We'd be right here except instead of praising the J6 committee in the person of Liz Cheney (do the Bulwark people know there are Democrats on the committee too?) they would be nitpicking it to death and complaining about how incompetent the Democratic members are.
I hate to say it, but unless there is a Republican involved to give most of the credit to there is nothing the Democrats can do to earn praise from a lot of the writers here.
Well, theyтАЩre cheering on Cheney because itтАЩs very easy for a Democrat to pound on the table and say that Trump is the most dangerous President in history. I would happen to agree that theyтАЩd be right, but they suffer no cost for saying so and likely would advance their careers for it.
Cheney, due to the cultish following and vindictive will of Donald Trump, is most likely ending her own career in politics to say the same thing. We would wish that a Republican shouldnтАЩt have to. They shouldтАЩve convicted him in the Senate and ended his blight on our electoral future. Instead, Mitch went the Isildur route and refused to cast the Ring into the fire. Too many Republicans, too many times, have made that choice.
Cheney hasnтАЩt. And most likely she will never be able to hold elected office again for it. In a profession that is almost defined by loud, angry expressions of cowardice dressed up as passion and belief, this is a very, very rare thing. Much rarer now than it was in the days of Barry Goldwater and Howard Baker.
As Cheney said at the libraryтАж I look forward to a day when I can disagree with her again. There is almost no salient political issue where I wouldnтАЩt. But the most important issue of our times is the one on which I do.
And frankly, she shouldnтАЩt have to give up her career for that. If more Republicans were willing to achieve a critical mass of resistance to Trump, we wouldnтАЩt have to sing her praises so loud. HeтАЩd simply be gone.
Kevin, I hear your frustration about the Dems on the committee not being given the credit they deserve, but I do take some exception to the commenters here being as biased against Dems as you feel.
Maybe the reason I say that is because I also read the Dispatch, and man, oh man, do I feel that way a lot about many of their commenters. The general tone of some of their writers, Jonah Goldberg for one, as well as that of many of their commenters, is the reason I have put my subscription to the Dispatch "on pause" and will probably not re-up my subscription, even though I love David French.
I come to the Bulwark to feel refreshed by what I read from Charlie, Tim, JVL, Will Saletan, Mona, etc., who I respect even though my politics are to the left of theirs so I don't always agree with everything they say.
I also love to read the Comments section. Many of the Comments give me as much information, and are as thought-provoking as the pieces by the Bulwark writers.
Kudos in general to most of this group of Commenters.
Same here -- I learn a lot from other people's comments here, and often leave with warm feelings for other commenters. When I finish reading WaPo comments, I'm more likely to feel the need for a shower.
I'm in the slow class, and gradually LEARNING not to start any fights. The unremitting fury over Dobbs has given me many, many golden opportunities to hold my fire. ЁЯШЙ
I line up very closely with Charlie and Mona on this, and like them, I see no good coming to anyone from throwing more fuel on the fire at this point. More resources for women and children who need them, yes; more fights, no.
I can't entirely agree. Bennie Thompson is my newest man-crush. He's magisterial and statesmanlike, and knows how to lead without hogging the spotlight. He and Cheney make an excellent team, but it's his team; he's better with her, but he'd be respected regardless. And at the end of each hearing, when he get's his Preacher on and makes that Altar Call for any witnesses who haven't come forward yet and would like to, to come forward now, I have to think that some folks are tempted.
I'm an Adam Schiff fan and wondered what Pelosi was up to when she tapped Thompson, but she knew what she was doing. Smart lady!
That is true, but she stands to lose the most. She is going against her party and the R's have put a target on her back. Same with Adam Kinzinger. They have virtually lost their careers, and in Kinzinger's case apparently most of his family has turned their back on him. Trump is a mob boss and he literally has a hit out on the on them.
Good point, and a good addition to this discussion, rlritt. It does take more courage for Cheney and Kinzinger to be on display in this committee than the Dems on it. I think their careers are probably more than "virtually lost".
Sure, Cheney and Kinzinger have put a lot on the line and have sacrificed politically more than any D on the committee. I'm pretty sure I've always acknowledged that and voiced my support for their work on the J6 committee.
And Cheney's speech last night was really good and I'd think any American of any political party can and should thank her for her work on the committee.
But I would never vote for Cheney unless I was able to vote in the Republican primary and the choices were her or Trump/DeSantis.
