Feel free to add your own

“Our biggest liability as a state should really be touted as our greatest asset.

Instead of fighting the somewhat incorrect notion that we have the highest taxes in the  country we should embrace it.

We have great schools, we have a great environment, we have great (low) crime rates, we have top notch or better health care facilities, we treat our poor people better than most other states, our state government works with our citizens to help make their lives better.  We have great communities.   And, we damn well have the best entrepreneurial environment that you’ll find anywhere in the country and our relatively low unemployment rates reflect that.

We know this costs money, so we’re not going to be the best of the best on the Forbes list.  If you want low taxes and a lousy state, go somewhere else.  If you want the best state, Vermont’s the place.”  

Late last night a friend of mine in Washington, DC wrote to tell me that Michele Boyd at Physicians for Social Responsibility in DC was alerting folks that the Senate Appropriations Committee will take action today on its Energy and Water Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2011.

Currently, what’s proposed, which we just learned late yesterday, is:

$10 billion in new nuclear loan guarantees (that’d be enough to finance another new reactor, at taxpayer financial risk)

$7 billion in fossil fuel loan guarantees

Up to $3.8 billion in renewables and efficiency loan guarantees.

This notice and a subsequent conversation early this morning concerned me greatly, so I wrote to both Senator Leahy and Senator Sanders.  

This winter, Fairewinds Associates’ chief engineer Arnie Gundersen uncovered a significant safety flaw in the new generation of nuclear plants, the AP1000.  The NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) took his report so seriously that it asked Arnie to testify in late June for more than an hour.  These are the reactors that the Senate is considering for loan guarantees.

The entire letter I sent to Vermont’s Senators is posted after the fold.

In response to my letter and emails, I received the following responses from our Senators.

From Senator Leahy’s staff this morning:

We are hearing rumors this issue may come up in the Appropriation Committee this afternoon.  If it does it will  be an amendment offered in Committee and not be a vote in the full Senate.

If an amendment is offered we believe it would be aimed at including additional funds to the loan guarantee program, which Senator Leahy will vote against.

More below the fold.

While today’s vote is limited to the appropriations committee and will not come to the full Senate floor, Senator Sanders’ staff notified me that the appropriate staff will read the letter and also pass it on to the Senator.

As I said in my letter to the Senators:

Burdening U.S. taxpayers with tens of billions dollars of additional liability for new reactors is not just unwise it is cavalier, given the industry’s inability to assure the safety of its technology, resolve interim or long-term radioactive waste storage issues, reduce the soaring capital costs of its proposed new reactors, and the industry’s history of cost overruns and default.  Moreover, Vermont’s taxpayers should not have to bear this outrageous tax burden for nuclear plants that have not been adequately reviewed and for which there is neither need nor adequate waste storage or terrorist protections.  The huge cost per kilowatt-hour for new nuclear power plants simply does not compute in today’s economy.

You may find Arnie Gundersen’s power point presentation here:  

http://www.fairewinds.com/AP10…

Here are the links to the whole report and the summary with technical drawings:

http://www.fairewinds.com/cont…

http://www.fairewinds.com/AP10…

Matt Wald of the New York Times featured Arnie’s testimony to the ACRS in the NY Time Green Energy Blog.  

Is a New Reactor Rust-Prone?  [The Westinghouse AP1000 Reactor]

By MATTHEW L. WALD, NYTIMES, 6/29/10

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com…

April 21, 2010, 3:27 PM

Critics Challenge Safety of New Reactor Design

By MATTHEW L. WALD

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com…

“…during the past year alone, Arnie and Fairewinds Associates have provided expert testimony to the NRC, State Public Service Commissions, and other agencies regarding the Fermi 3, Susquehanna, North Anna, Bellefonte, Beaver Valley, Levy County, Turkey Point 6 & 7, and Callaway nuclear power plants.  As a technical expert, Arnie also gave a key presentation at the Pennsylvania Statehouse delineating the actual concentration of radioactive isotopes released in Pennsylvania by the Three Mile Island nuclear accident.”  

“In addition to the research and report by Fairewinds Associates to the Florida Public Service Commission, former NRC Commissioner, Vermont resident, and Vermont Law School Adjunct Professor Peter Bradford, and Vermont Law School Adjunct Professor Dr. Mark Cooper have also given formal testimony regarding the extensive cost overruns on the new AP1000 units being proposed by FPL and Progress Energy.”

