except murder has a time limit to bring charges (called statute of limitations). While some times may be longer based on age of victim (ie. usually child molestation time doesn’t start rumning until *after* the minor victim reaches majority) or seriousness of crime (time to bring charges for petty theft is shorter than for grand larceny), given that Trump is in his 70s, it would be too late to charge him for anything he may have done from kindergarten to 1999 (except murder, of course).

    • DeniseVB says:

      Good luck with that Virginia, we ain’t gonna let that happen. Kids take martial arts training for the discipline, exercise and self-esteem. Lots of 4H and Boy Scout programs teach firearm safety by NRA certified instructors. Funny, the guy next door to me, is an NRA training instructor for NRA instructors. The guy on the other side owns a TaeKwonDo school. They are just laughing at the absurdity of that bill. And they’re beyond talking about another civil war, the next American Revolution will start in Virginia 😀

  14. Angie says:

    • DeniseVB says:

      Scott Adams is my canary in the coal mine. If he shows signs of a PDJT going off the rails, I might worry 🙂 Adams seems to be enjoying Trump even more than he did in 2016.

  15. helenk3 says:

    Kamala Harris dropping out of the race. just announced on FOX

    • lyn says:

      Wouldn’t it be funny if all Democrats dropped out?

      • taw46 says:

        Leaving the door wide open for Hillary!!! LOL

        • lyn says:

          Or Mooch, which would be super scary.

          • taw46 says:

            I’m still not convinced that she won’t be anointed “The Second Won” at the Dem convention next year. Yeah, I get all the reasons why she won’t run in a primary. But money is a powerful motivator to accept the nomination. The Dems are desperate to win and think she would be the ticket. And given her ego, it would never occur to her and others that she might lose.

          • Mothy67 says:

            Disagree. Mooch can make a 1000 times the money and be relevant by not running. A new dim leader diminishes her importance. Would she risk the loss and end up selling books like hillary in costco? I doubt it. She and his wife are more significant if the dims lose. They have no principles. Trump keeps them significant. Can’t you see her at a 2022 Oscar party waxing nostalgic about obummer years. She loses and that’s all gone. Shim can spend the rest of its life as a celebrity if it hedges bets. All the perks none of the work.
            I think clitler is not ready to let go, but brazzilla’s coalition won’t accept her. I think there’d be rage if she was again gifted the nom. TDS won’t be enough.

      • AniEm says:

        The whole group exemplifies the contempt Dems have for the USA.

    • DeniseVB says:

      It’s going to be Biden/Warren isn’t it? Or worse, Hillary or Michelle. Biden resigns due to mental decline, and Whomp! there she is, Madame President. The Dems have to win for that to happen, but it is a recurring nightmare 😛

    • Anthony says:

      Quick – who/what is she going to blame it on? Her first impulse was to blame it on billionaires, and everyone immediately thought she meant Bloomberg. But he’s not the only Billionaire who hates her.

      You may only pick one:

      1) Trump
      2) The Russians
      3) The Ukrainians
      4) Tulsi
      5) Her gender
      6) Toxic masculinity
      7) Mini Mike
      8) White people

  16. taw46 says:

    Kamala Harris FINALLY dropping out of race.

  17. Angie says:


  18. Angie says:

  19. taw46 says:

    Big smile from the Queen.

  20. lyn says:

  21. taw46 says:

  22. Myiq2xu™ says:

  23. Dora says:

    OT but this is wonderful news.


    PJ34 triggers self-destruction of human pancreatic cancer cells

    A study conducted on human pancreatic tumours transplanted in mice reveals promise for an effective therapy in the future, say researchers.


    • Myiq2xu™ says:

      Sometimes there are real breakthroughs. Sometimes they claim they made a breakthrough to get more funding.

      Sometimes after years of funding a new drug doesn’t pan out. Sometimes one or more university researchers resigns and takes a lucrative position in Big Pharma., and in a very short time he discovers a new drug that the company patents

      • 1539days says:

        Also, laboratory conditions (and rats) are different than real life humans. Plus, even the treatments can be a miracle to a handful of people and have almost no effect on anyone else.
        But hey, let’s shut down Big Pharma because money is bad.

    • 1539days says:

      Pancreatic cancer is one of the worst. Almost no symptoms until it’s bad.

  24. Dora says:

    OMG! I can’t believe he did this!!


    Adam Schiff supbpoenaed Devin Nunes phone records AND his staff member Derek Harvey.


  25. Dora says:

    Jeffrey Epstein did not commit suicide.


