All jacket, no farm

Don Bacon (literally) running for Congress
Don Bacon (literally) running for Congress

Welcome back from blowin’ stuff up!

A few quick notes…


ICYMI, Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse was off the July 4th parade routes, as he spent the weekend in Afghanistan greeting and thanking the troops.

See his Twitter photo feed to get a taste of his recent trip.


All hat, no cattle

The Hastings Tribune had an interesting interview with a former female chair of the Nebraska Democrat Party…who doesn’t have very nice things to say about its new chair via Hastings, Jane Kleeb.

Deb Hardin Quirk said she didn’t particularly care for how Kleeb went about securing the position leading up to and during this year’s state convention.

She says she is concerned that Kleeb “burned too many bridges” at the election, pitting Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton fans against each other, in order to claim her victory.

And then she adds another chuckler: Jane’s cowboy boots. (You may recall that Jane moved to Nebraska from Florida.)

“She doesn’t realize how that drives people in Omaha up the wall,” Quirk said. “That’s the biggest thing we heard about Scott’s (Kleeb) senate campaign, both of them wearing them. Omaha does not want to look like Cowtown U.S.A.”



2nd or bust

Speaking of Jane, it will be interesting to see the campaign she puts on for Hillary, particularly in the 2nd District.

Anything less than an electoral vote for Hillary in the 2nd will be seen as a loss — particularly if Hillary is putting lots of cash and possibly staff in Omaha as the newsies suggest.

We are told by them that this is NOT simply an extension of the Western Iowa campaign, but a driving force to take Omaha.

There’s the challenge. Will the Bernie partisan accept?


The social

On the Twitter: @LeavenworthSt
On The Facebook: Leavenworth St.


  1. Tony says:

    Well, it looks like Bernie is going to be totally screwed over by Clinton and the DNC, and in return Bernie supporters are preparing to riot at the convention. So the prospects of Clinton taking the 2nd district with “Jane’s help” are, well, zero.

  2. repenting lawyer says:

    No particular fan of Jane, but I managed to live most of my life in Omaha without meeting anyone who was troubled by cowboy boots.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Sasse is a physical coward and an asshole. Not a pretty mix. I despise what Democrats are doing to the USA but it is Republican hyenas like Sasse who most abet that and make it possible. And he does it all for Sasse.

    I helped that Sassehole get elected. Learning the hard way.

    • HTH says:

      Explain how going against the partisan grain that almost every other elected official is getting in line for is ‘cowardly.’ Sure, you can disagree with it, but spurning your party’s nominee, especially against an unpopular Democrat alternative, goes pretty high in my list of textbook political bravery. Little to gain, lot to lose. Or are you only against toeing the partisan line when it’s not what YOU want?


      • Tony says:

        It is cowardly, because he is going along with the establishment wants and is telling him to do while at the same time ignoring the will of the people, or understanding why Trump is so popular in the first place. All Sasse cares about is keeping his Senate seat.

      • Bob Loblaw says:


        Don’t know if you’ve noticed but Trump ain’t popular. He has about a 37% approval rating (or somewhere in that ballpark). Sasse is saying what 99% of the people are thinking. Yes, none of us can stand Hilary, but that doesn’t mean we have to like a clown like Trump.

        Senator Sasse is speaking his mind, being honest with voters, and putting political his neck on the line. When Trump gets wiped out in November people will remember the one GOP Senator who was sounding the alarm bells. Come 2017 and beyond it will be Sasse’s party. He’ll be the most talked about and listened to Republican leading the charge against Hilary. Nebraskans are lucky to have a Senator like Ben.

      • HTH says:

        Tony – do you think rebellious teapartier Mitch McConnell is brave for supporting Trump? What about Paul Ryan?

        Facts ain’t liberal, either. Trump has the appeal of old milk. Hillary may be skim, but that’s the choices people like you have left us with.


      • anon says:

        He wants what the republican majority wants,. or you enable Mrs Clean, but Sasse has learned what it is to have no voice

  4. Anon says:

    I particularly love the quote from Quirk saying that Jane can’t do any worse than Vince Powers, who was (in her words) dysfunctional the last two years LOL

  5. Power Man says:

    And Powers used to be such a fan of hers. Love to see the libs eat their own. Jane will be wearing her cowboy boots and FFA jacket to every meeting now.

  6. Gild D. Lily says:

    So Bill porks Loretta on the tarmac and Hillary is off the hook. His manhood should be gilded and put in a museum.

    Yes, I know. Lynch is a guy. The meeting was criminal not sexual, White Water not Monica. But that leaves criminality. And that taints our law enforcement.