Leahy Sanders Nuclear Loan Guarantees 7-22-2010R

Why does ACORN still matter? Two words – a name: Shirley Sherrod.

The one simple fact about the firing (yes … a coerced resignation is a firing) of Ms. Sherrod is this: It never should have happened! No amount of mea culpas or apologies or even rehiring Shirley can negate this reality.

This whole incident isn’t about Breitbart or the radical right wing lie & smear machine. We already knew they were full of shit. This incident is about a cowardly Obama administration that has shown itself to be lacking in judgment and ready to make kneejerk reactive decisions based upon wholly manufactured evidence. Imagine if we’d been talking about … oh … how about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq Iran some far off nation?

But at least the headline this morning in the Times Argus is “Mea culpa, White House apologizes to fired Ag worker”.

Welch is a totally different story. It’s been the better part of a year since Welch joined his radical right wing lie & smear machine buddies in Congress and attacked the grass roots organization ACORN based entirely on manufactured video evidence and other lies (voting issues, misuse of government funds). Yet the weasel Welch still stands by the lies even though the lies have been publicly exposed! (see this GMD post for audio from a recent Mark Johnson Show providing irrefutable evidence of Welch’s bullshit).

Just as nobody bothered to do even the most cursory fact checking before Shirley Sherrod was sacked from her job; the weasel Welch never bothered to say “You know, as an experienced prosecutor I know the importance of facts when it comes to damning people. I want to see the evidence supporting the claims before I make a judgment on the floor of the House – before I attack a grass roots organization that has done so much to help empower the dis-empowered.”

A simple step for someone with Welch’s experience, yet one he freely and openly refused to take … and refuses to take to this day.

Okay, this whole sordid Shirley Sherrod affair can be written off as a major fuck up with lessons hopefully learned. But the weasel welch continues with his lie based attacks on ACORN. No lessons learned or acknowledgment of poor judgment and worse actions.

Welch is much, much worse. Welch is simply doing a Tricky Dicky Cheney dance (ala Iraqi WMD) and just keeps insisting that despite mountains of evidence proving him wrong that he, Welch, was correct.

Lack of judgment and lack of credibility. That is the phrase that best describes Peter Welch. And he won’t even apologize for it. Those like Welch do not belong in Congress.

There are plenty of distortions and inaccuracies finding their way into the public forum these days, so it is doubly important that our sterling roster of Democratic gubernatorial candidates remain scrupulous about their facts.  If not, there may be hell to pay.  This week, when the Shumlin campaign made certain questionable assertions of primacy in the area of single-payor healthcare advocacy,  Matt Dunne’s campaign responded by crying “foul:”

In a mailing sent out to Vermonters this week, Shumlin writes,” “I am the only candidate in this race who has sponsored a single payer health care bill…”

Similarly, in a response to questions from the Burlington Free Press on Vermont’s social safety net, Shumlin writes “I am the only candidate who sponsored a single-payer health care bill.”

However, in the 1993-1994 Legislative Session, House Bill 0763 titled, “Vermont Health Security Plan/Single-Payer Health Plan” was co-sponsored by several House Members including Matt Dunne. In fact, Dunne has had a long history supporting single payer health care legislation and his current health-care plan is based on a single payer system.

The Dunne campaign is asking the Shumlin campaign for a public apology.  It is also demanding that a Dunne-approved correction from Shumlin be sent (at  Shumlin’s expense) to all the voters who received the original mailer that contained the erroneous statement.

When Obama was running for president there were people saying that he needed to stand up to his attackers. Others, like my friend, fellow blogger, and state Senate candidate Phillip Baruth, said that he knew what he was doing, he'd lived in the country and dealt with racism all his life, and that we should have confidence in him.I wasn't necessarily sold, but it seemed to be working for him so I didn't complain too much.

But after this Shirley Sherrod fiasco I have to ask, “Can't anyone here play this game?”

The basic outlines of the story are clear: Serial liar and right-wing scaremonger Andrew Breitbart published a heavily edited video of two minutes of a speech by Shirley Sherrod, an official at the US Department of Agriculture. Breitbart's claim was that Sherrod is a racist and that she is using her position with the USDA to screw white people. Within seconds the Obama administration leapt into action and fired her without even finding out the truth of the story.