    EXCLUSIVE: Bill Clinton was Jeffrey Epstein’s closest ‘celebrity mate’ and a frequent guest at his New Mexico ranch with wife Hillary, staying at the pedophile’s cowboy-themed village, say estate workers

    Bill and Hillary Clinton would stay at Jeffrey Epstein’s New Mexico ranch frequently after they left the White House, former estate workers told DailyMailTV

    The former president was Epstein’s closest ‘celebrity mate’ and the Clintons visited Zorro Ranch ‘a whole bunch of times’, a former contractor who ran the IT system at the property said


    • Somebody says:

      OMG, I just found out I have a party shower, hell my “party shower” is wider than Epstein’s but no doube window thank goodness. If his shower is as drafty as mine, I’m not so sure there was a lot of partying going on in there. It has high ceilings and is open at the top, so my guess is it’s a cold drafty bitch, no matter how hot the shower water is. I live for the day I can shrink mine and put the extra space in my closet, guess I’m just too boring for a party shower.

      • elliesmom says:

        When we were remodeling our old house, the first room finished was one of the bathrooms. We had a cocktail party in there for some of our friends. It was great fun. When we moved, our friends commented we no longer had a party shower. Then they came back a few months later, and when they saw how we had remodeled the bathroom in the new house, they laughed. The reality is when you design a shower for someone who is disabled, it ends up party-sized. We happened to have a bathroom designer who was very good at putting all of the things a disabled person needs into a bathroom but making it look sexy instead of looking like it belongs in a nursing home. I have friends who ask me if they can take a shower at my house. The “massage nozzles” are strategically positioned to give a person who needs to sit to shower a comfortable shower, but if you stand up, they’re “stimulating”. lol

        • Somebody says:


          I suppose you have a point, perhaps leaving the shower as it is will come in handy as hubby and I “age in place”. It would be easy to wheel a wheelchair into it, although there is a lip at the door that would need to be modified or a small ramp.

          Years ago when we first moved in, the first time we hosted bunco during the break they set up a card table and chairs in my shower to be smart asses. I never thought of it as a party shower or as an asset for the disabled. I will have to reevaluate. I only see it as drafty and a PIA to clean.

      • Myiq2xu™ says:

        When I was in basic training we heard of something called a “shower party” but you wouldn’t want to be the guest of honor at one. It is similar to a “blanket party.”

  26. SHV says:

    “So what “high crimes and misdemeanors” is Trump accused of?”
    Whatever a majority of the House of Reps. say they are. Impeachment, esp. Presidential impeachment is non-criminal and non-judicial. The “rules” including what is due process is whatever the House and especially the Senate say they are.

    This is an interesting read:
    “Report by the Staff of the Impeachment Inquiry on the
    Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment,
    Committee Print, Committee on the Judiciary, 93d Cong. 2d
    Sess., Feb. 1974”

    Click to access GPO-HPREC-DESCHLERS-V3-5-6.pdf

    • DeniseVB says:

      When do we get SCOTUS involved?

      • SHV says:

        I don’t think it will get involved. Unlike Watergate, there is no special council or criminal investigation involving the courts that resulted in United States vs Nixon. The current shit show is all House of Reps. and the game is played by their rules. Same deal if it goes to trial in the Senate; it will be a non-judicial proceeding, operating under Senate rules that can be changed by majority vote and no appeals. Chief Justice Roberts will be the Senate Presiding Officer and will make procedural decisions based on Senate rules or decisions by majority vote. I was a science major so I may be talking shit but from a brief review of impeachment literature, this seems to be the way it works.

        • Myiq2xu™ says:

          What if the House passes AOI and Cocaine Mitch looks it over and then says “I don’t believe that this is constitutionally valid and I’m not going to waste the Senate’s time with it.”

          Would House Democrats sue McConnell? Oh, you betcha.
          Would the loser appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals?
          Would the loser at that level appeal to SCOTUS?

          Roberts could save a lot of time by just telling the Democrats to bring the case straight to his desk.

  27. Dora says:

    I am SO angry!


    Schiff Team Subpoena’d Call Records from Trump Attorneys Along With Devin Nunes, John Solomon….

    AT&T provided the call records, likely under subpoena. (link)

    Let’s hope Schiff received them under subpoena, because the alternative is much worse. The alternative is a criminal leak from an outside interest.


    • helenk3 says:

      I know it is not PC and people will say it is not the right thing to do but if I were Nunes I would get pencil neck in the men’s room and punch the shit out of him. I would feel good to do so. Yes I know republicans are supposed to be better than that. They need to declare war on the dems and come out fighting and take no prisoners

      • Anthony says:

        You know, i was thinking that same thing. Nothing like a boy’s room beatdown to clear the air.

      • John Denney says:

        Pfft. As a legislator, Teddy Roosevelt engaged in fisticuffs against another legislator on the floor of Congress.
        There’s a case to be made for public thrashings.

  28. DeniseVB says:

  29. DeniseVB says:

    Back to Kammie 🙂

  30. DeniseVB says:

    Love Newtie….

  31. helenk3 says:


    OK I have a bunch of questions on this one.
    A 96 year old judge?????? why was he still on the bench? why was he given this assignment?
    this is as fishy as epstein’s death

  32. DeniseVB says:

    Ruh, roh. Trouble in Dimmy City. (I got this off the trending #PrimariesSoWhite .

