Original painting on the right. Two botched restoration attempts on the left.
Conservation experts in Spain have called for a tightening of the laws covering restoration work after a copy of a famous painting by the baroque artist Bartolomé Esteban Murillo became the latest in a long line of artworks to suffer a damaging and disfiguring repair.
A private art collector in Valencia was reportedly charged €1,200 by a furniture restorer to have the picture of the Immaculate Conception cleaned. However, the job did not go as planned and the face of the Virgin Mary was left unrecognisable despite two attempts to restore it to its original state. -- more
TRUMP: “Oklahoma is at a very low number. They have done really fantastic work. They have a new, a pretty new, magnificent arena as you probably have heard. We are getting exact numbers out, but we are either close to or over one million people wanting to go. We have a 22,000-seat arena, but I think we're going to also take the convention hall next door, and that's going to hold 40,000. So you have 22,000 plus 40,000, which would mean that we'd have over 900,000 people that won’t be able to go. Hopefully they will be watching. It’s an amazing — nobody has ever heard of numbers like this. I think we're going to have a great time. We're going to talk about our nation, we're going to talk about where we're going, where we've come from.”
The "new, pretty new, magnificent arena" opened 12 years ago. It was built with $178 million in taxpayer money. Perhaps turnout was low because Trump supporters didn't want to go to a magnificent socialist stadium.
As a kid, I found fireworks so compelling that I just didn't care about the neighbors. We only cared about the cops. Now I appreciate how annoying this is, scaring the s out of pets and sometimes disrupting sleep. Like everyone else, I'm not sure why this surge of illegal fireworks is happening across the country. Is it frustration with the lockdown or a lack of alternative stimulating activities?
This is the same Larry Kreskin Kudlow who said on February 25: "We have contained this, I won't say airtight but pretty close to airtight."
This is the same Larry Kudlow who wrote just months before the worst recession since the Great Depression:
"There is no recession. Despite all the doom and gloom from the economic pessimistas, the resilient U.S economy continues moving ahead “‘quarter after quarter, year after year'” defying dire forecasts and delivering positive growth. In fact, we are about to enter the seventh consecutive year of the Bush boom."
So, thanks, but I'll rely on actual experts who warn us that a second wave of COVID-19, while not inevitable, remains a possibility. First, however, we need to get through the first wave which is just taking hold in many areas of the country.
Costco has gone to great lengths to hold the price of the combo at $1.50 for 35 years.
When Costco president W. Craig Jelinek once complained to Costco co-founder and former CEO Jim Sinegal that their monolithic warehouse business was losing money on their famously cheap $1.50 hot dog and soda package, Sinegal listened, nodded, and then did his best to make his take on the situation perfectly clear.
"If you raise [the price of] the effing hot dog, I will kill you," Sinegal said. "Figure it out."
The hot dog combo is similar to a loss leader, but rather than literally drawing customers into the store for the bargain, the cheap hot dog is a goodwill amenity intended to leave Costco shoppers with a good feeling about their visit to the popular big-box store.
The decision does not exonerate Bolton of wrongdoing or liability. In fact, the decision confirms that Bolton has published the book in violation of the law. In future actions, Bolton could both lose book royalties and be criminally prosecuted for failing to obtain final written clearance to publish the material. At the same time, the present circumstances don't meet the legal standard to block further publication. My reading of the decision suggests that had the government brought the case sooner, they might have prevailed, but once "the horse is out of the barn" (copies of the book have been released to the media and others), it's too late for an injunction blocking further publication of the book. The secrets are no longer secrets, the damage is done and injunctive relief cannot alter that fact.
The law and the legal reasoning behind the decision appear straightforward so I expect that Barr will pursue both criminal and civil remedies, both of which would be legally justifiable. Such a prosecution might not proceed under a different president and USAG for political reasons. Likewise, pursuing prosecution will be motivated in part by political considerations... and revenge. If charged, would Bolton be convicted? All bets are off depending on the jury and Bolton's defense strategy. The aspect of this that surprises me is that Bolton is willing to gamble on this approach.
I despise both Trump and Barr, but I believe Bolton should be prosecuted. If Bolton were motivated by concern about presidential lawbreaking, he had an opportunity to make his concerns known earlier and perhaps more consequentially. Instead, he delayed, and the delay seems entirely motivated by Bolton's personal financial interests. As a high ranking government official, the only appropriate motivation should be the good of the country. Protecting American interests may incidentally attach to the publication of the book, but Bolton's failure to report his concerns to the appropriate IG and his refusal to testify before a closed, security-cleared congressional committee tells you everything you need to know about his motives.
Incidentally, I wonder how many will laud or condemn the judge's decision without actually reading the decision.