Uh oh. Another church filled with sexual predators, many of the pedophiles. And yes, they were protected by the holy rollers of the Assembly of God. You know, the ones who love Donald Trump. I guess we don’t have to wonder why anymore. He may not be a bible thumper but he’s one of them.
A children’s pastor was caught filming girls in a church bathroom in Arkansas. Elders suspended him for a few weeks.
In Illinois, a preacher was accused of sexually abusing children. Church leaders sent him to therapy rather than call police.
In California, a worship minister went to prison for molesting boys. His congregation threw him a party when he returned.
All of these men remained in ministry in the Assemblies of God, the world’s largest Pentecostal denomination. All went on to abuse more children.
Since the 1970s, Assemblies of God churches have repeatedly reinstated ministers and volunteer leaders accused of sexual misconduct, returning them to pulpits and youth groups, an NBC News investigation found. While some of the other largest Christian denominations now require safeguards such as background checks and mandatory reporting, national Assemblies of God leaders have resisted, arguing such rules would increase legal risk, undermine its commitment to local church autonomy and defy a core biblical command: to forgive.
The result is a patchwork system that has protected accused predators and left generations of children in danger.
NBC News identified nearly 200 Assemblies of God pastors, church employees and volunteer leaders accused of sexual abuse over the past half century, based on a nationwide search of lawsuits, criminal records and news archives. Together, they allegedly abused more than 475 people — the overwhelming majority of them children. The allegations stretch into this year, when a 10-year-old girl said in a lawsuit that her pastor groped her during Bible study.
It’s some really sick stuff:
Survivors say they were violated in sanctuaries, at pastors’ homes and in tents on camping trips. A California preacher was accused of holding knives to children’s chests while forcing them to perform sex acts on each other. In Louisiana, a youth leader confessed to drugging and assaulting three boys during a sleepover. A couple in New Mexico say their pastor used his spiritual authority to drive them apart, then coerced the wife into sex.j
I just don’t know what to say about this anymore. These are the people having hysterics over a trans woman using a bathroom but this stuff is just fine.
Apparently there is an “equal treatment provision” in federal SNAP regulations which prohibits discrimination against and preferential treatment for EBT participants. I don’t know why they needed to make a point of that in these circumstances but the administration is such a a stickler for the rule of law…
It’s quite clear that they really want people to suffer.
Rampell writes:
Meanwhile USDA Sec Rollins is trying to change the subject —subject being Trump's decision to withhold food aid from 40M people—by claiming admin is focused on rooting out SNAP fraud. To be fair, no one can fraudulently receive benefits if no one receives benefits, period. A… pic.twitter.com/AIxTGiR3lh
TAPPER: Obama's comments came within a day of Trump hosting a Gatsby-themed Halloween party at Mar-a-Lago while SNAP benefits are set to run out. What's your response?
BESSENT: I believe President Obama played a record amount of golf of any president, so I'm not sure why he's… pic.twitter.com/rd8YoJsO35
Tapper asked the question referencing Obama and Trump fiddling while the White House is being demolished. But he wasn’t prepared with this fact, which is right on his own website? It’s from 2020 during COVID but since Trump has already exceeded his first term golfing in the same period, I’m sure it holds up. (In fact, Tapper could have had his ace fact checker Daniel Dale prepare a totally up-to-date number, but no.)
Obama played 98 rounds of golf through this point in his presidency, according to data provided to CNN by Mark Knoller, a veteran CBS News White House correspondent who is known for tracking presidential activities. By contrast, Knoller said, Trump has spent all or part of 248 days at a golf course.
CNN’s own count has Trump at 266 days spending some time at a Trump golf course.
Since Trump and his aides often refuse to confirm that he actually played golf during a visit to a golf club, even when he has been spotted in golf attire, it is not possible to definitively say how many times Trump has golfed as President. And some of Trump’s rounds, like when he plays with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, mix leisure with official business.
Regardless, it is clear that Trump has spent more time golfing than Obama. And Trump’s own golf-related “carbon footprint” has been bigger than Obama’s even if you count only air travel.
Through this point in his first presidential term, Obama had made three vacation trips to his birth state of Hawaii for a total of 29,978 miles in the air, Knoller tweeted, while Trump has made 30 trips to Palm Beach, Florida, the home of Mar-a-Lago, for a total of 51,540 miles.
Obama played 333 rounds during his eight years as president, according to Knoller. In other words, Obama played golf once every 8.77 days as president. Trump, conversely, has been at a golf club once every 4.92 days so far.
It’s also worth noting that Trump’s trips – like his Saturday and Sunday visits to the Trump National Golf Club in Sterling, Virginia – have almost exclusively been to resort properties and golf courses his company owns.
In addition to the promotional value of these trips by a president, Trump’s company has generated hundreds of thousands in revenue from charges to the Secret Service, according to Washington Post reporting.
Bessent is a supercilious twat and a confirmed liar, almost as bad as his boss. You literally can’t believe a word he says which is very bad for a Secretary of the Treasury. He even lies about political matters like this, which is beneath him. He should just skip the question and say that he’s focusing on the economy but instead takes the opportunity to give Trump the big slurpy tongue bath he needs on a daily basis.
The Obama Golf Counter estimated that Obama played just over 300 rounds of golf as president. That’s probably low; CBS News reporter (and keeper of presidential data) Mark Knoller had the count at 333 over Obama’s two terms. That is in fact more than the 259 outings Trump made in his first term — although spread over eight years.
In other words, Trump almost played as much golf in his first term as Obama did in two. Bessent and the rest of the POS’s in the MAGA media just lie about everything.
You have to see this to believe he would write the above after seeing it.
