“Pecker offered to help deal with negative stories about that presidential candidate’s relationships with women by, among other things, assisting the campaign in identifying such stories so they could be purchased and their publication avoided.”

(“AMI” is the company which publishes The National Enquirer. “Pecker” is the head of that company.)

“It’s a critical admission because, if true, it transforms the payment into a criminal violation as opposed to simply a private transaction.”

It’s weird to hear old guys who don’t understand tech at all try to tell a tech expert how his own company works.

Here’s a classic exchange:

LAMAR SMITH: You’ve never punished a Google employee for manipulating search results, is that right?

GOOGLE CEO SUNDAR PICHAI: It’s not even possible for an individual employee to do that.

SMITH: I disagree. I think humans can manipulate the process.

Now here’s the really good part – by bringing this matter up in a public forum, covered by every news site and many bloggers (even me), Smith just made it even MORE likely that a search for idiot will turn up a story about Trump – or about Lamar Smith! If a Google search for “idiot” should actually lead to Lamar Smith, the picture would certainly be convincing!


But here’s the really sad part: this simple, elderly fellow who can’t understand the very basic concepts behind a Google search, is (at least for a few more weeks) the chairman of the House Committee on Space, Science, and Technology!

Gee, I can’t imagine why American students keep falling farther behind the rest of the world in science.

At least Smith seemed alert enough to know who he was talking to. That’s an indication of genius by congressional standards. He seemed like Dr. Steven Hawking compared to Louis Gohmert, who complained to the CEO of Google about Wikipedia, or Steve King, who complained about Apple.

“Congressman, iPhone is made by a different company.”

Gohmert’s complaint at least sounded like something that really happened. In King’s case, he not only addressed his concerns to the wrong guy, but it was pretty obvious that he had totally fabricated his complaint, but was too tech-challenged to realize how transparent his lie was.

These images demonstrate why Jennifer Connelly is a legend of film nudity. She was ubiquitous in our annual top twenty lists from 1996-2003, including three finishes in the top three, and two top-ten appearances in the same year.

Her nude scenes:

The Hot Spot, 1990

Of Love and Shadows, 1994

Mulholland Falls, 1996 (The top nude scene of 1996)

Inventing the Abbotts, 1997 (The #2 nude scene of 1997)

Waking the Dead, 2000, with additional nudity in deleted scenes. (#9 among the top nude scenes of 2000)

Requiem for a Dream, 2000 (#3 among the top nude scenes of 2000)

The House of Sand and Fog, 2003 (#15 among the best nude scenes of 2003)

Shelter, 2014

American Pastoral, 2016

They were both born on Dec 12, 1970, and are therefore both turning 48 today.

Madchen’s best nude scene is one of the greatest in history. In 1994, at the tender age of 23, she stripped off every stitch of clothing and was photographed from every angle in Dream Lover.

The remainder of her early career was mostly just teases: a quick flash of her booty in Love Cheat & Steal (1993, age 22); side-boobs in Bombshell (1996, age 25) and Hangman (2001, age 30). Then in 2013, after more than a decade without any nudity in her performances, she did a beautiful full rear nude at age 42, in a 2013 episode of Witches of East End, and she looked mah-velous. Those four appearances are pictured here.