Daily Bread for 3.23.19

Good morning.

Saturday in Whitewater will be sunny with a high of fifty-three.  Sunrise is 6:51 AM and sunset 7:11 PM, for 12h 19m 39s of daytime.  The moon is a waning gibbous with 91.5% of its visible disk illuminated.

Today is the eight hundred sixty-fourth day.


On this day in 1865, Wisconsinites defending the Union finish fighting in North Carolina:

On this date, the 21st Wisconsin Infantry, made up mostly of soldiers from the Oshkosh area, finished fighting their way through the South during Sherman’s March to the Sea and reached Goldsboro, N.C., where the campaign in the Carolinas ended. Its veterans reunited 40 years later in Manitowoc.

Recommended for reading in full:

  In February, Mikhaila Fogel, Susan Hennessey, Quinta Jurecic, and Benjamin Wittes offered Four Principles for Reading the Mueller Report:

First, in the absence of some glaring or obvious reason to reject them, people should be prepared to accept Mueller’s prosecutorial judgments. Mueller and his team are not 13 angry Democrats today, and they will not be 13 corrupt Republicans tomorrow. They are professionals who have had access to the best factual record anyone is likely to see. The determination of whether to charge—or not to charge—a given person is an informed professional judgment entitled to the presumption of regularity. The indictments that the special counsel has brought to date are all cases in which other reasonable prosecutors in Mueller’s shoes would have likewise pursued charges. To the extent the cases have been litigated, Mueller has prevailed; there is no indication that he has brought cases that were not substantially merited.


Second, people should also accept the factual record described in the report in the absence of specific reason to doubt it. This does not mean that Mueller is some kind of deity, whose word on factual matters is infallible. It is, however, a recognition that Mueller has had the benefit of an elite staff of lawyers and investigators who have had access to an array of witnesses and documents and intelligence available to nobody else. This means, quite simply, that he knows more than everyone else does and is thus in a position to change the working factual record dramatically, whereas onlookers can only argue about the existing record or—in the case of investigative reporters and congressional committees—inch it forward at the margins.


Third—and this point significantly qualifies the previous one—the report only covers what it covers. There may be many lines of inquiry the public feels are relevant to L’Affaire Russe, or to ethical and legal questions about the president and his family more generally, that are not within the scope of the Mueller report. The report itself will likely address a far narrower set of questions.


Fourth, a decision not to prosecute does not necessarily resolve questions of morality, ethics or impeachability.

(Emphasis in original.)

  Why Chicken Nugget Demand Is Flat:

Comments are closed.