This is the Seth Meyers clip Donald Trump just had a meltdown over on Truth Social where Seth brutally mocks Trump’s insane rant about steam powered catapults. Trump REALLY doesn’t want people to see this so whatever you do please do NOT share this video! pic.twitter.com/APvamZhzR5
This from Jonathan Martin is unusual because he’s usually a confirmed “Democrats in disarray” guy. Here he talks about how Trump is the kiss of death in swing states:
Neither Earle-Sears nor Ciattarelli are Christie-level political talents, to put it mildly. But it makes the races all the more difficult when Trump is a get-out-the-vote machine for Democrats and puts his own party’s candidates in a vise in which they’re squeezed between his enthusiasts who expect loyalty and more skeptical voters who demand independence.
It’s hardly a new story. Democrats dined out on this exact same dynamic in almost every election between 2017 and 2020, the first time Trump was president. As the ever-insightful Charlie Cook recently noted, “In the four elections since Trump was first elected president, Republicans have lost 17 of the 21 Senate races” in the country’s seven presidential swing states.
What’s remarkable is that Republicans have been here before, and they still just take it.
Sherrill and Spanberger can scarcely believe how easy their rivals have made it to link the Republicans to Trump.
In an interview at an Oktoberfest in South Jersey earlier this month, Sherrill told me with an element of wonder that Ciattarelli has “not separated himself an inch” from Trump (which is quite the full circle turn for someone who said in 2016 that Christie should consider resigning if he was going to spend so much time stumping for then-candidate Trump).
Even more than before, it is required that Republicans bend the knee to Dear Leader. And the only people who like that are members of the cult.
People always talk about how the Democrats are purists and demand total adherence to the left agenda but it’s really the Republicans who are the purists. And it’s not even to a set of ideas or values — it’s to one freaky old man who tells them that windmills cause cancer. You tell me which party is off the rails.
So far, the Republicans in Congress are actually saying no to this demand that they nuke the filibuster so they can be forced to put their own names and reputations on all the extremist lunacy he wants to pass. We’ll have to see if they can withstand demands like the one above — and how the cult responds if they do.
Working-class voters see Democrats as “woke, weak and out-of-touch” and six in 10 have a negative view of the party, concluded a frank internal assessment of the hole the party finds itself in.
My problem is that (unless I missed it) they don’t include a link to the poll itself. Without the data, there is no way to know who the pollsters included in “working class.” We’ll get to that issue in a moment.
The Democratic brand “is suffering,” as working-class voters see the party as “too focused on social issues and not nearly focused enough on the economic issues that impact every one, every day,” the report said.
“We lost people we used to get [in 2024], so why did we lose them? Why don’t we go ask them,” said Mitch Landrieu, co-chair of Democracy Matters and senior adviser to then-President Joe Biden. “They said what they thought about us and it was painful to hear … They feel forgotten, left out, and that their issues are not prioritized by the Democratic Party or the Republican Party.”
I can tell you that without a poll after spending 12 straight Friday rush hours holding signs on an overpass. (The side facing the interstate changes each week. The side facing pedestrians is the one above.)
The week I aimed YOUR LIFE SHOULDN’T BE THIS HARD at the interstate, the diversity of vehicles that responded with waves, honks, and thumbs-up caught my attention. Sure, there were Subarus (ubiquitous here), plus Hondas and Toyotas, and even one Mercedes. But positive feedback also came from lawn-service pickups, Latinos in a work van, personal pickups, a couple of semis, and aging beaters with hanging body panels and peeling paint. Many are the sorts of voters and non-voters Democrats have lost to despair, disgust, and apathy.
Cynical and frustrated Americans feel unheard and undefended by both parties. They want to feel seen. This message above has won me instant credibility and trust. Pedestrians on the bridge week after week after week — especially those 35 and under, and especially women — look me square in the eye and thank me. Seriously.
A slim, tattooed young woman about 30 read it and said, “Oh, hell yeah,” and shot me a pinky-and-thumb, shaka salute. She asked if she could take a picture. A car full of 20-something women saw the sign, stopped on the bridge and cheered. A woman on a scooter turned around at the end of the bridge and came back to take a photo. A trio of young guys, early 20s, fist-bumped me on Friday.
I’m no messaging expert. I just lucked into this message after speaking with a 20-yr-old summer intern struggling to make any money while paying $1200/mo. for a short-term apartment. (It might have been $1500.)
If I were canvassing, they might be the first six words out of my mouth when the door opens … before I ask what would make their lives better and how Democrats might help.
Yes, the bulk of pedestrians are white, but the bulk of the “working class” are not. That’s why Rebecca Solnit last week offered this perspective after reading a Tressie McMillan Cottom op-ed regarding Graham Platner, the U.S. Senate candidate from Maine. Solnit posted to Facebook:
It’s been infuriating for a long time that “working class” is too often code for white men, fantasy white men from 1934 wearing hard hats and carrying lunch buckets, stingy-hearted white men who imagine their own thriving can only be built atop others’ deprivation, too often fancy rhetoric to justify pandering to the most prejudiced by throwing anyone and everyone else under the bus. Which is not just bad ethics, but bad strategy, since the backbone of the Democratic Party IS everyone else.
And here’s an important point: despite the wording of the headline, this isn’t a thing “the Democrats” do: I can promise you AOC, Maxine Waters, Elizabeth Warren, and Ilan Omar don’t do. It’s a thing that mostly white guys do in the service of white guys.
Tressie McMillan Cottom writes (in part, but there’s a gift link so you can read the whole thing):
I cannot swear to know the minds of men like Murphy and Sanders. But, were I a betting person, I’d wager someone else’s riches that they know racism and xenophobia are inextricably linked to America’s inchoate understanding of class politics. They know that “working class” has become a powerful political totem of its own — a discursive sleight of hand used to separate out white voters’ concerns as more legitimate, more materially grounded, more important than other voters’ concerns.