I wouldn't vote for her either except in those kinds of circumstances, but were she to win, I'd at least be secure in the knowledge that no matter what else, she isn't a fascist.
Of course, the most important part of what I just wrote above is that I can't believe I have to write that in earnest (not towards you, just in general).
Without Liz they wouldnтАЩt be half as effective, sheтАЩs a very gifted prosecutor & speakerтАФ thereтАЩs nobody else on the committee thatтАЩs the full package like her. Not to mention a political career and family history that add significant credibility to the prosecution, considering how most squirrels in the party simply circled the wagons around Trump, regardless of any evidence
The J6 Committee is full of gifted prosecutors and speakers that don't have an R next to their name. Cheney is not special in that regard. What makes her special is the R next to her name.
Her political career and family history are littered with dead Iraqis, poverty-stricken American families with services taken away from them, voter suppression, Roe eliminated and the public rejection and attack upon her own sister for being a lesbian.
Liz Cheney the politician is the antithesis of my idea of a politician I can vote for.
I agree that there are plenty of gifted prosecutors and speakers that have a D after their name, and some that are on the committee. They made a very smart choice, however, to have Liz Cheney, also a gifted prosecutor and speaker, be the main speaker and leader, because she DOES have an R after her name, and does have the background and history of being a loyal Republican, with the family name, etc. Thus, she is more likely to be considered credible by the Republican sitting in their den watching, and somewhat protected from the charge that what is coming out of the committee is just mudslinging by Dems for political reasons.
Completely agree, but this is why what she is doing is so important--even Trump-skeptical Republicans would be unable to hear a word of these devastating revelations if they weren't coming from the mouth of one of their own.
Which kind of puts the lie to the whole "Democrats are terrible at messaging" since putting Liz and Adam out front is part of the Democratic messaging strategy.
Bennie Thompson and the other D members have been impeccable.
Can you imagine a group of Republican representatives going for hours and hours in private/public hearings without grandstanding for their own egos?
Also, if the Never Trumpers here were unable to commend how well these hearings are going if everything was presented the same but it was Adam Schiff, Jamie Raskin or Zoe Lofgren doing the presenting then that speaks badly about them.
There is an argument to be made that what marks an endeavor as non- partisan or bi-partisan is not the party affiliation of the participants. Party affiliation is a very superficial criteria. What marks an endeavor as non or bipartisan is the good faith and objectivity in the conduct of the participants. To compare, even though the recent Supreme Court confirmation hearing was nominally bi-partisan because of the presence of both Democrats and Republicans, the actual conduct of especially the Republicans was highly partisan. If McCarthy's picks were on the J6 committee, it might be nominally bi-partisan, but those guys were determined to turning the committee into a partisan circus.
It sure is. I keep hearing from Republican after Republican. Many of them hired / appointed by Trump and at least a few confirmed by a Republican Senate.
As his constituent, I have written him an effusive letter that he allowed such an effective hearing to be held without the usual heckling obstruction tactics. :)
Wondering aloud where any of us would be right now without the insistent and persistent voice of Liz Cheney.
Everyone should thank Pelosi for maneuvering the gambit to get to where we are today.
All other paths explored, including independent or bipartisan or bicameral nonsense would've led to clusterf*ck, and we wouldn't have found anything.
Sure, Liz deserves a lot of credit for execution. She forced the cmte to focus on Trump and Trump alone. None of that Capitol security nonsense.
But Pelosi is the COB.
Spinal Tap had the lyrics to that possible fate in their song "Hell Hole."
"Yeah, I'm living in a hell hole
Don't want to stay in this hell hole
Don't want to die in this hell hole
Get me out of this hell hole!"
Yet she still supports the anti-republic party
We'd be right here except instead of praising the J6 committee in the person of Liz Cheney (do the Bulwark people know there are Democrats on the committee too?) they would be nitpicking it to death and complaining about how incompetent the Democratic members are.
I hate to say it, but unless there is a Republican involved to give most of the credit to there is nothing the Democrats can do to earn praise from a lot of the writers here.
I don't think it is a lot, there are one or two who frustrate me sometimes
But, i don't know why they should be any different than us...they haven't become liberals and I don't think they should
Well, theyтАЩre cheering on Cheney because itтАЩs very easy for a Democrat to pound on the table and say that Trump is the most dangerous President in history. I would happen to agree that theyтАЩd be right, but they suffer no cost for saying so and likely would advance their careers for it.