  33. Mothy67 says:

    Can someone remind me about vmom and amazon. I just forget when I am shopping.

  34. Angie says:

    Holy fuck. The Dems really are out of control abusing power. They have got to be stopped.

    Pray for Trump.

  35. taw46 says:

    OK, buying the book.

  36. DeniseVB says:

    Yikes !

  37. lyn says:

    • Somebody says:

      Only half? Definitely need a second term, with any luck the other half will resign on election night 2020 #winning

      • Constance says:

        Wow! Half! That is just amazing and I do hope the other half throws a hissy fit and quits.

      • Mt.Laurel says:

        Half means the other half has dug its heels in and are likely very busy in trying to complete the sale of the USA to globalists who hate us.

  38. lyn says:

    • Mt.Laurel says:

      I think of this every time I hear a climate true believer express horror that the world will end in 10 years, 5 years, 2 years, . . .whatever is the going carbon tax rate. It never occurred to me that people took these things seriously.

      Tonight on In Search Of . . .Did Big Foot and the Loch Ness Monster conspire and devise a mad scheme to get the lookie loos to focus on fake climate theories just to get themselves some peace and quiet?

  39. taw46 says:

  40. helenk3 says:

    wonder how he would react to today’s shitshow in DC?

  41. Mothy67 says:

    Shower parties are a thing.
    Years ago I had the easiest job in the world booking large parties. I got a base and 18% commission. It was in an Italian style family restaurant. It sold itself. Where else in Manhattan could you get a private room for 50/person with a full course dinner and open bar steps from Central Park. All I did was fax menus and contracts. One older couple wanted to be very involved. They’d come in for tastings everyday for two weeks. They had to sample all the wine options. I was getting drunk by 2 for a week. They didn’t care about the cost. The act of throwing this tacky party was part of the fun for them. They told me it was a shower party. I didn’t explore it. Assumed it was for a grand daughter. Days of day drinking for hours I got to know them. They were this very affluent, unpretentious older couple who were making their sunset days a blast. I asked about the shower. They were Holocaust survivors who put a new shower in their condo. Time was ticking for them all and they wanted to do a big get together that wasn’t a funeral. People were flying in from all over the world to see their new bathroom which was upstairs from the restaurant. They were so alive and far from somber. The party was a smash. These people had gone through hell on Earth and 60 years later got together over plumbing fixtures. I did ask don’t you think using the word shower might be insensitive considering what was done to those who didn’t survive the camps. Their claim was that for decades they wanted to do a grand get together. Everyone said great, but it never took place. We have always lived with our history. Wanted to do something about our great lives since not reminisce about then. We wanted a party not a therapy session. The best way to do it was to put it front and center. People literally came from all over the world. They spent a few days acting like teenagers running around NY getting drunk. Most of the food had to be brought in as the restaurant was not kosher. They didn’t care about paying twice just wanted a big room for 70 friends. I learned quite a bit day drinking with them. They could have spent the post war years in misery and no one would have judged them. Instead they made lives. I consider it such a blessing to have worked for them. The other event planner scoffed at having to plan a party with these two very eccentric people. I said I’d do it having no clue I was I about to set sail on a two week tipsy voyage.
    The bathroom was stunning.

  42. Mothy67 says:

    I wonder if you could have fun with your mom and provide some safety for her with Alexa. You could set up the motion detector with a doorbell if she goes in the kitchen in the middle of the night.
    I am laughing my ass off with my mom dealing with Alexa. She yells at it all the time. Gets really close and screams. I am like mom you can talk in a regular voice across the room. The best part is the unlimited music. My mom was with my dad from age 13 until his death. It’s the holidays and it’s been almost two years. I hear her as she sits on the floor wrapping presents asking Alexa to play the story of her life through music. The tears are different now. Less pain more beauty. Through the Years by Kenny Rogers as she wraps her great grandkids presents. It’s like a Hallmark movie watching her walk down memory lane in a good way through music. Longer by Dan Folgerberg. Woman by Lennon. All you have to say is Alexa play blah blah blah. There are 50 million songs. I come home and she is doing the hustle with the roomba. I am like okay that’s wierd. It has lifted her spirits to fill the house with music. I never thought about it. I have my air pods in all the time.

  43. Dora says:

    It’s a start.

  44. DeniseVB says:

    WoW, this is our Embassy in London? The Obamas never stayed there? Why? Why? I just remember the 5-Star hotels downtown that the O gang rented several floors of, adding to the security costs x 1000.

  45. DeniseVB says:

    LOL, just when you think it can’t get stupider, someone proves me wrong 😛

  46. Dora says:

  47. Mothy67 says:

  48. lateblum says:

    I’ll be taking the grand girlies to see this next week. The CTA schedule and the girls’schedule makes it a bit problematic, but we’ll mak3 it work

  49. lyn says:

    Mean Girls!

  50. lyn says:

  51. Dora says:

  52. DeniseVB says:

    New thread up 😉

Comments are closed.