These senators are demonstrating a willful blindness that has become endemic in the Democratic Party. Their rhetoric — and the conventional wisdom that flows from it — suggests that we cannot talk about economic solutions without abandoning our commitment to the Black, Latino, gay, transgender and female poor that are the lifeblood of the Democratic Party’s base. The conceit at the heart of that belief is that poor white people are too racist, and too uniquely ignorant of their racism, to vote in their best interests. Therefore, Democrats have to accept a little racism to win the working class.
It is an old argument. History will tell you that negotiating with racism or fascism or authoritarianism never ends well.
It is also a cop-out that can sound like political pragmatism: The idea that we simply must learn to overlook bad behavior as mere human foibles. Who among us, it is implied, has not said or done or etched a hateful symbol of exclusion and oppression into our minds or bodies? If Democrats are to win back the “working class” that they have lost to Trump, they have to look beyond silly things like Nazi iconography or a little casual racism or a soupçon of sexism and anything else that the “woke” left of the party cares about.
I find it hard to imagine that we would be having this conversation at all were Platner anything other than a fit middle-aged white guy who dresses like a stock photo of a “real man.” Our culture is built to eternally forgive men, generally, and white men of means, especially, for their mistakes. Every single time, they were young and immature and it would be a shame to hold them accountable for anything they did wrong. The rest of us just need to be strong-armed into the forgiving and forgetting portion of the program.
That is how you get to the place I found myself this week, reading apologia for a hateful symbol pretending to be sound, hard-nosed political analysis.
Now, I know for a fact that the working class in this country looks more like a Latino woman who cleans houses than it looks like Platner, a former defense contractor turned oyster farmer with some leftist political beliefs.
I also know a lot of actual poor white people. The kind of poor white people who don’t even make enough or have enough to be counted among the working class. The people who rely on SNAP benefits for their meals and emergency rooms for their health care.
Sometimes they subsist on a diet of racist notions to explain why their lives are as hard as they are. Sometimes those poor white people even have racist tattoos. I live in the South. There is no shortage of Confederate flags and “Don’t tread on me” tags on display in hot, humid months.
Once, at a meeting with tenant organizers in the center of white American poverty in Appalachia, a young white guy showed up to a meeting with his Stars and Bars tattoo on display. The poor white rural women and working-class Black women who run those meetings took this guy to task. They told him (colorfully) to get himself together. And the next week they all protested their landlord together.
Their coalition-building wasn’t the kind of kumbaya that Platner apologists are talking about, where a room full of people were expected to swallow their outrage to preserve one man’s feelings. There was accountability. There was education. And there was meaningful action. There was not a college degree or a political donor among them, and yet, somehow, actual poor people figured out how to handle racist iconography without scapegoating minorities or making excuses for a white man’s mistakes.
Here’s the thing. The Democratic Party has a problem. The party’s leaders think they have a problem with Trump voters. Some polling says white men without college degrees don’t like them, don’t trust them and won’t vote for them, so they think the only logical way forward is to pander. Their polling addiction ignores more complex political instruments telling them that the working class isn’t just white men and that centrism isn’t enough to bring white voters back into the fold.
It is going to take hard politics. The kind that shows up in communities between elections and solves problems that don’t sound glamorous on television talk shows. It looks like facing down the Klan in a trailer park, not complaining about racism while doing far too little to avert it. It means believing that racism is not a natural condition of poverty but a political weapon that rich men use to constrain poor people’s political power. And — most critically — it looks like not wanting, even for a second, to be confused with the people who would do that. You don’t wear a red hat as a joke. You don’t fly the ironic flag of historical hate to get a rise out of people. You don’t wear the cool tattoo for over a decade that maybe, kind of, possibly, probably looks like something horrible and hateful.
That’s why it is annoying not to have the link to the poll to examine the demographics behind it. I get Cottom’s complaint. Solnit is right too. “Working class” is broader than white men of the Rust Belt. “The working class today is much more complex and diverse than the white, male, manufacturing archetype often evoked in popular narratives,” declares Demos. None of my pedestrians look like Platner. But it is not pandering to acknowledge people’s economic struggles whatever they look like, that life in America shouldn’t be this hard. People — not just beefy white men — feel their country and its promise are failing them. And both major political parties. Maybe start with that.
Keith Olbermann’s special report on habeas corpus, as reported on Tuesday, October 10, 2006.
It was already clear weeks ago that Donald John Trump and his Project 2025 co-conspirators — Christian nationalist OMB director Russ Vought and the president’s pet psychopath, Stephen Miller, among them — were on a trajectory to unmake the United States of America, its constitution, and your freedoms. The Heritage Foundation published their plan in 900-plus pages entitled “A Mandate for Leadership” (2023) that looks to the world now like a blueprint for dictatorship. A key element of its implementation was a shock-and-awe strategy, a concept made famous in George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq on false pretenses.
On October 10, 2006, Keith Olbermann (“Countdown”) examined how Bush’s Military Commission’s Act of 2006 impacted the right of habeas corpus, a.k.a. The Great Writ. That foundational right is enshrined in Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution. Olbermann built a memorably snarky rant around habeas and other Bush assaults against the Bill of Rights in the wake of the September 11 attacks. Worldwide revulsion against the Bush torture regime, the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuses, and leak of the 2002 torture memos was by then over two years old.
Given the manifold predations against the Constitution and Bill of Rights by the Trump 2.0 autocracy, it feels timely to dredge up the low-rez Olbermann video for your review. (Transcript here.) Its application to the Trump 2.0 terror campaign against civilians by masked ICE agents dressed as if for invading Fallujah needs no further explanation.
His Imperial Lordship makes no secret of which of your constitutional rights he believes are contingent on his mood. Sen. Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut takes notice.
You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him. Why? Because Trump believes he – not the people – decides the law.
