This whole episode would be comical if it wasn’t so depressing. So the Reps are up in arms because Garland did exactly what they demanded that he do. That reminds me of a line from Animal House – “you fucked up, you listened to us”. It also reminds me (yet again) of how Trump would disparage a former Administration member as being unqualified for the JOB THAT HE NOMINATED THEM FOR.
I assume there are two primary reasons for the Rep response. The first is simple muscle memory. Whatever Garland does is bad, full stop. The second is to prepare the Trump base for the possibility that nothing will come of the investigation. Then they can say “we told you that Weiss was not a good guy. He’s ignoring all of the obvious evidence”. I bet they would have tried the same tack with Durham had Durham been appointed by Garland.
Perhaps in the coming days, some intrepid Capitol Hill reporter will ask them to justify their current position, considering their past position. But I know that their response won’t matter to their base (even if they repeated the Animal House line) because nothing matters to their base except that they are going after Biden or the libs or the Dems. Certainly, logic doesn’t matter.
Still I will remember this as (perhaps) exhibit number one when it comes to the hypocrisy that is the current GOP.
“it’s important for political observers and news consumers to look at these situations with a wider lens to avoid being misled” – amen to that. Just as the ultimate responsibility for our current political climate lies with the voters, so too is it incumbent upon news consumers to at least think about what they are being told to see if it passes the “smell test”. But the success of OANN and Newsmax (not to mention Fox), shows that ain’t happening.
In the not-too-distant past, news organizations had a decent chance of creating some balance because both sides of an issue had legitimate points. Most issues were 60/40 or 70/30 (meaning that those on the “60” side could understand that those on the “40” side had legitimate points). Now a lot of issues are 95/5 and those same news organizations just can’t figure out how to deal with the “5”. If they ignore it, those on that side will just accuse them of blatant bias. But if they give full coverage to the “5” side, then they are giving it undeserved relevancy.
This is just another example of the uneven playing field. Whatever anyone thinks about the MSM, they at least try to present a true picture. They seem to be walking on eggshells to tell both sides. They admit their mistakes. But the conservative media couldn’t care less. They don’t even bother pretending to present the other side. And the only time that they apologize is when they fear a defamation lawsuit.
And there is another difference. As biased as outlets like MSNBC are, they don’t make stuff up.
Debates are pointless, for all sides. Doesn't change any votes, questions are dodged, the audience is biting their nails praying their candidate won't look stupid or break a big sweat, no specifics mentioned, just SOS talk pts., and so on.
The only entertaining debates that I can recall include are those having the comedic Ross Perot, Lloyd Benson callng Dan Quayle a Jack Kennedy not, and Trump's epileptic appoplexy at Biden making him look bad with facts. Then, there are the partisan afterparty interviewees that praise their guy as a god, and all others as incompetent diablos.
As per tradition I will skip the live circus and tune into the Reader's Digest or Cliff Note editions.
I love in one of the debates Trump kept wandering around the stage and making stupid comments while Biden was making a point. Finally, Biden smiled and said hey, shut up, man. Biden was totally unintimidated.
“Press coverage intended to fairly represent “both sides” of an issue runs a high risk of failure when one side is dominated by bad-faith actors. In such cases, creating the impression of balance can lead to drawing false equivalences, elevating unserious positions, and minimizing serious crimes. While the larger media world continues to struggle to accept this lesson—one of the biggest of the 2016 election—it’s important for political observers and news consumers to look at these situations with a wider lens to avoid being misled.”
This whole “I will support the eventual republican nominee” is a nonsensical commitment to authoritarianism rule. It clearly puts party above country, a point democrats should use in the general. Should all republicans support a fascist or convicted sexual predator or white supremacist, just because he’s a republican?
If David Duke were running and he wins the republican nomination, would all republicans be required to vote for him? No need to answer, it’s a rhetorical question. This is definitely their father’s GQP: circa, Deep South 1950’s.
I’m also shocked McCarthy hasn’t started impeachment proceeding yet. Blue state republicans be damned. It’s an a two tiered system of Justice I tell ya!!!!
I hear Comer has two new whistleblowers that will swear under oath that Hunter is the real Qanon and it was Joe who personally transported the 11,781 fake ballots in GA that threw the election to Biden...:)
"Should all republicans support a fascist or convicted sexual predator or white supremacist, just because he’s a republican?"
