grab bag post tonight - something here to offend every 1.
1st gripe. tcm. turner classic movies. it's been garbage for months. i don't need to see westerns or war movies in prime time especially not on the weekend. last friday, they ran several goldie hawn films. i would've watched those if i'd known. but i'd already given up tcm and didn't find out about it until the last film that night. tonight, i'm flipping through channels as i pull up stuff that might be worth writing about and they're doing a rock hudson festival. i think it started with 'pillow talk.' i like that film - with doris day - i like it enough to bought it for streaming. they show that movie a lot so i didn't think about it. turns out it was a rock hudson festival - part of 1. right now 'send me no flowers' also with doris day, next up 'man's favorite sport' which is a solid rock film with a great paula pretniss performance and then it's rock in roger vadim's 'pretty maids all in a row' with angie dickinson. i like roger vadim as a director. as a screen writer, i've never been that impressed. but as a director? he's got an amazing eye (or he did, he's deceased). watch 'the game is over' (1 of his better scripts) and it's just grogeous. it's a delight to the eye and there's all this stuff going on that you don't even notice when you 1st watch but then you notice, on repeat viewings, how it's shaping your reaction.
he made 'and god created woman' twice. the classic with bardot and then an 80s remake with rebecca de mornay. the script both times was crap. 1 of his worst scripts. he tried to add more depth to the remake but that didn't really help. but although the scripts are lousy, both films are memorable. he really had huge talent as a director. and let me drop back to 'spirits of the dead.' that's a film with 3 segments directed by 3 directors. the other 2 are fellini and louis malle. and yet it's vadim who grabs you with his segment (starring jane fonda and peter fonda - the only film they did together). it's a beautiful segment and it's a powerful 1. vadim has always been underestimated. (1 of the few things i agree with quentin tarantino about is that 'pretty maids all in a row' is a classic film.)
is jennifer welch not 1 of the ugliest people on youtube? i usually watch kara swisher on youtube. she's got jennifer welch on in the latest. i can't take looking at that sour puss. she looks like she's abused diabetes drugs and lost way too much weight to the point that the face has sunken in. at least jennifer's partner - the fat 1 - still looks like a human being.
next up, keith boyken.
the target boycott has been a success and it continues. applause for those who started it and applause for those who joined it.
never read a james patterson book but that's apparently about to change.
big marilyn monroe fan.
let's close with c.i.'s 'The Snapshot:'
In particular, just after the shooting, DHS put out a statement claiming that the agents in question had been “boxed in by 10 cars” and that Martinez’s vehicle “rammed” theirs. The statement also suggests she threatened the agents with a “semi-automatic weapon.” All this “forced” an agent to shoot Martinez, who then “drove herself to the hospital.” DHS added that she’d previously doxed agents online. In short, the shooting was wholly justified: The victim was the one doing the terrorizing—of law enforcement.
Yet these claims are undermined by the criminal complaint against Martinez. It only mentions two cars menacing the agents, not 10. It doesn’t mention her gun, let alone her threatening of the agents with one. It says she was taken to the hospital by ambulance. And as the Chicago Sun-Times reports, Martinez’s lawyer says body-cam footage even contradicts the claim that she directly threatened the officers with her vehicle and shows that the agent said, “Do something, bitch,” before opening fire.
A judge dismissed charges Thursday against Marimar Martinez, who was shot by a Border Patrol agent multiple times in Chicago and accused of using her car to assault and impede federal law enforcement.
The move came after federal prosecutors filed a motion to dismiss their own case. Martinez's case has been one of the most high-profile examples of civilians being accused by federal authorities of ramming into a vehicle driven by immigration agents.
Martinez and co-defendant Anthony Ian Santos Ruiz pleaded not guilty last month to Justice Department charges that they used “their vehicles to assault, impede, and interfere with the work of federal agents in Chicago.”
Andrew S. Boutros, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, filed court documents Thursday morning to dismiss the charges.
U.S. District Judge Georgia Alexakis granted the government’s motion to dismiss the charges Thursday evening, court documents show. The charges were dismissed with prejudice, meaning Martinez and her co-defendant cannot be filed again against them.
Prosecutors said Border Patrol agent Charles Exum shot Martinez in self-defense after she and Santos Ruiz allegedly rammed their cars into a federal vehicle on Oct. 4.
“After striking the agents’ vehicle, the defendants’ vehicles boxed in the agents’ vehicle, the complaint states,” prosecutors said in a statement when charges were announced last month. “The agent was unable to move his vehicle and exited the car, at which point he fired approximately five shots from his service weapon at Martinez, the complaint states.”
Martinez’s legal team had argued that it was federal agents who rammed her car with their vehicle and that the shooting was unjustified and an excessive use of force.
The motion to dismiss comes after it was revealed last week at a court hearing that the Customs and Border Protection agent who shot Martinez multiple times had bragged about it in messages to other officers.