This is why we are in the middle of, not on the verge of, a totalitarian takeover. pic.twitter.com/JN9Gy08BJR
Timothy Snyder (“On Tyranny“) spelled out their plan on October 25: “[T]he goal of these people is the end of law, the end of democracy, and the end of a recognizable republic.”
In testimony after the September 11 attacks, then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice told a congressional hearing that nobody could have predicted that terrorists might use a commercial airplane as a missile. In fact, they’d been warned.
Americans had a quarter of a century of warnings that an autocrat in the White House was a potential threat. They did not take it seriously, even after Trump impeachments, felony convictions, federal indictments, and his brown-nosing of world dictators. Your job now — our job — is to make sure it is not too late.
Time keeps on slippin’, slippin’. I can’t believe I’m entering my 20th year contributing to Hullabaloo. Technically, it was 19 years ago that my pal Digby graciously offered me a crayon, a sippy cup and weekly play date on her otherwise grownup site so I can do my little scribbles about pop culture (to be precise, my first review was published November 18, 2006). That’s a lot of sticky floors and buckets of stale popcorn under my belt, so for giggles I thought I’d comb through the archives and pick the top 25 from the (estimated) 600 first-run films I’ve reviewed since 2006. As per usual-not ranked, but presented alphabetically.
Roll film!
Another Earth (2011) – Writer-director Mike Cahill’s auspicious narrative feature debut concerns an M.I.T.-bound young woman (co-scripter Brit Marling) who makes a fateful decision to get behind the wheel after a few belts. The resultant tragedy kills two people, and leaves the life of the survivor, a music composer (William Mapother) in shambles.After serving prison time, the guilt-wracked young woman, determined to do penance, ingratiates herself into the widower’s life (he doesn’t realize who she is). Complications ensue.
Another Earth is a “sci-fi” film mostly in the academic sense; don’t expect to see CGI aliens in 3-D. Orbiting somewhere in proximity of Andrei Tarkovsky’s Solaris, its concerns are more metaphysical than astrophysical. And not unlike a Tarkovsky film, it demands your full and undivided attention. Prepare to have your mind blown.
After the Storm (2017) – This elegant family drama from writer-director Hirokazu Kore-eda is a wise, quietly observant and at times genuinely witty take on the prodigal son story. All the performances are beautifully nuanced; particularly when star Hiroshi Abe and scene-stealer Kirin Kiki are onscreen. Kudos as well to DP Yutaka Yamazaki’s painterly cinematography, and Hanargumi’s lovely soundtrack. Granted, some could find the proceedings too nuanced and “painterly”, but those with patience will be richly rewarded. Full review
Applause (2009) – Paprika Steen delivers a searing performance in this Danish import, directed and co-written (with Anders Frithiof August) by Martin Zandvliet. Technically, Steen is giving two searing performances; one as an embittered, middle-aged alcoholic stage actress named Thea Barfoed, and another as the embittered, middle-aged alcoholic “Martha”, as in “George and Martha”, the venomous, bickering couple who fuel Edward Albee’s classic play, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf.
As you might guess, the clever theatrical allusions abound throughout, with interwoven vignettes of Thea’s nightly performances as “Martha” serving a Greek Chorus for her concurrent real-life travails. While she continues to wow adoring fans with her stagecraft, the acid-tongued Thea makes a less-than-glowing impression on the people she encounters in her off-stage life (mostly due to the fact that she’s usually half in the bag by lunchtime).
While I’ve seen this story before, it’s been some time since I’ve seen it played with the fierce commitment Steen brings to it. Thea’s shame spiral binges evoke Patty Duke’s Neely O’Hara in Valley of the Dolls at times, but I felt Steen’s overall performance (and the writing and directing ) strongly recallsJohn Cassavetes’ Opening Night. In that 1977 film, Gena Rowlands plays, well, an insecure, middle-aged alcoholic stage actress, who is starring in a play that mirrors her real life angst. And just like the late, great Rowlands, Steen is a force of nature; a joy to watch. She is fearless, compassionate and 100% convincing. After all…she is an actress. (Full review)
Blade Runner 2049 (2017) – So many films passing themselves off as “sci-fi” these days are needlessly loud and jarringly flash-cut. Not this one. Which is to say that Blade Runner 2049 is leisurely paced. The story is not as deep or complex as the film makers want you to think. The narrative is essentially a 90 minute script (by original Blade Runner co-screenwriter Hampton Fancher and Michael Green), stretched to a 164-minute run time.
So why is it on my list? Well, for one thing, the “language” of film being two-fold (aural and visual), the visual language of Blade Runner 2049 is mesmerizing and immersive. I imagine the most burning question you have about Denis Villeneuve’s film is: “Are the ‘big’ questions that were left dangling at the end of Ridley Scott’s 1982 original answered?” Don’t ask me. I just do eyes. You may not find the answers you seek, but you may find yourself still thinking about this film long after the credits roll. Full review
Certified Copy (2010) – Just when you’re being lulled into thinking this is going to be one of those brainy, talky, yet pleasantly diverting romantic romps where you and your date can amuse yourselves by placing bets on “will they or won’t they-that is, if they can both shut up long enough to get down to business before the credits roll” propositions, Iranian director Abbas Kiarostami throws you a curve-ball.