Unfortunately that's the line the Republicans are taking across the board, because "Democrats are destroying the country". Voters in Georgia voted for the abominable Herschel Walker just because Republicans needed control of the Senate. Similarly, many Republicans will vote for Trump if he's nominated, even if they have to hold their nose to do it - including many who intimately recognize how unqualified and destructive Trump will be, such as Mike Pence and Bill Barr.
Not necessarily. Consider the damage done to Hillary by the "Hillary-hater" engine initialized in the '90s when she was in charge of health care reform, sustained throughout her candidacies for president, and culminating in the Benghazi hearings, the email fiasco, and chants of "Lock her up!" The Hunter Biden investigation was originally one of Trump's 3 "October Surprises" - investigations intended to issue reports damaging to Biden and the Democrats the month before the election; all 3 fizzled out. The original Hunter Biden investigation was intended to focus on corruption in the Ukraine (which they're still going after), but turned up nothing actionable, so they shifted to taxes and the gun application, both of which are relatively trivial.
Meanwhile, the lack of any evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden hasn't kept the right-wing press from constantly charging corruption (see, for instance, the August 10th New York Post cover). Republicans have long mastered what I call the "Smoke Effect" (where there's smoke there must be fire), and the constant barrage of innuendo and false claims can actually affect voters - e.g. one of my relatives turned against Hillary just because of the Benghazi hearings, which Kevin McCarthy bragged was bringing down Hillary's poll numbers.
Re: the debates. Vivek has to rap all his responses. The requirement for the pledge is yet another confirmation that the GOP is not a serious party anymore. Trump can easily sit this one out and enjoy his popcorn while they debate. If he does not go, they will have to turn on each other, since going after Trump will look stupid. Christie will probably still make it work, but not the others. Trump likes to watch people fighting. It gives him a special thrill.
We really need a better forum as a country to hold people accountable to this kind of rank hypocrisy / duplicity.
"Name Weiss a Special Prosecutor!" "Democrats are terrible for naming Weiss a Special Prosecutor." No one can actually defend that. Yet we really have no forum / mechanism to point that out to people. Republicans ought to be mad about that and want better Republicans to replace those who hack in such an idiotic (charitable) fashion.
Re: the NBC News report (and all the other serious reports, including you, Joe), I honestly appreciate the seriousness and objectivity in which they do their reporting. I appreciate the word choices that are made. But I often times feel a smirk behind them. Maybe it's mine that I am overlaying the info.
I'd guess it's very hard for intelligent reporters to have to actually treat some of the nonsensical Republican attention hogging as if it's really serious, but traditionally, pre- Gingrich, congressional press conferences or 'hearings' usually DID have some reason to be covered as if they were actually of some importance. I would also guess today's good reporters are rolling their eyes while they're writing these things.
I imagine so. I deal with stupid stuff at work. What I know helps me with that and the Trump/GOP catastrophe is maintaining a psychological distance. It's when I can't or don't do that, that I get really aggravated. I'll bet the better reporters do something similar.
"Three individuals on this list have not agreed to the pledge. Pence and Christie have been pretty clear they think Trump is unfit for office, though Pence has not said outright he won’t back his old boss if push comes to shove. The third candidate who hasn’t signed is Trump, because he doesn’t like several of the candidates."
-----
Christie has made it abundantly clear that his prime motivation for running is to hold the Apricot Arthropod's feet to the fire, to hold him accountable for his past and ongoing violations of our laws, our Constitution, the oath of office he took in 2017, his betrayal regarding our allies and friends, among myriad other offenses TFG has committed.
Pence can try to spin away his complacency as VPOTUS to the Tangerine Tyrant, but that stench will follow him around the rest of his days. It wasn't until the MAGAdroids were threatening to lynch him that he did or said anything that wasn't an homage to his ex-boss. He *still* can't bring himself to totally condemn the actions taken by the previous inhabitant of the White House, he continues to be an apologist for the sake of his own image, and in an attempt to win over some of the Orange cultists.
As for the Orange G-d King himself, he says he won't sign the loyalty pledge because he doesn’t "like several of the candidates[.]" In reality, he doesn't like *any* of the others running for the New GOP nomination - for no other reason than their last names aren't Trump. He is waiting in the wings for his coronation, not only as the New GOP candidate, but also as President-for-Life. And, if he doesn't achieve his goals you can be assured that he will do everything he can to burn down the country in an act of revenge on all who don't recognize his godhead.
