Before you start something with an assumption about how it is going to finish, you better make sure you don't have your own skeletons rattling in the closet

 

Unless you believe in something strong enough despite all the odds against you, wishful thinking tends not be a very good strategy to win the battle, especially if the facts are not on your side. A lawyer doesn’t take an appeal case of a death row inmate unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the man is innocent and there was deliberate wrong-doing by prosecutors and witnesses. 

Johnny Depp was someone who believed he was in the right—and as we heard in those audio tapes, was someone whose nature was to avoid conflict, but who was under constant assault by a crazed narcissist who feasted on self-obsessed conflict. Most of us understand why Depp felt he was the "real" victim in his relationship with Amber Heard, and despite a speed bump in the UK, he prevailed in front of a jury of ordinary people who understood who really controlled and manipulated  that relationship, and why.

Depp was fortunate that Heard, her legal team, a parade of seemingly disinterested former friends/witnesses and “experts” who tried to “explain” the inexplicable,  screwed things up so badly in a case that should have been a grand slam out of the ballpark given the current social political climate. But Heard couldn’t finish what she started because it was apparent that she was her own worst enemy, as it was clear that it was her arrogance, selfishness and narcissism got the better of her, convinced that no one would question her; she couldn't foresee the future because she never thought her story would be subject to the rules of evidence or contradicted by the testimony of third-party witnesses. 

Upon more thought, Heard's most "convincing evidence"--the image showing "bruises" evenly spread across the length of her brow and around her eyes--is even more suspect when one considers the fact that because Depp was right-handed, we would see most or all of the "damage" to the left side of Heard's face; no, the "verdict" is that the "bruises" were most likely from filler injections, with some who have had filler or Botox injections noting the resemblance to their own bruising. Further, the infamous "bruise" she showed at the TRO appearance was also on the "wrong" side of her face.

Heard started this because this B-lister (as former TMZ employee Morgan Tremaine called her) was humiliated that her A-list husband was finished with her. During the trial she continuously doubled-down on her most obvious lies—the “donations,” how TMZ got the kitchen cabinet video from her own cellphone, and after claiming that the Washington Post op-ed wasn’t about Depp, became so flustered during cross examination that she “inadvertently” admitted that it was about Depp. 

Heard obviously hoped that her initial accusations  would destroy Depp's career and reputation, but anyone who watched the 2016 deposition can see by Heard’s demeanor that she was no “victim,” but a completely self-involved person who took Depp’s rejection “personally,” and thus wanted “revenge.”

Thus in hindsight it should not be at all surprising that when instead of a case based on “evidence”—but in fact one based on selfish feelings—once Depp’s case was out of the hands of a judge who was proven to be biased and easily conned by a proven liar, and into the hands of “average” citizens who had better understanding of “normal” life, that given the evidence (or lack thereof) presented at the Virginia trial, it was not “shocking” that Depp won his case against Heard; people know a liar and an abuser when the see—and especially hear—one.

This was certainly not how Heard convinced herself this would all end, being the most hated woman in America (well, except for those people who think she looks like a "angel" and not a demon) without a job. Had she known it would all end this way would she have written (with the help of ACLU) that op-ed? Probably not, but then again Heard wasn't the sort to take "advice."  

Heard also finds herself in a pickle after having insisted on appealing the trial verdict and piling-up legal fees to no point before throwing in the towel (regardless of how the media and Heard portrays it). She thinks this case is all over now and people will leave her alone. That's wishful thinking, especially given that her numbskull shills won't shut-up.

Rather than being "all over," Heard is currently begging for mercy from the court to throw out New York Marine’s lawsuit against her, since Heard claims the “settlement” means she is no longer demanding that the insurance company reimburse her for any legal costs, although Travelers thinks it needs to “share” the fiasco it got itself into. Travelers should have thought about this before they agreed to insure Heard; as the website Risk& Insurance notes

Celebrities are just like us, aren’t they? But that’s beside the point. The real lesson here is that when an insured is facing nuclear-sized allegations, insurers will want to review what is or is not covered lest they be strapped with a nuclear-sized verdict.