Then again, maybe this film isn’t so much about “thinking”, as it is about “perceiving”. Because if it’s true that a “film” is merely (if I may quote Orson Welles) “a ribbon of dreams”-then Certified Copy, like any true work of art, is simply what you perceive it to be-nothing more, nothing less. Even if it leaves you scratching your head, you get to revel in the luminosity of Juliette Binoche’s amazing performance; there’s pure poetry in every glance, every gesture. (Full review)
Computer Chess (2013) – The most original sci-fi film of 2013 proved you don’t need a $300 million budget and 3-D technology to blow people’s minds. For his retro 80s-style mockumentary, Andrew Bujalski finds verisimilitude via a vintage B&W video camera (which makes it seem as if you’re watching events unfold on a slightly fuzzy closed-circuit TV), and “documents” a tournament where nerdy computer chess programmers from all over North America assemble once a year to match algorithmic prowess. Not unlike a Christopher Guest satire, Bujalski throws idiosyncratic characters into a jar, and then steps back to watch. Just when you think you’ve got the film sussed as a gentle satirical jab at computer geek culture, things get weird…then weirder. Dig that final shot! (Full review)
The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014) – In the interest of upholding my credo to be forthright with my readers (all three of you), I will confess that, with the exception of his engaging 1996 directing debut, Bottle Rocket, and the fitfully amusing Rushmore, I have been somewhat immune to the charms of writer-director Wes Anderson. To me, “a Wes Anderson film” is the cinematic equivalent to Wonder Bread…bland product, whimsically wrapped.
At the risk of making your head explode, I now have a second confession. I kind of enjoyed The Grand Budapest Hotel. I can’t adequately explain what happened. The film is not dissimilar to Anderson’s previous work; in that it is akin to a live action cartoon, drenched in whimsy, expressed in bold primary colors, populated by quirky characters (who would never exist outside of the strange Andersonian universe they live in) caught up in a quirky narrative with quirky twists and turns (I believe the operative word here, is “quirky”). So why did I like it? I cannot really say. My conundrum (if I may paraphrase one of my favorite lines from The Producers) would be this: “Where did he go so right?” (Full review)
The Guilty (2018) – Essentially a chamber piece set in a police station call center, this 2018 thriller is a “one night in the life of…” character study of a Danish cop (Jakob Cedergren) who has been busted down to emergency dispatcher. Demonstratively glum about pulling administrative duties, the tightly wound officer resigns himself to another dull shift manning the phones.
However, if he was hoping for something exciting to break the monotony, he’s about to fulfill the old adage “be careful what you wish for” once he takes a call from a frantic woman who has been kidnapped. Before he gets enough details to pinpoint her location, she hangs up. As he’s no longer authorized to respond in person, he resolves to redeem himself with his superiors by MacGyvering a way to save her as he races a ticking clock.
Considering the “action” is limited to the confines of a police station and largely dependent on a leading man who must find 101 interesting ways to emote while yakking on a phone for 80 minutes, writer-director Gustav Möller and his star perform nothing short of a minor miracle turning this scenario into anything but another dull night at the movies. Packed with nail-biting tension, Rashomon-style twists, and bereft of explosions, CGI effects or elaborate stunts, this terrific thriller renews your faith in the power of a story well-told. I haven’t seen the 2021 U.S. remake…but I don’t see how you could improve on perfection. (Full review)
Happy Go Lucky (2008) – The lead character in British director Mike Leigh’s dramedy appears to exist in a perpetually cheerful state of being. Her name is Poppy, and her improbably infectious giddiness is brought to life in an amazing performance by Sally Hawkins. Poppy is a single and carefree 30 year old primary school teacher. She breezes around London on her bicycle, exuding “young, colorful and kooky” like Lynn Redgrave in Georgy Girl. She is nothing, if not perky. Some might say she is insufferably perky, but all she really wants is for everybody else to be happy, too.
Now, before you think this is heading in the direction of a whimsical fable, a la Amelie, you have to remember, this is Mike Leigh, and he generally doesn’t do “whimsical”. Through a string of compassionate, astutely observed and beautifully acted films about contemporary British life (High Hopes, Life is Sweet, Career Girls, Naked and Secrets and Lies) Leigh has proven himself a fearless storyteller when it comes to plumbing the well of real, raw human emotion. This “Leigh-ness” comes into play with the introduction of a character that will test the limits of Poppy’s sunny optimism and faith in humanity.
When all is said and done, I venture to say that Leigh is actually making a somewhat revolutionary political statement for this cynical, post-ironic age of rampant smugness and self-absorption; suggesting that Poppy’s brand of bubbly, unflagging enthusiasm for wishing nothing but happiness unto others defines not just the root of true compassion, but could be the antidote to societal ills like xenophobia, child abuse and homelessness. See it and decide for yourself. (Full review)
In the Loop (2009) – Political satire is not dead; it’s just been sort of resting …at least since Wag the Dog sped in and out of theaters in 1997. Armando Iannucci and co-writers Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Ian Martin and Tony Roche (much of the team responsible for the BBC series The Thick of It) mined the headlines and produced a nugget of satirical gold with In the Loop, recalling the days of Terry Southern and Paddy Chayefsky, whose sharp, barb-tongued screenplays ripped the body politic with savage aplomb.The filmmakers take aim at multiple targets, and hit the bull’s eye nearly every time with creatively honed insults delivered in deliciously profane pentameter by all members of a fine cast that includes Peter Capaldi, Tom Hollander, David Rasche, Mimi Kennedy, and James Gandolfini. (Full review)
The Irishman (2019) – If I didn’t know better, I’d wager Martin Scorsese’s epic crime drama was partially intended to be a black comedy. That’s because I thought a lot of it was so funny. “Funny” how? It’s funny, y’know, the …the story. OK, the story isn’t “ha-ha” funny; there’s all these mob guys, and there’s a lot of stealing and extorting and shooting and garroting. It’s just, y’know, it’s … the way Scorsese tells the story and everything.
I know this sounds weird, but there’s something oddly reassuring about tucking into a Scorsese film that features some of the most seasoned veterans of his “mob movie repertory” like Robert De Niro, Joe Pesci and Harvey Keitel; akin to putting on your most well-worn pair of comfy slippers. And with the addition of Al Pacino …fuhgeddaboudit! (Full review)
Killer Joe (2012) – This is a blackly funny and deliriously nasty piece of work from veteran director William Friedkin. Jim Thompson meets Sam Shepherd (with a whiff of Tennessee Williams) in this dysfunctional trailer trash-strewn tale of avarice, perversion and murder-for-hire, adapted for the screen by Tracy Letts from his own play.