1. For all his complicity as Trump's VP, and his role in choosing all the corporate execs and lobbyist shills for positions in the government, on January 6th Pence did the right thing, and my impression is that as much as he's avoided involvement in subsequent events, he simply will not lie under oath, unlike many of the other players.
2. The Orange Emperor doesn't think of himself a God King; rather he's a terminally insecure little boy who can't live up to the standards his father set, and needs constant reassurance and adulation to partially assuage that.
You heard it here. Trump will never leave office if he becomes President. He will cancel the election for President and will appoint his son or daughter as his successor.
Somewhere, a short time ago, I proposed what the Apricot Arthropod will take as his official title after taking the election, legally, illegally or extralegally [turns head, spits three times between index and middle fingers], when being sworn in as the 47th POTUS as a blatant ripoff of Idi Amin:
His Excellency, President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji [can't be Al Hadji (sic) since it's Moooooslim] Doctor Idi Amin Dada [obviously replacing the name with TFG], VC, DSO, MC, [he'll award himself the Medal of Honor, a couple Purple Hearts with Oak Leaf Clusters, a Silver Star and anything else that strikes his fancy] Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas
He'll just refer to himself as "The Second Coming Bringing Divine Retribution."
Trump doesn’t need to be onstage at the first debate. He could sit in the audience and heckle, or do it split-screen on Newsmax.
I loved the article's wonderful picture of America's second dumbest senator.
This whole episode would be comical if it wasn’t so depressing. So the Reps are up in arms because Garland did exactly what they demanded that he do. That reminds me of a line from Animal House – “you fucked up, you listened to us”. It also reminds me (yet again) of how Trump would disparage a former Administration member as being unqualified for the JOB THAT HE NOMINATED THEM FOR.
I assume there are two primary reasons for the Rep response. The first is simple muscle memory. Whatever Garland does is bad, full stop. The second is to prepare the Trump base for the possibility that nothing will come of the investigation. Then they can say “we told you that Weiss was not a good guy. He’s ignoring all of the obvious evidence”. I bet they would have tried the same tack with Durham had Durham been appointed by Garland.
Perhaps in the coming days, some intrepid Capitol Hill reporter will ask them to justify their current position, considering their past position. But I know that their response won’t matter to their base (even if they repeated the Animal House line) because nothing matters to their base except that they are going after Biden or the libs or the Dems. Certainly, logic doesn’t matter.
Still I will remember this as (perhaps) exhibit number one when it comes to the hypocrisy that is the current GOP.
“it’s important for political observers and news consumers to look at these situations with a wider lens to avoid being misled” – amen to that. Just as the ultimate responsibility for our current political climate lies with the voters, so too is it incumbent upon news consumers to at least think about what they are being told to see if it passes the “smell test”. But the success of OANN and Newsmax (not to mention Fox), shows that ain’t happening.
In the not-too-distant past, news organizations had a decent chance of creating some balance because both sides of an issue had legitimate points. Most issues were 60/40 or 70/30 (meaning that those on the “60” side could understand that those on the “40” side had legitimate points). Now a lot of issues are 95/5 and those same news organizations just can’t figure out how to deal with the “5”. If they ignore it, those on that side will just accuse them of blatant bias. But if they give full coverage to the “5” side, then they are giving it undeserved relevancy.
This is just another example of the uneven playing field. Whatever anyone thinks about the MSM, they at least try to present a true picture. They seem to be walking on eggshells to tell both sides. They admit their mistakes. But the conservative media couldn’t care less. They don’t even bother pretending to present the other side. And the only time that they apologize is when they fear a defamation lawsuit.
And there is another difference. As biased as outlets like MSNBC are, they don’t make stuff up.
Well said.
Debates are pointless, for all sides. Doesn't change any votes, questions are dodged, the audience is biting their nails praying their candidate won't look stupid or break a big sweat, no specifics mentioned, just SOS talk pts., and so on.
The only entertaining debates that I can recall include are those having the comedic Ross Perot, Lloyd Benson callng Dan Quayle a Jack Kennedy not, and Trump's epileptic appoplexy at Biden making him look bad with facts. Then, there are the partisan afterparty interviewees that praise their guy as a god, and all others as incompetent diablos.