And now we are hearing that the author of the original Sun article labeling Depp a “wife beater”—Dan Wootton—probably should have thought twice before throwing stones and made sure his own “house” wasn’t a rat and roach-infested garbage bin. We are learning of the accusations of a former partner, Alex, who is accusing Wootton of “stalking” and “bullying” during their relationship.

But that was hardly the worst accusation. Alex also claims to have discovered a secret video on a computer external hard drive of Wootton’s “friend” having apparently non-consensual sex with a male Sun employee. Worse, Alex believes that it was Wootton himself, using an alias, who secretly filmed the episode. Apparently this was all a “secret” kept in the “closet” until this disclosure, and Wootton has “disappeared” from airwaves for now. 

The media, of course, has avoided mentioning Wootton’s connection with the Depp/Heard case, which of course would suggest that Wootton was hoping to use it for “protection” just in case these accusations became public—which apparently he received for some time, which only underlines the hypocrisy. It's hard to believe that when Wootton was writing that "wife-beater" piece that he didn't think about what would happen if people found out about him; but then again, some people just don't think that far ahead.

On a bigger scale, the “end game” is something nations should think of before they start things like protracted wars. Putin apparently thought the war in Ukraine would last only a few days once Kyiv was captured and its president detained or killed. 17 months later nothing has changed, with his military ill-equipped to fight an opposition force of equal or greater ability, and not just bombing Syrian or African militants.

It wasn't supposed to be this way, and Putin is desperate to find a way out of this headache of a war, and convince the public that all the Russian dead was for a "good" cause. If Putin knew where this ended-up at, would he have quit the venture, or increased the resources put into the effort? Of course it is too late now for hindsight, and he obviously is desperate for a way out, but only on his terms, which is not the terms the Ukrainians are at the moment willing to accept.

Of course you have "smart" people like Elon Musk, Oliver Stone and Tucker Carlson who have all the "answers" now, finding it so “disturbing” all this blood of young men being shed for a “needless war,” which they seem to blame Ukraine more than Russia for—not surprising since they have expressed pro-Russia sentiments in the past and appear to be undisturbed by the many "mysterious" deaths and the denial of basic freedoms, such as that of expression. 

But they should have thought about that before Russia invaded Ukraine, because now they  sound not just like pathetic Putin apologists but hypocrites; the fact that Russians, blindly following their leader, are shedding no tears over the death and destruction brought upon a country that was no threat to it testifies to high level of  mendacity present in any defense of Putin and Russians in general.

And there is Yevgeny Prigozhin and those other Russian generals who probably should have thought twice before secretly supporting his mutiny. Prigozhin seems to have been a bit of a coward after his little army came within a few hours of Moscow’s city limits, apparently not expecting to see a blockade on the Oka River. He assumed that the portions of the Russian military was going to rise-up in support of him, and when it didn't happen (no doubt that his would-be supporters were having thoughts of a purge), he backed off.

After Prigozhin stood down, it was assumed that he and his business empire was “doomed,” but the fact that he was allowed to “negotiate” with Putin over his and the Wagner Group’s future suggests that Putin own position is weak and he fears another uprising by “antagonizing” Prigozhin and those in the military who still secretly support his anti-establishment position. Putin certainly didn't see this coming, and now all he has left is "luck" and the hope that the West tires of the war before he does.

The point of all of this, I suppose, is that before you start on a questionable crusade with questionable motivations, you should think about the worst-case scenario on how all of this will end, especially if you have no sense of the strength of opposition. For people like Heard and Wootton, they should have heard those skeletons rattling in the closets waiting for someone to notice and let them out. 

For Putin and his gang, he was better off believing his own lies about having no intention to invade Ukraine; the "truth" was no great help to him, and reality has a cruel way of bringing one closer to doom the longer they stay the course.