Numerous poorly-sourced stories are making the claim that Team Hillary blames Obama for her loss.

While this is plausible, it not only ignores the toxic effect Obama support has had on other candidates in the past, but if embraced by her supporters has absolutely terrible optics:

She couldn't do it without a man.

Not the message you want your “feminist icons” to be sending, I think…

Joan Jett singing the Mary Tyler Moore theme:

In other news, the recent “women’s march” on DC featured a speaker who got 25-to-life for her active role in kidnapping, torturing, raping, and murdering a 62-year-old man.

Which feminism do you prefer?

Controlling the narrative isn’t as easy as it used to be…

(via)

We’re in for a long four+ years. At this point, Trump could spend his entire administration playing Windows Solitaire, and every day there’d be twenty news stories and ten thousand retweets about how he’s keeping the black cards down. Nothing is too trivial or false for them to spin up the hate machine.

And I get it now. It’s simple, really. They hate Trump because he’s not ashamed of America.

He’s not going to continue the international apology tour. He’s not going to scold us for not being Europeans. He likes America, and Americans. And they can’t stand that.

In unrelated news, here’s Shizuka Nakamura doing her impression of the plants in my yard:

more...

True bravery is taking a stand against the oppression that only exists inside your head.

I expect steaming piles of praise for such actions to be published on Friday.

[Update: keep it classy, leftists: “other groups tried to disrupt the day’s events by burning flags, throwing bricks and rioting en masse, leading to injuries and nearly 100 arrests by early afternoon”]

…today’s headlines would simply have read, “Mentally Ill Spy Wins Early Release”.

Lying under oath to steal children: was that wrong? should we not have done that?

Trott: You mean to tell us due process is consistent with a government official submitting perjured testimony and false evidence? How is that consistent? I mean I hate to get pumped up about this but I’m just staggered by the claim that people in the shoes of your clients wouldn’t be on notice that you can’t use perjury and false evidence to take away somebody’s children. That to me is mind boggling.

Lin: In criminal proceedings we know this to be true because . . .

Trott: No, no! It’s a court proceeding with a liberty interest, a fundamental liberty interest at stake.

Lin: And on the reverse side . . .

Trott: And you’re telling us that these officials [weren’t] on notice that you can’t commit perjury and put in false evidence?

Lin: I understand broadly the principle that common sense tells us that lying is wrong and lying to . . .

Care to guess how soon you’ll see stories like this showing up after the significant increase in tobacco taxes that just passed? This is, of course, in addition to the Internet sales and interstate smuggling that’s already going on, and the pipe/cigar shops going out of business because of the estimated 40% price increase. No one knows what will happen to vape retailers, because even the people who wrote the law still don’t know what it means.

Note that in the linked story, the headline calls the cigarettes “fake”, when what they really mean is “untaxed”.