    I was a Top Secret Material Control Manager. This is without doubt ten years in prison for Hillary Clinton. But the FBI proves itself to be a political gestapo by letting her go.

    This country is broken. Business as usual. Which is why voters have looked at Carson, Sanders and Trump instead of political dynasty hemorrhoids like Jeb and Hillary.

    BTW, Jane is a guy too. Sasse, on the other hand…

  7. repenting lawyer says:

    Gild, how many of those 10 years were spent studying mens rea? Maybe you read USC in your spare time.

      • repenting lawyer says:

        Humble, yes neg does, but negligent offenses have always been rare in American criminal law, and the applicable offenses are not negligence offenses, andd FBI statement turned on absence evidence of mind state. Never knew many humble law students, but ,yes, profs are worse.

      • Humble law student says:

        I guess only law students need to read the statute before commenting.

        The relevant statute is 18 US 793 (f)

        It does say ‘gross negligence’ . Isn’t that one of them thar “terms of art”?

      • repenting lawyer says:

        Humble, I have read the statute. Gross negligence is a mind state, usually equated with recklessness, FBI said carelessness did not reach that level. I not sure what we are arguing about.

      • Humble law student says:

        No, the FBI said no such thing. Since I presume you’ve read Comey’s statement, I have to conclude this is a complete fabrication on your part.

      • Repenting lawyer says:

        Humble, if FBI did not find evidence adequate, I rather assumed they were speaking of mind state in statute. Maybe too charitable to FBI, but hardly a fabrication.

      • Humble law student says:

        So your argument is, if the FBI decided X must be right, then it’s right?

        Interesting. I’ve never heard that particular argument from a lawyer before.

      • Repenting lawyer says:

        Humble, what I said was if the FBI said

        X it meant X including what is implicit in X. I neither asserted the accuracy or inaccuracy of X.I do assert that judgments based on available information uninformed by legal standards is probably not reliable. Do not see why that upsets you.

      • Sparkles says:

        Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation – James Brien Comey, Jr., lawyer, second-highest-ranking official in the United States Department of Justice, Republican –

        “In looking back into our investigations into the mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts,” Comey said. “All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of information exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.”

      • Tony says:

        From the National Review today:
        “It seems to me that this is what the FBI has done today. It has told the public that because Mrs. Clinton did not have intent to harm the United States we should not prosecute her on a felony that does not require proof of intent to harm the United States. Meanwhile, although there may have been profound harm to national security caused by her grossly negligent mishandling of classified information, we’ve decided she shouldn’t be prosecuted for grossly negligent mishandling of classified information.”

  8. HTH says:

    Is it just me, or does it seem like Trump and his ilk want to make a political prisoner out of Hillary? I’m no fan of hers, but I certainly don’t get my jollies from imagining her behind bars.


      • repenting lawyer says:

        Tony, when did we have equality under law with regard to prosecution? Are you suggesting a defendant could plead as a defense that others who committed the crime have not been charged? Like to see some cases on that.

      • Tony says:

        Something much simpler then that. If you or I did what Hillary did, we would go to prison for 5-10. Hillary got off because she is Hillary and the system is fixed and corrupt. In the meantime, media liberals are all cheering that she will be annointed queen for life in November.

      • repenting lawyer says:

        Tony, in fact FBI was critical of treatment of documents at State generally. I have not handled a classier document in 50 years and would faint at the sight of one. Do you receive or send a lot of classified e-mail? If not you comment is just silly.

      • HTH says:

        Tony, funny to talk about equality under the law. Here’s one to ponder: ‘innocent until proven guilty.’ Hillary may very well deserve persecution, but for people like you (and, it seems, every Trump supporter) to assume her guilt in the absence of the full evidence is, at best, political, and at worst a fevered witch hunt.


      • bynd says:

        RL: It works in labor case law. Like type previous infractions and punishment, factor 6 of the Douglas factors. I do believe a pretty large loophole has just been punched in our ability to prosecute those who give secrets to our enemies. Now we have to prove intent regardless of what the law states. We shall see.

        We can retry Manning and bring home what’s his face. Their intent was not to harm but to righteously expose.

      • repenting lawyer says:

        Bynd, I was not talking about arbitration. The rule there is one of settled practice not substantive law.

      • repenting lawyer says:

        Bynd, You are confused about intent, a good motive does not excuse an intentionally unlawful act. The loophole you see does not exist. The statute as written requires a mental state of which FBI found insufficient evidence. Congress can always rewrite the statute.

      • Humble law student says:

        So ‘gross negligence’ requires intent? But you just said it doesn’t.