Things have been changing so fast that when I walked out to the end of my driveway this morning the headline on the front page was that Thomas Vilsack was sticking to her firing, even though by now it was clear that the whole thing was built on a lie, but by the time I got back to the house and turned on the radio the same Secretary of Agriculture was considering reconsidering his decision. You can almost picture people running up and down the halls at the White House, bumping into each other, throwing files in the air, and tripping over their own ties.

By the end of the day the White House and Vilsack were apologizing to her, practically begging her to take her job back, and that might happen. Even Breitbart, that lying sack of shit, was pretending to feel sorry for her.

So why is the Obama administration rolling over for a lying, right-wing hit man like Breitbart? What is he really afraid of? There were a lot of people who didn't like it when Obama appointed Rahm Emmanuel his chief of staff, but I kind of liked it because he is a fighter. The problem is, there's no fighting. Just when is this administration going to decide that it's not going to play dead for every right-wing attack?

What's next? Is Obama going to invite Sherrod and Breitbart to the White House for another beer fucking summit?

It is time to fight.

North Beach Park, Burlington, Vermont USA • (L to R) John Odum, Bill Peberdy (BP), Jack McCullough, Caoimhin Laochdha (in back), Julie Waters (with banjo), Sue Prent, Maggie Gundersen, John Ryan (JD) and Hobbes (Hamburg Summit Mascot) – Missing GMD writers: greenvtster, mataliandy NanuqFC, and kestrel9000 (Ed Garcia)

The Annual Hamburger Summit. There is no political barbecue quite like the Hamburger Summit, held jointly each year by VDB (Vermont Daily Briefing) and those of us here at GMD (Green Mountain Daily).

Some call us a motley crew, but here we are.  I couldn’t get hold of this photo to put it up with Julie’s post picnic post, so get the whole story from Julie here on GMD.

Once again, the Hamburg Summit, Blogger’s Picnic was a special event.  The weather held and this was one of the best weather days we’ve had for this event.

Our newer GMD members Sue Prent and BP, brought tons of food, and BP’s wife Amy relieved me from my time on the grill.  Julie wowed us all with banjo music.

Sue, you promised to share your special deviled egg recipe.

Linda from the NE Kingdom asked me to post two links regarding TMI and the new nukes proposed with federal loan guarantees, so Linda, here are the links:

The Three Myths of the Three Mile Island Accident

And, the AP1000 Nuclear Design Flaw Addressed by Arnie Gundersen Expert to NRC Safety Committee (ACRS)

Lastly to those who sometimes claim that GMD’ers are hiding behind phony pen names, that’s just not true.  If you had attended any of the other Hamburg Summits, you would have met the rest of the GMD motley crew who’s family or work commitments sadly precluded their attendance at the 2010 Summit.

I’m wishing you all a wonderful summer.  And, thanks Philip Baruth from Vermont Daily Briefing for organizing this years’ event and to Don Shall for the great GMD group photo.

When Jim Douglas was running for Senate a long, long time ago, it was congressional pay raises (and the accusation that Senator Leahy was “squealing like a stuck pig.”) Against Racine, it was a baseless attempt to tag him as a “flip flopper.” Scudder Parker was, nonsensically, “Mr. Property Tax.” Clavelle was red-baited as a sandinista. Symington was dinged on her financial releases.

The way Jim Douglas and his election machine played the game was to avoid the issue by finding a way to fan a triviality into a character attack. In other words, politics by smear. It’s dishonorable stuff, and Douglas seemed to relish it. On the other hand, it suggests he understood just how weak he was on the issues.

In any case, the question has been whether heir apparent Brian Dubie would resort to the same playbook, and it seems the answer is “yes.” In his case, though, he seems content to let the machine’s usual suspects do the dirty work for him, softening up the target they’ve apparently decided they are most likely to face in the General Election: Secretary of State Deb Markowitz. They’ve done so in a coordinated attack over the past few days, and will continue in an upcoming report on nursing licensing fees due to hit the papers soon. Details after the flip.