According to Reuters, records presented at the hearing showed that in a group Signal chat with other agents, Exum wrote: “I fired 5 rounds and she had 7 holes. Put that in your book boys.”
In a message to another recipient, Exum sent a news article about the event followed by the message: “Read it. 5 shots, 7 holes,” Reuters reported.
Paramount Skydance made deals with Trump prior to gaining merger approval, now reportedly admin favorites to take over Warner Bros.
Senators warn that botched merger review could raise costs, reduce choices for Americans
“The American people deserve full confidence that the federal government is enforcing these laws independently, transparently, and free from political pressure or financial influence.”
Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) led Senators Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) in writing to U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater, warning that a potential Warner Bros. deal could be tainted by political favoritism and corruption. Warner Bros., in an upcoming formal auction process, is expected to receive bids from major media companies potentially including Paramount Skydance, Netflix, Apple, Amazon, and Comcast, raising the specter of a new, massive media giant that drives up costs and reduces choices for American families.
Recent reporting revealed that the Trump administration prefers for Paramount Skydance to win the bid, raising questions of political favoritism. The close relationship between the Trump administration and Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison could politicize the merger approval process. In July, the Trump administration approved the merger between Paramount and Skydance, just weeks after Paramount donated $16 million to Trump’s Presidential Library — and after Ellison reportedly agreed to a secret “side deal” to run millions of dollars’ worth of pro-Trump ads.
“The Department of Justice (DOJ) must guarantee that any review of a potential Warner Bros. transaction is conducted transparently, independently, and in accordance with federal antitrust and anti-corruption laws — not politics,” wrote the lawmakers. “Regardless of which bidder is selected, the combination of one of these companies with Warner Bros. would further consolidate the media market — risking higher prices and less variety for consumers.”
The lawmakers demanded that the review of any potential transaction involving Warner Bros. follow the law and avoid the taint of corruption and political favoritism. If the review is botched and a new media giant emerges, the company would have even more market power to raise costs at a time when working- and middle-class Americans are already being squeezed by skyrocketing costs across the board.
To ensure the DOJ review is fact-based and transparent, the senators are pressing for answers on interactions that might bias the transaction review process. In particular, the senators ask whether DOJ officials have discussed any matters related to a potential Warner Bros. transaction with lawyers, lobbyists, or consultants hired by Warner Bros. or any of the reported bidders. They also seek further clarification on whether conversations have been held with non-DOJ lawyers, as well as White House officials or Donald Trump, relating to transaction review at the DOJ, including a potential transaction involving Warner Bros.
“A transparent and lawful merger review process ensures that antitrust and public interest laws function as intended — to protect competitive markets, prevent concentration of power, and safeguard American families from higher prices and fewer choices,” the lawmakers concluded. “The American people deserve full confidence that the federal government is enforcing these laws independently, transparently, and free from political pressure or financial influence.”
Senator Warren has consistently fought back against corrupt corporate media consolidation:
-
On October 10, 2025, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) questioned Skydance’s refusal to address President Donald Trump’s reported secret side deal.
-
On August 1, Senator Warren released a statement in response to Paramount’s and Skydance’s responses to her letters to each of the companies, describing the responses as “dodgy” and calling for “a full, independent investigation” into whether the companies or their executives engaged in any criminal behavior connected to the approval of the companies’ multi-billion-dollar merger.
-
On July 24, Senator Warren responded to the Trump administration’s approval of the Paramount-Skydance megamerger, saying “bribery is illegal no matter who is president.”
-
On July 23, Senator Warren published an op-ed in Variety: “Elizabeth Warren on Colbert 'Late Show' Cancellation: Is the Paramount Trump Payoff a Bribe?”
-
On July 21, Senators Warren, Sanders (I-Vt.), and Wyden (D-Ore.) pressed David Ellison, CEO of Skydance, about reports of a secret deal between Skydance and President Trump—and how it may be related to Paramount’s recent multi-million-dollar settlement agreement with Trump.
-
On July 17, Senators Warren and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), along with Representatives Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.), Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.), and lawmakers in Congress, unveiled the Presidential Library Anti-Corruption Act to close loopholes that allow presidential libraries to be used as tools for corruption and bribery.
-
On July 15, Senator Warren released a new report exposing how companies, special interests, and foreign governments may be pledging donations to President Trump’s future Presidential Library as a corrupt tool to secure favorable outcomes from his administration.
-
On July 2, Senator Warren called for an investigation into Paramount’s settlement with Trump.
-
On May 19, Senators Warren, Sanders, and Wyden wrote to Shari Redstone, Chair of Paramount, with concerns regarding whether Paramount may be engaging in potentially illegal conduct involving the Trump Administration in exchange for approval of its megamerger with Skydance.
###