I'm obviously focused on crime news today -- Zimmerman, Edwards and now Armstrong.

In TV news, why does TNT think Dallas can make a comeback? Michelle Obama is on Restaurant Impossible tonight.

For those of you with other topics on your mind, here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency has opened a formal action against Lance Armstrong for violating anti-doping rules from 1998 to the present. The notice is here.

The letter says Armstrong used blood transfusions from 2000 to 2005. It also alleges he used cortisone without medical authorization, and got plasma and saline transfusions.

Actions were also opened against the Team Director, two Team Doctors, a consulting doctor and a team trainer. The only rider named is Lance Armstrong.

In addition to testimony of fellow riders, the Agency says it has a urine sample showing EPO use taken in 2001 during the Tour de Switzerland. It says it has a witness who will say Armstrong told him/her it was covered up.

[More...]

John Edwards' long, embarrassing saga into the criminal justice system is over. The Justice Department announced it won't seek to retry him and has moved to dismiss the charges.

DOJ's Lanny Breuer says:

“Last month, the government put forward its best case against Mr. Edwards, and I am proud of the skilled and professional way in which our prosecutors.... conducted this trial,” he said.

Team Edwards says:

“While John has repeatedly admitted to his sins, he has also consistently asserted, as we demonstrated at the trial, that he did not violate any campaign law nor even imagined that any campaign laws could apply,” they said. “We are very glad that, after living under this cloud for over three years, John and his family can have their lives back and enjoy the peace they deserve.”

[More...]

The Judge in the George Zimmerman case has ruled that George Zimmerman's police interviews and statements are not confessions because they contain no admission of guilt and therefore must be supplied to the media within 15 days. A copy of the order is here. It states:

Upon an in camera review of the Defendant's statements, they do not qualify as confessions, as the Defendant does not acknowledge guilt of the essential elements of the crime. The only element conceded by the Defendant is that he shot and killed the victim, but he does not concede any other elements of second-degree murder. Fla. Stat. §119.071(2)(e) does not exempt the statements from the public record. Since the Defendant admitted at his bond hearing that he shot the victim, disclosure of those statements will not impact the Defendant's right to a fair trial.

[More..]

At the hearing to revoke bond on June 1, 2012, Judge Kenneth Lester said he would issue a written order. Yesterday, he issued his order, which you can read here.

Interestingly, he writes for the first time that the state's evidence is "strong." The state chose not to present evidence on the facts of the case at the April 20 bond hearing, relying instead on its affidavit. The only testimony at the hearing on the facts of the case came from the state investigator, called by the defense, who acknowledged weaknesses in the state's case. The state's affidavit of probable cause, which as has been endlessly discussed, was a one-sided portrayal with factual inaccuracies and no mention defendant's claim of self-defense. It didn't contain evidence of the elements of second degree murder. [More...]

Not a good day for the Zimmermans. Shellie Zimmerman has been arrested and charged with perjury. She has been released on a $1,000.00 bond.

You can read the capias and affidavit for her arrest here. The Affidavit says the money was transferred not only by Shellie Zimmerman into her and George's accounts at the credit union, but also using George's sister's account at the credit union. It also includes transcripts of additional jail calls, none of them good for George Zimmerman. The state says the calls show they transferred and withdrew money from a safety deposit box, and that many of Shellie's deposits and withdrawals were in amounts of $9,000.00, $9,990.00 or $9,999.00, which some might argue shows an intent to evade federal currency reporting requirements. He also directed her to use some of the money to pay their bills.

ABC breaks down the charges here. [More...]

Using a profane word in public is now subject to a $20 fine in Middleborough, MA. The town's residents passed the law yesterday, at the urging of the police chief, by a vote of 183-50. The town has 20,000 residents.

How will it be enforced? At the discretion of the police.

The measure could raise questions about First Amendment rights, but state law does allow towns to enforce local laws that give police the power to arrest anyone who "addresses another person with profane or obscene language" in a public place.

Matthew Segal, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, said the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the government cannot prohibit public speech just because it contains profanity.

[More...]

Open Thread.