The first salvo was launched by GOP Secretary of State candidate and former Douglas mouthpiece Jason Gibbs. Gibbs launched a scathing, over-the-top attack on Markowitz in a campaign press release – a release that didn’t even mention either his primary opponent, Chris Roy, or potential Democratic nominees Charles Merriman or Jim Condos:

Last week, the Secretary of State struggled through three consecutive challenges:

Few Vermonters had been adequately notified of the new August 24th Primary Election.  (See also:  Rutland Herald, Capital Beat Column, July 11, 2010)

Ballot errors prevented early and absentee voting to begin on time in some communities. (See also: Burlington Free Press, Vt Buzz, “Early voting? Not so fast”, July 12, 2010)

The insecurity of the statewide voter checklist was illustrated when it crashed and left Town Clerks and others unable to access important public information (See also: WCAX, “Vermont Voter Checklist Trouble, July 14th, 2010).

Everyone makes mistakes.  But, with the right leadership, these issues could have been handled with the level of accountability Vermonters expect and deserve from their officials–and they could have been avoided all together.  Nevertheless, in each case, the incumbent’s focus was on deflecting responsibility for the problem instead of solving it.

[…] Town Clerks tell me that sending mixed messages–or providing no clear leadership at all–is all too common.  

(Read the full release here). Now its certainly common practice for a candidate running for an open position being vacated by a member of the opposing party to attack the incumbent for the purposes of then tying an opponent to that negative characterization, but again – this release draws no such connections. As VPR’s John Dillon reported this morning:

(Dillon) But Gibbs insisted he is not criticizing Markowitz personally but is trying to show how he would run the office differently. And he said he has not coordinated his strategy with Lieutenant Governor Brian Dubie, the GOP gubernatorial candidate.

[…](Dillon) The blast from Gibbs was not the only criticism from Republicans over the early voting glitches. Gibbs’ former boss – Governor Jim Douglas – had this to say last week.

(Douglas) “It’s disappointing. Folks showed up Monday morning in some communities and the ballots weren’t there. I don’t understand why there wasn’t an announcement of some kind maybe at the end of last week saying they’d be delayed in some places.”

(Dillon) Douglas was asked whose fault was it? Markowitz’s, or the Legislature, which moved up the date of the primary.

(Douglas) “Well, the Democrats.” (laughter)

It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that Gibbs is attempting to soften up Markowitz on Dubie’s behalf.

Note that Jim Douglas as well has made comments to the press, following up on his Lieutenant’s themes – all of which is to lead up to a rare Dubie appearance on Vermont Edition. Understandably, Republicans are concerned about Dubie’s performance when left unscripted. With the timing of this attack, Douglas and Gibbs (working with Dubie) are theoretically able to steer the line of questioning toward the perception of impropriety in Secretary Markowitz’s office, leaving Dubie to face friendly, softball questions and an opportunity to wax superior to his potential opponent.

And this is only part 1 of what seems to be a more sophisticated and sustained attack than we’ve generally seen from the Douglas-Dubie machine. Part 2? That comes soon, with the release of a story being worked on by the Vermont Press Bureau, which brings Auditor Tom Salmon into the equation.

Back in the Spring, the Board that supervises the professional regulation of Vermont nurses (a 10-member board made up of 10 Douglas appointees) requested Salmon undertake an audit of the professional licensure system they are tasked with supervising – a system administered by the Secretary of State’s office. Salmon’s office returned a positive audit, concluding that the Board’s funds were secure and properly accounted for. Salmon did, curiously, make some suggestions above and beyond what was asked for, but they didn’t seem to amount to anything noteworthy (the audit can be seen here).

According to sources, what’s now being shopped to the media is that one of those tertiary recommendations was that the Secretary of State ask for an opinion from the Attorney General’s office as to whether or not the office was using too much of that money for its internal administrative purposes. On its face, that would seem to be a strangely absurd recommendation, as that is largely the point of the fees in the first place – although they also are used for some other, legislatively defined pools.

But more significant is the fact that no such recommendation seems to appear in the linked audit above.

The Secretary of State’s office – which reportedly did respond positively to some of the extraneous recommendations from the Auditor’s office – did not seek any such opinion from the AG, which – again – there is no evidence from the audit that it was even encouraged to.

And now, months later, this is being pushed by Republicans behind the scenes, channeled through their contacts in the professional media, and morphed into some sort of scandal. Exactly how remains rather mysterious, and presumably more details of the attack will emerge when the report hits the stands (if it even sees print). Presumably, the GOP machine wants to raise doubts about Markowitz’s capacity for responsibly managing public funds, but again, based on what’s available publicly, it’s hard to imagine how that argument is being made in this instance.

