8 March—First, Musk-related Schadenfreude. A couple of days ago Elon Musk’s highly touted SpaceX rocket suffered what his press people called a “rapid unscheduled disassembly” a few minutes after it was launched from Texas. Not long after takeoff, blastoff, liftoff, pissoff, or whatever launches from Musk’s Starbase are called, when it was about 90 miles up, the unmanned/unwomanned (but never unpersonned) Starship—which was the world’s largest rocket—spun out of control and exploded into hot debris that disrupted air traffic as it streaked across the sky. Evidently the rapid unscheduled disassembly was caused by a fuel leakage.

That was the second Starship catastrophe. You’ve got to love “rapid unscheduled disassembly,” though. It’s the kind of periphrasis you’d expect from the government.

While schadenfreuding about Musk, it’s also refreshing to note that in the absence of the press some of Trump’s official government lackeys have been telling Elon where to get off with DOGE’s ill-considered, irresponsible staff and budget cuts. It’s not known whether Trump will continue to do Musk’s bidding or shock everybody and do the right thing. Suffice to say, we don’t know what happens when Elon and Donald are alone.

In all events, you can’t run a government like you run a business. Not that it matters to Trump or Musk, since neither is a businessman anyway. Musk is a brilliant ideas man while Trump is . . . not.

😖 😖 😖 😖 😖 😖 😖

It’s unthinkable and unconscionable that Bob Fisher could have been convicted yesterday in Torrington of manslaughter. And after the six-person jury deliberated or partied for only three hours. It was clearly a case of self-defense because of his inability to retreat (as required by Connecticut’s stupid law) when the mild-mannered, 78-year-old lawyer shot and killed his drunken attacker, Matthew Bromley, a total stranger, in his law firm’s parking lot four years ago.

Nobody knows the much younger, physically fit Bromley’s motive for confronting and assaulting the physically unfit lawyer. Bromley was unknown to Fisher and the staff of his firm. Could it have been mistaken identity with Bromley three sheets to the wind? In all events, the jury must really have reveled in their bit of anti-lawyer Schadenfreude when they convicted an innocent attorney who they must have known was actually a victim.

In Connecticut a judge can issue a “Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict” to overrule a jury if he reckons the evidence presented at trial doesn’t support the verdict. And that’s precisely what Judge Eliot Prescott should do because the evidence presented by defense lawyer Bill Conti showed beyond any—not just reasonable—doubt that Bob Fisher was guilty only of defending himself against a drunk attacker . . .