As per tradition I will skip the live circus and tune into the Reader's Digest or Cliff Note editions.
I love in one of the debates Trump kept wandering around the stage and making stupid comments while Biden was making a point. Finally, Biden smiled and said hey, shut up, man. Biden was totally unintimidated.
That was a good one
“Press coverage intended to fairly represent “both sides” of an issue runs a high risk of failure when one side is dominated by bad-faith actors. In such cases, creating the impression of balance can lead to drawing false equivalences, elevating unserious positions, and minimizing serious crimes. While the larger media world continues to struggle to accept this lesson—one of the biggest of the 2016 election—it’s important for political observers and news consumers to look at these situations with a wider lens to avoid being misled.”
Yup.
This whole “I will support the eventual republican nominee” is a nonsensical commitment to authoritarianism rule. It clearly puts party above country, a point democrats should use in the general. Should all republicans support a fascist or convicted sexual predator or white supremacist, just because he’s a republican?
If David Duke were running and he wins the republican nomination, would all republicans be required to vote for him? No need to answer, it’s a rhetorical question. This is definitely their father’s GQP: circa, Deep South 1950’s.
I’m also shocked McCarthy hasn’t started impeachment proceeding yet. Blue state republicans be damned. It’s an a two tiered system of Justice I tell ya!!!!
I hear Comer has two new whistleblowers that will swear under oath that Hunter is the real Qanon and it was Joe who personally transported the 11,781 fake ballots in GA that threw the election to Biden...:)
"Should all republicans support a fascist or convicted sexual predator or white supremacist, just because he’s a republican?"
Unfortunately that's the line the Republicans are taking across the board, because "Democrats are destroying the country". Voters in Georgia voted for the abominable Herschel Walker just because Republicans needed control of the Senate. Similarly, many Republicans will vote for Trump if he's nominated, even if they have to hold their nose to do it - including many who intimately recognize how unqualified and destructive Trump will be, such as Mike Pence and Bill Barr.
I just read the entire Devon Archer transcript. There is literally nothing there; and, moreover, evidence to refute the allegations leveled at Joe.
Going after Biden with absolutely no evidence will backfire, they just want to keep this in the news for another year
Not necessarily. Consider the damage done to Hillary by the "Hillary-hater" engine initialized in the '90s when she was in charge of health care reform, sustained throughout her candidacies for president, and culminating in the Benghazi hearings, the email fiasco, and chants of "Lock her up!" The Hunter Biden investigation was originally one of Trump's 3 "October Surprises" - investigations intended to issue reports damaging to Biden and the Democrats the month before the election; all 3 fizzled out. The original Hunter Biden investigation was intended to focus on corruption in the Ukraine (which they're still going after), but turned up nothing actionable, so they shifted to taxes and the gun application, both of which are relatively trivial.
Meanwhile, the lack of any evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden hasn't kept the right-wing press from constantly charging corruption (see, for instance, the August 10th New York Post cover). Republicans have long mastered what I call the "Smoke Effect" (where there's smoke there must be fire), and the constant barrage of innuendo and false claims can actually affect voters - e.g. one of my relatives turned against Hillary just because of the Benghazi hearings, which Kevin McCarthy bragged was bringing down Hillary's poll numbers.
Re: the debates. Vivek has to rap all his responses. The requirement for the pledge is yet another confirmation that the GOP is not a serious party anymore. Trump can easily sit this one out and enjoy his popcorn while they debate. If he does not go, they will have to turn on each other, since going after Trump will look stupid. Christie will probably still make it work, but not the others. Trump likes to watch people fighting. It gives him a special thrill.
Especially when “his people” are fighting for him, as in J6.
Hey guys, I'm not a free subscriber to Bulwark+, but this is the second email I've gotten from you all claiming I am. What's up?
I hate to break it to you, Tracey, but the deep state has reached out and ensnared you! Ha ha!!! There's no escaping the Bulwark.
Oh, they Bulwarked me last year, at least.
We really need a better forum as a country to hold people accountable to this kind of rank hypocrisy / duplicity.