        I hate it when academics prostitute themselves in the brothel of politics.

      • Repenting lawyer says:

        Humble, I was responding to Bynds’ confusion of intent and motive. Gross negligence is not intent, though good sought by act might enter into recklessness analysis. I am a retired academic so I maybe allowed more sins, bit I do not see prostitution in comment.
        I read the press conference and took the Director at his word that there was not enough evidence to prosecute, but he was not thrilled with HRC and her folks. I think you have confused literacy with prostitution.
        In any event since I wrote without charge even if you criticism was correct there would be no prostitution.

      • HTH says:

        I hate when law students think that just because they’re in law school they are God’s gift to intelligentsia.


      • Humble law student says:

        I’m impressed you could spell ‘intelligentsia’. But that’s probably just a tribute to modern spellcheckers.

    • repenting lawyer says:

      Bluejay, smart political play would be to emphasize carelessness, and ask if she really understands national security. You comment only appeals to the already convinced, and you are probably wrong on the merits.

      • Bluejay says:

        Trump can hammer Hillary repeatedly by just reading the Comey transcript. Moreover hit on the deleted emails that even the FBI couldn’t recover. Plenty of material for Trump to use.

        As a matter of political rhetoric I think the sovereign immunity theme is powerful. Clinton above the law and all of that. We fought a war to get rid of a monarch.

      • Tony says:

        We fought a war to get rid of a monarch, but “equality before the law” was revoked today, and the liberals are cheering it.

      • Anonymous says:

        RL: Not confused. Just theorizing on how far this can be taken. I believe the people would support good intent well before incompetence. In any case, it is as many of us stated it would be. No surprise there. It is always about politics.

  9. Anonymous says:

    Anything less than an electoral vote for Hillary in the 2nd will be seen as a loss…

    Good luck with that. Jane doesn’t take over the Chair until after the November election.

  10. Old Lefty says:


    Jane won’t be leading the charge for Hillary in the 2nd District or any other part of Nebraska this year. Vince Powers is still the Democratic State Chair until December. Quirky’s assessment of Vince was spot on – the guy is worthless. Donald Trump’s best asset in Nebraska is Vince Powers.

    Deb Quirk was a dismal failure as Democratic State Chair. She’s made a concentrated effort to make sure no one who followed her could achieve any more than she did. She’s been running off volunteers for years by fighting with and lying about new people. She hasn’t maintained her presence in the party because she’s productive, the cowards in charge tolerated her because she has made fairly substantial financial contributions. Her money probably isn’t going to buy her much love anymore once Jane takes over. Deb has been screaming for years, “We have to stop holding all these meetings.” It isn’t going to be long before Deb won’t even be welcome at those meetings.

      • Old Lefty says:

        I’m not BTO, but he probably agrees with me.

        It’s probably pointless for you to even try to guess who I am. The list of people Quirky has told lies about and ran off is almost endless.

        To his credit, BTO didn’t walk out in the face of your hostility, he just kept rubbing your noses in the truth. He’s a very persistent and irritating guy.

  11. The Eye Ball says:

    Odd what Republicans won’t criticize. Gov. Ricketts whose ever to “restore” the death penalty when there are no drugs to carry out an execution. Sens Bob Krist and John McCollister who want to expand Obamacare in Nebraska. Trump and his anti-trade talk which scares farmers.

  12. Ricky says:

    Wow I just noticed that Pat Bochers spent 90 thousand dollars running for an office that pays 11 thousand a year and he LOST. I thought Borchers knew everything? He is a professor! What is wrong with the people that could not recognize Borchers excellence?
    Maybe he and Ernie Goss can recognize the greatness of President Obama and try to emulate them?
    One of the more foolish wastes of money other than this 90 grand is the million that the Indian Tribe is paying Loserbaugh to not bring extended gambling to Nebraska. That thing is going down in flames, but Loserbaugh will still be paid.
    ricky from omaha

    • repenting lawyer says:

      Ricky, no professor knows everything, Pat is an expert in his fields of law and very bright in general. The political bug bit and he scratched. so what?

    • The Grundle King says:

      You are a bitter, pathetic soul. To be your age, and yet be so very immature…it must be hard for your kids when their friends see your incoherent ramblings published in the paper. I can’t imagine how I’d feel if my dad spewed such a constant stream of childish blather, but ’embarrassed’ wouldn’t even begin to describe it. The hardest part would be knowing that others are undoubtedly judging me on the basis of my dad’s petulant snivelry.