While the noir tropes in the narrative holds few surprises, the squeamish are forewarned that, even at 76, the late Friedkin still had a formidable ability to startle unsuspecting viewers; proving you’re never too old to earn an NC-17 rating. How startling? The real litmus test occurs during the film’s climactic scene, which is so Grand Guignol that (depending on your sense of humor) you’ll either cringe and cover your eyes…or laugh yourself sick. (Full review)
Love and Mercy (2014) – Paul Dano’s Oscar-worthy performance in this film as the 1960s era Brian Wilson is a revelation, capturing the duality of a troubled genius/sweet man-child to a tee. If this were a conventional biopic, this would be “good enough” as is. But director Bill Pohlad (and screenwriters Oren Moverman and Michael A. Lerner) make this one go to “11”, by interpolating Brian’s peak period with his bleak period…the Dr. Eugene Landy years (early 80s through the early 90s). This “version” of Brian is played by John Cusack, who has rarely been better; this is a real comeback performance for him. There are no bad performances in this film, down to the smallest parts. I usually try to avoid hyperbole, but I’ll say it: This is one of the best rock’n’roll biopics I’ve seen in years. (Full review)
Man on Wire (2008) – Late in the summer of 1974, a diminutive Frenchman named Philippe Petit took a casual morning stroll across a ¾” steel cable, stretched between the two towers of the then-unfinished World Trade Center. On the surface, this may appear to be a straightforward documentary about this eccentric high wire artist who was either incredibly brave, or incredibly stupid. In actuality, it is one of the best suspense/heist movies of the decade, although no guns are drawn and nothing gets stolen. It is also very romantic, although it is not a traditional love story. Like Petit’s sky-high walk itself, James Marsh’s film is ultimately an act of pure aesthetic grace, and deeply profound. (Full review)
The Master (2012) – As Inspector Clouseau once ruminated, “Well you know, there are leaders…and there are followers.” At its most rudimentary level, Paul Thomas Anderson’s film is a two-character study about a leader and a follower (and metaphorically, all leaders and followers). It’s also a story about a complex surrogate father-son relationship (a recurring theme in the director’s oeuvre). And yes, there are some who feel the film is a thinly disguised take-down of Church of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard. I found it to be a thought-provoking and startlingly original examination of why human beings in general are so prone to kowtow to a burning bush, or an emperor with no clothes; a film that begs repeated viewings. One thing’s for sure- the late Philip Seymour Hoffman and Joaquin Phoenix deliver a pair of knockout performances. Like all of Anderson’s films, it’s audacious, sometimes baffling, but never dull. (Full review)
Moonage Daydream (2022) – David Bowie invented the idea of “re-invention”. It’s also possible that he invented a working time machine because he was always ahead of the curve (or leading the herd). He was the poster boy for “postmodern”. Space rock? Meet Major Tom. Glam rock? Meet Ziggy Stardust. Doom rock? Meet the Diamond Dog. Neo soul? Meet the Thin White Duke. Electronica? Ich bin ein Berliner. New Romantic? We all know Major Tom’s a junkie…
Of all his personas, “David Jones” is the most enigmatic; perhaps, as suggested in Brett Morgen’s trippy film, even to Bowie himself. More On the Road than on the records, Morgen’s kaleidoscopic thesis is a globe-trotting odyssey of an artist in search of himself. This is anything but a traditional, linear biography. Morgen doesn’t tell you everything about Bowie’s life, he simply shows you. Even if David Jones remains elusive as credits roll, the journey itself is absorbing and ultimately moving. Think of it as theKoyaanisqatsiof rock docs. (Full review)
Never, Rarely, Sometimes, Always (2020) – Writer-director Eliza Hittman’s timely drama centers on 17-year old Autumn (Sidney Flanigan) , a young woman in a quandary over an unwanted pregnancy who has only one real confidant; her cousin, BFF and schoolmate Skylar (Talia Ryder). They both work part-time as grocery clerks in rural Pennsylvania (a state where the parent of a minor must consent before an abortion is provided). After a decidedly unhelpful visit to her local “crisis pregnancy center” and a harrowing failed attempt to self-induce an abortion, Autumn and Skylar scrape together funds and hop a bus to New York City.
Hittman really gets inside the heads of her two main characters; helped immensely by wonderful, naturalistic performances from Flanigan and Ryder. Hittman has made a film that is quietly observant, compassionate, and non-judgmental. She does not proselytize one way or the other about the ever-thorny right-to-life debate. This is not an allegory in the vein of The Handmaid’s Tale, because it doesn’t have to be; it is a straightforward and realistic story of one young woman’s personal journey. The reason it works so well on a personal level is because of its universality; it could easily be any young woman’s story in the here and now.(Full review)
No Country for Old Men (2007) – The bodies pile up faster than you can say Blood Simple in Joel and Ethan Coen’s masterfully constructed 2007 neo-noir (which earned them a shared Best Director trophy). The brothers’ Oscar-winning screenplay (adapted from the Cormac McCarthy novel) is rich in characterization and thankfully devoid of the self-conscious quirkiness that has left some of their latter-day films teetering on self-parody.
The story is set among the sagebrush and desert heat of the Tex-Mex border, where the deer and the antelope play. One day, good ol’ boy Llewelyn (Josh Brolin) is shootin’ at some food (the playful antelope) when he encounters a grievously wounded pit bull. The blood trail leads to discovery of the aftermath of a shootout. As this is Coen country…that twisty trail does lead to a twisty tale.