"Name Weiss a Special Prosecutor!" "Democrats are terrible for naming Weiss a Special Prosecutor." No one can actually defend that. Yet we really have no forum / mechanism to point that out to people. Republicans ought to be mad about that and want better Republicans to replace those who hack in such an idiotic (charitable) fashion.
Repubs are so full of it. BS that is.
Dumb and Dumber.
Re: the NBC News report (and all the other serious reports, including you, Joe), I honestly appreciate the seriousness and objectivity in which they do their reporting. I appreciate the word choices that are made. But I often times feel a smirk behind them. Maybe it's mine that I am overlaying the info.
I'd guess it's very hard for intelligent reporters to have to actually treat some of the nonsensical Republican attention hogging as if it's really serious, but traditionally, pre- Gingrich, congressional press conferences or 'hearings' usually DID have some reason to be covered as if they were actually of some importance. I would also guess today's good reporters are rolling their eyes while they're writing these things.
I imagine so. I deal with stupid stuff at work. What I know helps me with that and the Trump/GOP catastrophe is maintaining a psychological distance. It's when I can't or don't do that, that I get really aggravated. I'll bet the better reporters do something similar.
The GOP has really taken to heart the concept that today is the first day of the rest of your life. To be reborn anew everyday must be a joy.
"Three individuals on this list have not agreed to the pledge. Pence and Christie have been pretty clear they think Trump is unfit for office, though Pence has not said outright he won’t back his old boss if push comes to shove. The third candidate who hasn’t signed is Trump, because he doesn’t like several of the candidates."
-----
Christie has made it abundantly clear that his prime motivation for running is to hold the Apricot Arthropod's feet to the fire, to hold him accountable for his past and ongoing violations of our laws, our Constitution, the oath of office he took in 2017, his betrayal regarding our allies and friends, among myriad other offenses TFG has committed.
Pence can try to spin away his complacency as VPOTUS to the Tangerine Tyrant, but that stench will follow him around the rest of his days. It wasn't until the MAGAdroids were threatening to lynch him that he did or said anything that wasn't an homage to his ex-boss. He *still* can't bring himself to totally condemn the actions taken by the previous inhabitant of the White House, he continues to be an apologist for the sake of his own image, and in an attempt to win over some of the Orange cultists.
As for the Orange G-d King himself, he says he won't sign the loyalty pledge because he doesn’t "like several of the candidates[.]" In reality, he doesn't like *any* of the others running for the New GOP nomination - for no other reason than their last names aren't Trump. He is waiting in the wings for his coronation, not only as the New GOP candidate, but also as President-for-Life. And, if he doesn't achieve his goals you can be assured that he will do everything he can to burn down the country in an act of revenge on all who don't recognize his godhead.
fnord
Two comments here.
1. For all his complicity as Trump's VP, and his role in choosing all the corporate execs and lobbyist shills for positions in the government, on January 6th Pence did the right thing, and my impression is that as much as he's avoided involvement in subsequent events, he simply will not lie under oath, unlike many of the other players.
2. The Orange Emperor doesn't think of himself a God King; rather he's a terminally insecure little boy who can't live up to the standards his father set, and needs constant reassurance and adulation to partially assuage that.
You heard it here. Trump will never leave office if he becomes President. He will cancel the election for President and will appoint his son or daughter as his successor.
Somewhere, a short time ago, I proposed what the Apricot Arthropod will take as his official title after taking the election, legally, illegally or extralegally [turns head, spits three times between index and middle fingers], when being sworn in as the 47th POTUS as a blatant ripoff of Idi Amin:
His Excellency, President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji [can't be Al Hadji (sic) since it's Moooooslim] Doctor Idi Amin Dada [obviously replacing the name with TFG], VC, DSO, MC, [he'll award himself the Medal of Honor, a couple Purple Hearts with Oak Leaf Clusters, a Silver Star and anything else that strikes his fancy] Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas
He'll just refer to himself as "The Second Coming Bringing Divine Retribution."
fnord
True. He was raised to believe he is better than everyone and he can do anything without punishment. And in fact he is a moron. But he's also a bully.
It going to be a hot August for quite a few republicans, especially in GA. That debate's not the 25th is it? /s
I find myself skimming MSN these days. It's not worth a lot of the ineptitude I see.
Thanks Joe for the quick and concise coverage.
Hey Joe, if you need a drink when you're in the Des Moines area, hit me up. JVL and Tim have my email.