      • Sparkles says:

        ” petulant snivelry”

        Love that one.
        It almost demands to be shouted from atop the walls of a ancient castle by a pair of Frenchmen hurling taunts. Something like –
        “You and your petulant snivelry, you are less than nothing you silly English pig dog. I wave my private parts at your aunties, you cheesy lot of second hand electric donkey bottom biters.”

      • repenting lawyer says:

        GK, I am a bitter pathetical soul, but doubt my children, who already know this, will be upset by kind words for Pat Borchers, and I have not been quoted in a newspaper in 20 years.

      • Ricky says:

        Why would that be? We need more conservative know-it-alls? No we don’t we want progressives like Jane Kleeb running for office.

      • Ricky says:

        Why don’t you ask my children how they feel? How wrong you are anonymous tea partier. Try getting a letter published in the paper; it’s not that easy.
        If my words were incoherent ramblings they would not get published correct?
        Borchers wasted 90 K because nobody likes him. That is obvious because nobody likes a conservative that thinks he knows everything.

      • bynd says:

        Actually Ricky, I use to get them into the paper a lot. But then, if that is your goal in life, GK is right, you are pathetic. And really, all you have to do is write one or two everyday or probably even less. So, no, it isn’t that tough. And no doubt if you actually read the letters in the paper, thank god none of them are in charge of fiscal, school or other important public policy. They print all sides Ricky, regardless of how goofy. It is called the entertainment factor. You are very entertaining in a morbid type of way.

      • The Grundle King says:

        RL, my comment was not directed at you, but at Ricky. While I find you to be obstinate and disagreeable at times (and I recognized that I’m the same way), your arguments are seldom childish.

        Ricky, if your letters get published in ANY paper, then indeed it must be easy. Your comments are a poorly tied string of discombobulated thoughts, held together only by your underlying bitter hatred of anything and anyone positioned slightly right of far-left. I suspect the only reason your letters get published, while letters from far better conservative minds are discarded, is that the editors at papers like the LJS love see them for the troll-bait that they are, and know the clicks and comments such letters are sure to generate. They love controversy far more than conversation, because more clicks means more ad revenue. Rational letters, based on facts and reason, are hard to argue with…and thus, are of little value to the papers, because people click once, read it, provide no comment, then don’t bother reading it again. Your letters on the other hand…whoo boy…

        @Sparkles…I did get a kick out of that. If it’s not a line from one of the Monty Python movies…it should have been.

      • Tony says:

        I disagree with that Grundle, I think the LJS publish liberal letters because they are agenda driven liberals that will print stuff they agree with.

    • Sparkles says:

      Pat Borchers should be applauded for stepping forward to run for office.
      When running for a high paying gig like the NE legislature, it no doubt takes a sincere desire to make a difference.
      I would venture a guess that the people who supported his inaugural campaign still believe it was a wise investment and would gladly support him again.

    • HTH says:

      Ricky, please run for office. I would just revel in your failure.

      Borchers is a Nebraska treasure – we need more people like him on both sides of the aisle.


    • bynd says:

      Ricky, How much did Obama spend to become president which pays $400,000. How much is spent to become a congressperson or Senator. I’ve never seen some one who spends so much time in the bile to come up with such inconsequential BS. And the worse part is, it is all a surprise to you.

  13. Anonymous says:

    At the Lancaster County Democratic Party meeting last week someone (who was cut from the list of possible Bernie Sanders delegates herself) was accusing people of faking being LGBT in order to win a diversity delegate slot to the DCCC.

    As a Bernie supporter and a member of the LGBT community I find this to be reprehensible. She should think about why the Sanders campaign cut her in the first place.

    • bynd says:

      I am really not trying to be an ass, but aren’t you folks all about, you are what you identify as? And all it takes is your word. You folks created the monster and then cry when it bites in you in the butt!

  14. Anonymous says:

    2:48, I saw a copy of the “faked LGBT” Delegate application (and it was only one person). You should be mad at the person who did it, not the person who made the factual accusation.

      • Anonymous says:

        Tony, these people have no decency at all. You should have seen the antics they pulled over the last 6 months. Bernie Sanders cut them from representing him at the national convention because of stuff just like this.

      • Tony says:

        Yeah, but anyone accusing someone of “not really being gay” could open themselves up to a lawsuit. It is far more damaging then refusing to bake a wedding cake.

      • Anonymous says:

        Tony, you know nothing of the situation. If the Pope declared himself a Pagan, would you believe him? The claim was extremely doubtful.

      • Tony says:

        Who is the Democrat arbitrator of who is gay and who isn’t? Elizabeth Warren claimed to be 1/64 Cherokee and used it to get special treatment in her academic and professional life. The fact that she refuses to take any kind of DNA test to prove her heritage doesn’t matter. There are no absolutes in the liberal world. So if I claim to be black today and tomorrow white again, who are you or anyone else to say I can’t do that?