Tommy Lee Jones gives a wonderful low-key performance as an old-school, Gary Cooper-ish lawman who (you guessed it) comes from a long line of lawmen. Jones’ face is a craggy, world-weary road map of someone who has reluctantly borne witness to every inhumanity man is capable of, and is counting down the days to imminent retirement (‘cos it’s becoming no country for old men…).
The cast is outstanding. Javier Bardem picked up a Best Supporting Actor statue for his turn as a psychotic hit man. His performance is understated, yet menacing, made all the more unsettling by his Peter Tork haircut. Kelly McDonald and Woody Harrelson are standouts as well. Curiously, Roger Deakins wasn’t nominated for his cinematography, but his work on this film ranks among his best. (Full review)
The Old Oak (2024) – The bookend of a triptych of working-class dramas set in Northeast England (preceded by I, Daniel Blake in 2016 and Sorry We Missed You! in 2019), The Old Oak marks 87-year-old director Ken Loach’s 28th film.
The story (scripted by Paul Laverty) is set in an economically depressed “pit town” on the Northeast coast of England in 2016 (which was 2 years into the implementation of the UK’s Syrian Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme), and centers on TJ (Dave Turner), a former labor organizer barely making ends meet as owner and proprietor of “The Old Oak” pub.
One day, a busload of Syrian refugees appears and disembarks in the center of town. Unfortunately, not all the locals appear willing to roll out the welcome wagon. When xenophobic catcalling escalates into a scuffle that results in a young Syrian woman’s camera getting damaged, TJ intervenes and defuses the situation.
What ensues is rife with Loach’s trademarks; not the least of which is giving his cast plenty of room to breathe. The ensemble (which ranges from first-time film actors to veteran players) delivers uniformly naturalistic performances. Hovering somewhere between Do the Right Thing and Ikuru, The Old Oak is raw, uncompromising, and genuinely moving (rare at the multiplex nowadays), with an uplifting message of hope and reconciliation. If this is indeed its director’s swan song-what a lovely, compassionate note to go out on. (Full review)
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) – “Surely (you’re thinking), a film involving the Manson Family and directed by Quentin Tarantino must feature a cathartic orgy of blood and viscera…amirite?” Sir or madam, all I can tell you is that I am unaware of any such activity or operation… nor would I be disposed to discuss such an operation if it did in fact exist, sir or madam. What I am prepared to share is this: Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt have rarely been better, Margot Robbie is radiant and angelic as Sharon Tate, and 9-year-old moppet Julia Butters nearly steals the film. Los Angeles gives a fabulous and convincing performance as 1969 Los Angeles. Oh, and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is now my favorite “grown-up” Quentin Tarantino film (after Jackie Brown). (Full review)
Rampart (2011) – In a published interview, hard-boiled scribe James Ellroy once said of his (typical) protagonists “…I want to see these bad, bad, bad, bad men come to grips with their humanity.” Later in the interview, Ellroy confided that he “…would like to provide ambiguous responses in my readers.” If those were his primary intentions in the screenplay that drives Oren Moverman’s gripping and unsettling 2011 film (co-written with the director), I would say that he has succeeded mightily on both counts.
If you’re seeking car chases, shootouts and a neatly wrapped ending tied with a bow-look elsewhere. Not unlike one of those classic 1970s character studies, this film just sort of…starts, shit happens, and then it sort of…stops. But don’t let that put you off-it’s what’s inside this sandwich that matters, namely the fearless and outstanding performance from a gaunt and haunted Woody Harrelson, so good here as a bad, bad, bad, bad L.A. cop. (Full review)
Samsara (2011) – Whether you see Ron Fricke’s film as a deep treatise on the cyclic nature of the Omniverse, or merely as an assemblage of pretty pictures, doesn’t amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world. The man who gave us the similar cinematic tone poems Chronos and Baraka drops a clue early on in his latest film, as we observe a group of Buddhist monks painstakingly creating a sand mandala (it must take days). At the very end of the film, we revisit the artists, who now sit in silent contemplation of their lovely creation. This (literal) Moment of Zen turns out to be the preface to the monks’ next project-the ritualistic de-construction of the painting (which I assume must take an equal amount of time). Yes, it is a very simple metaphor for the transitory nature of beauty, life, the universe and everything. But, as they say, there’s beauty in simplicity. (Full review)
Skyfall (2012) – Assembled with great intelligence and verve by American Beauty director Sam Mendes, this tough, spare and relatively gadget-free 2012 Bond caper harkens back to the gritty, straightforward approach of FromRussia with Love (the best of the early films).
That being said, Mendes hasn’t forgotten his obligation to fulfill the franchise’s tradition of delivering a slam-bang, pull out all the stops opening sequence, which I daresay outdoes all previous. Interestingly, the film’s narrative owes more to Howard Hawks than it does to Ian Fleming; I gleaned a healthy infusion of Rio Bravo in Neal Purvis, Robert Wade and John Logan’s screenplay.
Star Daniel Craig finally settled comfortably into the character with this entry; his Bond feels a little more “lived in” than in the previous installments, where he was a little stiff and unsure about where he should be at times.
This is one of the most beautifully photographed Bond films in recent memory, thanks to DP Roger Deakins (one particularly memorable fight scene, staged in a darkened high rise suite and silhouetted against the backdrop of Shanghai’s myriad neon lights, approaches high art). Bond geeks will be pleased; and anyone up for pure popcorn escapism will not be disappointed. Any way you look at it, this is a terrific entertainment. (Full review)
Weathering With You (2020) – It was a marvelously gloomy, stormy Sunday afternoon in late January of 2020 when I ventured out to see Japanese anime master Makato Shinkai’s newest film. Little did I suspect that it would come to hold such a special place in my memory…for reasons outside of the film itself. I’ll admit I had some problems with the narrative, which may bring into question why it’s in my top 25 . That said, I concluded my review thusly:
Still, there’s a lot to like about “Weathering With You”, especially in the visual department. The Tokyo city-scapes are breathtakingly done; overall the animation is state-of-the-art. I could see it again. Besides, there are worse ways to while away a rainy Seattle afternoon.