In response to the Justice Department's warning letter to the government of Florida noting that Florida's voter purge initiative violates Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires Justice Department pre-clearance of state actions which have a disparate impact on the voting rights of minorities and a federal law prohibiting purging of voter rolls within 90 days of an election, Florida vows to fight for its voter purge:

Ken Detzner, Florida�s secretary of state, accused the federal government of sullying the integrity of the election process by trying to thwart Florida�s efforts to remove voters who are not American citizens.

What Detzner does not acknowledge is that the Florida purge removes lawful voters from the rolls, and most of those voters are minorities.

Individual rights? What about the most fundamental of them - the right to vote? Somehow I doubt that too many "individual gun rights" advocates are much concerned about Florida's attempt to thwart the most fundamental right - the right to vote.

Speaking for me only

The Florida Task Force on the state's Stand Your Ground law holds its first hearing today -- in a church. 56% of Floridians support Stand Your Ground laws. I support them as well. I don't understand why progressives have chosen this issue. Limiting any constitutional right is not progressive. It's reactionary.

Hopefully the hearing will not be about the Trayvon Martin shooting. Laws should not be enacted or changed in response to a singular event. George Zimmerman may well have been justified in shooting Trayvon Martin under standard self-defense principles. And if he wasn't, it's unlikely the Stand Your Ground law will provide him with immunity.

The Task Force is led by Florida Lt. Governor Jennifer Carroll. She says:

Even though the task force was created because of this case, it won't focus exclusively on this case.... I didn’t want the task force to be a trial of the Zimmerman-Martin case. This task force has to look at public safety and citizens’ rights,” said Carroll.

[More....]

The drumbeat for Ben Bernanke to save us is getting louder from Democratic pundits. Brad Plumer at Ezra's place:

So can anything break the economy out of its current doldrums? If natural forces aren�t going to produce a fast recovery, Smith argues, then the Federal Reserve has to step in: �The Fed has to say that it will tolerate more inflation or will be more heavily focused on unemployment. This way folks engaging in long term projects will know that even if the economy picks up they can still expect to experience low financing costs.�

It can't hurt I suppose, but really, didn't we all agree that in a zero lower bound environment, aren't the Fed's tools of limited utility? Isn't government spending to boost aggregate demand the only real tool that works here? Karl Smith, who owns up to a missed call on the economy recovering (he thought a strong recovery was forming in the winter) writes:

I'm sort of back, but really not. Works is piled up on my desk. But I'll find something to write about.

Open Thread.

The New York Times reports that all three candidates in Mexico's upcoming presidential election are signalling a break from the U.S. in its drug war strategy.

The candidates, while vowing to continue to fight drug trafficking, say they intend to eventually withdraw the Mexican Army from the drug fight. They are concerned that it has proved unfit for police work and has contributed to the high death toll....

The U.S. believes this will result in more drugs coming into the U.S.[More...]

It's 95 degrees in Denver, apparently a record.

Who will be Mitt Romney's running mate? Some say Marco Rubio, while the LA Times gives this list:

Some of the names bandied about most often are Ohio Sen. Rob Portman, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, South Dakota Sen. John Thune, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan.

Jeb Bush couldn't be any clearer he isn't interested. Paul Ryan said he's keeping his options. I wouldn't, it's not going to be him.

Who do you think Romney will pick? And does it matter?

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

Note: This post is around 4,000 words. You may have to read it in pieces. Comments must address the topic. After familiarizing yourself with the facts and issues under discussion, feel free to post a civil response.

Despite his lawyer's statement that George Zimmerman has some repair work to do on his credibility, I'm even less convinced than I was before that Zimmerman's credibility should be affected by the matters presented in the state's motion to revoke bond or the judge's order revoking bond.

Neither alleged George Zimmerman lied. They allege he was deceitful through his silence. I think why he was silent needs to be examined, and in examining it, I can't quite decipher what his lawyer, Mark O'Mara is saying: Is he falling on his sword because Zimmerman deceitful to him and the Court, or is he acknowledging his own missteps for failing to properly inform Zimmerman and by extension, his wife?

Here is the full docket in the case, and here are the publicly released pleadings. The State's Motion to Revoke Bond is here. The transcript of his wife's testimony at the April 20th bond hearing which the state is relying on is here. The audio of the June 1 hearing revoking bond is here. The video of the Judge's ruling on June 1 is here. [More...]