      • bynd says:

        Under Obama’s and Lynch’s guidance, you are not allowed to question what anyone calls them selves. That includes 5 year olds who don’t have the mental capacity to do so.

  15. repenting lawyer says:

    Tony, apples and oranges. first it may make a difference if libel or slander is involved, and in any event harm is injury to reputation a portion of community as in Holmes’s famous opinion on anti whiskey lady in whiskey ad. Refusal to bake cake was violation of a state civil rights statute. Harm is denial of statutory right to service. Stop playing lawyer, you do not get it.

    • Tony says:

      So a baker actually acknowledges that someone is gay, and that is wrong, but some Democrat insider can label someone “not really gay”, and that’s ok?

      • repenting lawyer says:

        Tony, it is not wrongful baker to acknowledge person is gay, the wrong is in refusal of service when statute covers the case. If someone who is gay is accused in writing of pretending to be gay, it would be liable though in some states proof of damage might be required, spoken, slander, is more complicated.

      • repenting lawyer says:

        Tony, the case would be more complicated since we retaking about convention delegates and NYT v Sullivan might apply.

      • The Grundle King says:

        I think Tony’s on to something here. If the baker wants to refuse service to GLBTXYZ, but doesn’t want to get sued for doing so, the baker simply denies service on the basis that he believes the client is lying about being gay…and he refuses to do business with dishonest people.

        I’m not saying I would support or oppose such a tactic, but if the idea is that you can deny something to someone on the basis that you think that person is lying…I mean, all bets are off. How do you prove that you’re NOT lying about a personal trait?

  16. Jack Tripper says:

    All those years I lived with Janet and Chrissy not once did Mr. Furley suspect I wasn’t gay, it wasn’t until I ran to be a DNCC delegate for Bernie that Linda Anderson figured it out and told everyone.

  17. Anon says:

    How is the KXL lawsuit(NAFTA) in a evolving Clinton legal system going to bode for Jane in the future, will it be like kickback Ben’s punt at the waste site.

  18. 90 Grand and Borchers finished last says:

    Wow somebody give me ninety thousand dollars and I guarantee I won’t finish out of the money.
    I’d probably win going away.

    • HTH says:

      Ricky, you are either a damnable idiot or an insufferable troll. I’m not sure which is worse.

      You may be a damnable idiot if you believe the bile you write. You should know the purpose of running for any office is to have the chance to influence policy, not to collect what is often a measly paycheck. Otherwise, you’d be right to critique Bernie or Billary for the millions they’ve spent to get a job that pays less than half a million a year (or, more accurately, to get a job that pays nothing – party nominee). Similarly, you should know that when campaigns are more competitive, they get more expensive. If you do not know these things, your opinions are void for idiocy and willful ignorance – not an unlikely option for a Jane Kleeb supporter.

      Of course, if you know these things, but keep spewing your nonsense notwithstanding merely for the purpose of insulting others and getting a rise, then you are an insufferable troll. Truly, a sad thing to see in someone who should, by age if nothing else, conduct himself in a manner resembling an adult. But, by all means, keep yourself feeling big behind the meaningless accomplishment of having your paltry letter to the editor published.


      • 90 Grand and Borchers finished last says:

        Can I borrow 90 grand? I can waste it in better ways than Borcher did. I would give half of it away to the Food Bank and use the 45 grand to win a seat in the Unicam. Thanks make that check out to Ricky From Omaha.

      • The Grundle King says:

        Ricky, you couldn’t win a ham sandwich with $45k, $90k, or $90 million. Three sentences into your campaign, and it would be over.

  19. repenting lawyer says:

    HTH Judge Kopf has a very niceties on Borchers on Mimesis Law, perhaps if Ricky read it he might have a more balanced appreciation for Pat.
    You are right that for most offices 90grand is a very insignificant war chest, and he was not able to overcome name recognition other R, probably because this blog did not have enough readers in his district.
    As a former member of the collection of divas over which Pat presided, he was not a know it all, unlike a lot of us, and was always a good companion for conversation.

  20. 90 Grand and Borchers finished last says:

    Hey I got a good letter to the editor coming up in the OWH. Check it out! Maybe this weekend.

    • bynd says:

      The irony. Ricky calling some one else a know it all. Yet, he doesn’t know how to get anyone to give him a plug nickel for running for sewer inspector. And with his mouth, Ricky knows sewers and bile.


      Ricky isn’t intelligent enough to be a Troll. He really is that immature.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.