Even though it won’t work (because there’s nothing there), all of this makes one thing abundantly clear: the Douglas smear machine is now the Dubie smear machine, and it is in overdrive this year. Gibbs, Salmon, Douglas and others are all prioritizing the promotion of Brian Dubie into the state’s top spot.

And all of this avoids any real engagement on the issues, of course. Why? Perhaps because, somewhere in there, they know they’re at a disadvantage on those terms.

So scandals will be manufactured and aspersions will be cast until one seems to stick, and in the process, protect Dubie from having to answer questions he can’t handle, or at the very least bump his lack of executive competence from the headlines.

No doubt this is only the tip of the ugliness iceberg. Brace yourselves.

(NOTE: The GMD byline represents collaborative work by multiple – but not necessarily all – site contributors)

(An update: this video has been removed from youTube.  So far, no one has come to take credit for it, so this leads me to believe that my initial assessment of it was entirely accurate.  Will the anonymous user who posted it acknowledge what was done here?

This was posted to youTube under the moniker PoliticsVT, who had two videos.  They have both been removed. – promoted by JulieWaters)

In the past week, a video’s been referenced in the comment threads here that suggests that Brian Dubie wants to tax small stores and that it’s okay to tax them as much as we want:

A few problems I see with this:

1. the quote in question isn’t from Brian Dubie, but instead tax commissioner Richard Westman;


2. the quote itself isn’t specifically sourced.  It references “Vermont Public Radio” and “April of 2010” but doesn’t provide anything specific enough to find out exactly when this statement was claimed to have been made


3. The quote is taken out of context with no clarity as to what the intent was behind it.

It’s extremely easy for me to imagine that this was someone saying that this is what us liberals think, that it’s okay to tax mom and pop stores as much as we like.  Without a broader context, I don’t see how we can make a judgment about this specific quote, but it’s presented as some sort of attack on Dubie himself.  

Look, we’ve just seen a really nasty example of what can happen when clips are edited for partisan political purposes.  I’ve no problem with attack ads, but they need to be properly sourced, documented and valid.  I don’t see an indication that this one is, and given that I asked for clarification from the person who posted the links and never received a response, I’m inclined to think that this is bogus.  

I’m sure Dubie would make a horrible governor.  He’s shown more interest in platitudes than policy.  But we need to go after him for what he’s actually involved in or avoided.

And yes, I’m going after something produced by someone who clearly shares my goals, because I don’t think my goals are truly served by this sort of approach.  

It’s good for neither politics nor policy to muddy the waters of our debates with this sort of innuendo.  

(Another 1st person candidate piece. – promoted by JulieWaters)

Throughout the campaign, we’ve been working to change the culture in Montpelier by engaging Vermonters in the Vermont tradition of public service and inspiring them to get involved in their communities and their state government. By engaging directly with community organizations, those of us in the political sphere can learn first hand the needs of Vermonters, provide authenticity to our civic leaders and give a voice to people who have often been absent from the democratic process.

Nowhere did I see this effort in action more than during a service politics event we held in Montpelier last month. At the event, a group of volunteers from the campaign joined members of the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board and members of the Parks Department to prepare a new and improved trail from the Cummings Street low income housing project to the town recreational fields and pool. 

The goal of the project was to make it easier and more fun for the kids and families from the Cummings Street housing project to walk or bike to the recreation area.

We were delighted to help with a project that benefited both the Parks Department and the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board. My father was one of the founders of the Vermont Land Trust and VHCB has been a critical part of supporting Vermont's housing needs and conserving our land and resource. We also joined people working in national service, a commitment that can not help but inspire. 

But the most powerful part of the afternoon came from an unexpected place. As we started getting to work on the project a six year old boy who lived in the housing project approached us (we’ll call him JJ).  He asked us to leave, saying he would break the bridge we were building and even threatening us personally. He assumed we’d yell back or ignore him.  Instead we took him by surprise: we asked him to join us in helping out. While he remained skeptical at first, by the end of the day he was carrying tools, stripping bark off logs and clearing paths to make our efforts easier.  Half way through the project, JJ went back home and returned with his mother and many residents of the community.  He proudly showed them where the trail, benches and “his bridge” will be. By the end of the project seven kids from the community came out to help us.