I have since seen it again, twice (I bought the Blu-ray). Like many of Shinkai’s films, it improves with subsequent viewings. Besides, there’s no law against modifying your initial impression of a movie. That’s my modified opinion, and I’m sticking to it. (Full review)
Won’t You Be My Neighbor? (2018) – In his affable portrait of the publicly sweet, gentle, and compassionate TV host Fred Rogers, director Morgan Neville serves up a mélange of archival footage and present-day comments by friends, family, and colleagues to reveal (wait for it) a privately sweet, gentle, compassionate man. In other words, don’t expect revelations about drunken rages, aberrant behavior, or rap sheets (sorry to disappoint anyone who feels life’s greatest pleasure is speaking ill of the dead).
That is not to deny that Rogers did have a few…eccentricities; some are mentioned, others implied. The bulk of the film focuses on the long-running PBS series, Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood, which debuted in 1968. With apologies to Howard Beale, I don’t have to tell you things are bad. I think this documentary may be what the doctor ordered, as a reminder people like Fred Rogers once strode the Earth (and hopefully still do). I wasn’t one of your kids, Mr. Rogers, but (pardon my French) we sure as shit could use you now. (Full review)
JP Morgan warned the US government about more than $1bn in transactions linked to Jeffrey Epstein that were possibly related to reports of human trafficking, new documents confirm.
The largest bank in the US filed a suspicious activity report (SAR) in 2019, just weeks after Epstein was found dead in a New York jail cell, about transactions linked to the paedophile financier and prominent business figures. It also flagged wire transfers made by Epstein to Russian banks.
JP Morgan’s report said it had flagged about 4,700 transactions, totalling more than $1bn, that were potentially related to reports of human trafficking involving Epstein, the New York Times reported. The report, filed during the last Trump administration, also flagged sensitivities around Epstein’s “relationships with two U.S. presidents”.
The report was included in a release of previously sealed court records that were made public on Thursday after requests from the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. The documents included other SARs that JPMorgan filed in the years before Epstein’s 2019 arrest about large cash withdrawals, the New York Times reported.
The 2019 report did not detail the nature of the transactions or why they were suspicious. But it identified transactions with Leon Black, the co-founder of the private equity firm Apollo Global Management who left the company in 2021; the hedge fund manager Glenn Dubin; the lawyer Alan Dershowitz; and trusts controlled by the retail tycoon Leslie Wexner.
The report identified $65m of wire transfers from the mid-2000s that appeared to move between multiple banks linked to Wexner’s trusts but it did not provide details about the transactions involving Black, Dubin or Dershowitz.
None of the individuals named in the report have been charged with crimes in relation to Epstein.
The money laundering probe adds a new layer to the narrative about how the government conducted its investigation into the notorious sex abuser. It also raises questions about what evidence prosecutors may have gathered, long before the public began demanding a full accounting of his case. If that investigation had continued, prosecutors may have been able to identify other individuals and institutions that facilitated his sex-trafficking operation, said Stefan Cassella, the former deputy chief of the Department of Justice’s Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section. They might also have recovered more restitution for his victims, Casella said.
The money laundering investigation was opened in February 2007, according to a former law enforcement official familiar with the case who requested anonymity because of the sensitivities surrounding Epstein. At around the same time, prosecutors focused on a pattern of transactions in which Epstein directed some of his employees to withdraw large amounts of cash to disburse to women around the world he was suspected of having victimized. That was used as the basis for a potential charge of operating an unlicensed money-transmitting business, the former law enforcement official said.
The lead prosecutor on the case, former Assistant US Attorney Marie Villafaña, requested that a grand jury issue subpoenas for “every financial transaction conducted by Epstein and his six businesses” dating to 2003, the emails show. Target letters were sent to three of his assistants alerting them that Epstein was under investigation for money laundering and other financial crimes. Villafaña also dispatched two agents to the houses of two secretaries.
The previously undisclosed details about the existence of a money laundering investigation puts a spotlight on Alex Acosta, the former US Attorney for the Southern District of Florida who signed off on Epstein’s controversial non-prosecution agreement.
Last month, Acosta was interviewed by lawmakers from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform about the Epstein case. He was peppered with questions by Democratic Rep. Melanie Stansbury about whether his office investigated Epstein for “potential financial crimes.” Acosta said, “I don’t recall a financial aspect,” according to a transcript of his interview the committee released this month. “We were focused on the inappropriate acts that took place in Palm Beach.”
The emails and documents obtained by Bloomberg show that Acosta was copied on correspondence related to the money laundering investigation.
[…]
In May 2007, Villafaña drafted a 53-page indictment and an 82-page prosecution memo, according to a 2020 Justice Department report that examined the integrity of the federal investigation. That report described Villafaña urging her superiors to move swiftly because she believed Epstein was continuing to sexually abuse girls. Instead, the report concluded, she was stonewalled by senior officials at the office who saw her as too aggressive. (The 2020 report does not mention any financial-crime element of the probe.)
The evidence Villafaña collected was serious enough that she wrote in the prosecution memo that Epstein should be charged with money-laundering and operating an unlicensed money transmitting business, according to the former law enforcement official. The indictment, a copy of which hasn’t been publicly released, was never filed and remains shrouded in secrecy.
It’s always important to follow the money. Epstein had way more of it than ever made any sense. And while he was certainly sex trafficking to many of his rich friends, there was almost certainly more to it than that.
This is a rich vein that has to be followed up. The Democrats should not let up one bit.