As I travel through the state, Vermonters – especially younger voters – are saying they have become disenchanted with the political system, the blame game in Montpelier, and standard campaign tactics.

Our campaign is reviving “service politics” – an effort to use campaign resources and volunteer energy to give back to the community. That is the power of the Vermont tradition of service that empowers all Vermonters in strengthening our community and moving this state forward. While other candidates talk about the children who are struggling, we are different – we engage with them and hopefully impact their lives in a profound and positive way.

More importantly, JJ’s response is not that much more different that that of other Vermonters.  The cynicism and anger that has grown over the last 8 years can been heard across the state.  But as we reach out to Vermonters, our campaign has found that, like JJ, that cynicism and anger can vanish when people are not told what they should think, but are asked to be a part of the solution.

We’ll be participating in two service politics projects this week in Montpelier and Springfield, that we hope you can join us for.

Today, we’ll be delivering food to Montpelier’s seniors with Meals on Wheels. If you have volunteered with Meals on Wheels before, then come out today, Wednesday, July 21 at 11:15am. We’ll be meeting at the National Life Building at 1 National Life Drive, Montpelier.

On Friday, we’ll be joining volunteers and members of the Springfield community to help build a new playground for the Union Street School. Join us on Friday, July 23, at 1:00pm at the Union Street School, 43 Union Street, Springfield.
 
We’re excited to continue participating in projects like these and the one in Montpelier, to come up with new ways to engage, interact and debate with Vermonters across the state. If you know of other upcoming service projects or planning one of your own, please let us know. If not, let us know what type of projects you’d like to see, and hopefully we can bring a service event to your community soon.

Remember when the weasel peter welch joined his radical right wing allies in Congress to attack the grass roots organization ACORN? Remember how each and every reason welch used – AND CONTINUES TO USE – to support his alliance with his radical right wing allies in Congress in attacking ACORN turned out to be irradiate waste product? (Meaning of no value whatsoever … not even to till the earth with.)

Well, now it’s the Obama administration’s turn to be the weasel, and the target of their baseless attacks is a woman named Shirley Sherrod.

Ms. Sherrod WAS a regional director of the U.S. Department of Agriculture down in tea party heaven Georgia. But then she made the mistake of talking about a decades old incident that taught her the evils of looking at life through a lense of skin color … and that was enough for Obama and his courtiers to bounce the poor woman from her job faster than a dumping of Obama’s one time long time pastor Wright.

Of course the wing nuts took Shirley Sherrod’s statements way, way out of context in order to lie about her statements. The lie machines told the world that Sherrod’s statements were about contemporary actions and, rather than discussing a life lesson learned, reflected her attitudes today.

Which obviously was enough to kick the DC Democratic surrender monkey machine into high gear … and promptly push for and receive Ms. Sherrod’s resignation … something I would call firing by coercion.

The NAACP was the first public body to realize just how duped they were by the made up bullshit that Obama and his administration lapped up like tax dollars for bloody and pointless wars.

After watching the full, unedited tape of remarks delivered by Sherrod, however, the NAACP now says that it was “snookered” into casting judgment on Sherrod, and has officially retracted its criticism of her, fulfilling an earlier Surge Desk prediction. In a further bitter irony, Sherrod was actually speaking at an NAACP event.

(NAACP Retracts Criticism of Shirley Sherrod After Viewing Full Video of Speech, AOL News, 07/20/10)

And the supposed victim of Shirley Sherrod’s non-existent rascism?

Earlier in the day, Eloise Spooner, the wife of the farmer mentioned in Sherrod’s story, spoke to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, where she vigorously defended Sherrod, saying that her actions help the couple hold onto their farm.

(ibid)

Yeah … Obama’s in your corner … until he’s not … which is much more often than the prior.

(PS. Still waiting on that welch apology to ACORN for the damage he did there.)

Full video of Shirley Sherrod’s speech as provided by the NAACP:

The video is about 43 minutes, and I would suggest listening from the beginning and continue at least through her conclusion regarding the incident in question. Her non-controversial controversial statements begin a little after 16 minutes. One note: there is an obvious edit in the filming (looks like a part 1 was appended to a part 2) at 21 minutes but it doesn’t affect her comments one iota.