Cheney, due to the cultish following and vindictive will of Donald Trump, is most likely ending her own career in politics to say the same thing. We would wish that a Republican shouldnтАЩt have to. They shouldтАЩve convicted him in the Senate and ended his blight on our electoral future. Instead, Mitch went the Isildur route and refused to cast the Ring into the fire. Too many Republicans, too many times, have made that choice.
Cheney hasnтАЩt. And most likely she will never be able to hold elected office again for it. In a profession that is almost defined by loud, angry expressions of cowardice dressed up as passion and belief, this is a very, very rare thing. Much rarer now than it was in the days of Barry Goldwater and Howard Baker.
As Cheney said at the libraryтАж I look forward to a day when I can disagree with her again. There is almost no salient political issue where I wouldnтАЩt. But the most important issue of our times is the one on which I do.
And frankly, she shouldnтАЩt have to give up her career for that. If more Republicans were willing to achieve a critical mass of resistance to Trump, we wouldnтАЩt have to sing her praises so loud. HeтАЩd simply be gone.
But heтАЩs not gone. And so she does have to.
The Reagan Library was an odd place to say what she said given that Ronnie pioneered keep quiet when other conservatives were out of line
Cheney is wealthy and never needs to work again. What is she risking?
The LOTR reference alone gets a like! ЁЯШБ
Kevin, I hear your frustration about the Dems on the committee not being given the credit they deserve, but I do take some exception to the commenters here being as biased against Dems as you feel.
Maybe the reason I say that is because I also read the Dispatch, and man, oh man, do I feel that way a lot about many of their commenters. The general tone of some of their writers, Jonah Goldberg for one, as well as that of many of their commenters, is the reason I have put my subscription to the Dispatch "on pause" and will probably not re-up my subscription, even though I love David French.
I come to the Bulwark to feel refreshed by what I read from Charlie, Tim, JVL, Will Saletan, Mona, etc., who I respect even though my politics are to the left of theirs so I don't always agree with everything they say.
I also love to read the Comments section. Many of the Comments give me as much information, and are as thought-provoking as the pieces by the Bulwark writers.
Kudos in general to most of this group of Commenters.
There's definitely degrees and The Bulwark is no Dispatch for sure.
And this is still my go to site first thing in the morning.
I really don't expect him to be otherwise...lol
lol, ain't that the truth.
Same here -- I learn a lot from other people's comments here, and often leave with warm feelings for other commenters. When I finish reading WaPo comments, I'm more likely to feel the need for a shower.
For a while I just wouldn't read them at the WAPO....now I pick and choose and don't start any fights...lol
I'm in the slow class, and gradually LEARNING not to start any fights. The unremitting fury over Dobbs has given me many, many golden opportunities to hold my fire. ЁЯШЙ
Yeah, I would say it is the most contentious issue I have ever seen, it is not so easy sometimes
I line up very closely with Charlie and Mona on this, and like them, I see no good coming to anyone from throwing more fuel on the fire at this point. More resources for women and children who need them, yes; more fights, no.
Agreed
lol, same
100% agree about the Dispatch. I do think Mona, Cathy, and someone's Charlie fall into what Kevin wrote. Tim and JVL almost never do
I feel the same way. I am a liberal Democrat, but I have enormous respect for the folks at the Bulwark.
I do as well. And they listen which is why I feel free enough to offer my opinion because they do listen. Charlie's demonstrated that lots of times.
By the way, Kevin, your comments are among the ones I enjoy reading.
Thank you, that's very nice of you.
I try sooooo hard not to let my snark get away from me, not always successfully.
I can't entirely agree. Bennie Thompson is my newest man-crush. He's magisterial and statesmanlike, and knows how to lead without hogging the spotlight. He and Cheney make an excellent team, but it's his team; he's better with her, but he'd be respected regardless. And at the end of each hearing, when he get's his Preacher on and makes that Altar Call for any witnesses who haven't come forward yet and would like to, to come forward now, I have to think that some folks are tempted.
I'm an Adam Schiff fan and wondered what Pelosi was up to when she tapped Thompson, but she knew what she was doing. Smart lady!
That is true, but she stands to lose the most. She is going against her party and the R's have put a target on her back. Same with Adam Kinzinger. They have virtually lost their careers, and in Kinzinger's case apparently most of his family has turned their back on him. Trump is a mob boss and he literally has a hit out on the on them.
Good point, and a good addition to this discussion, rlritt. It does take more courage for Cheney and Kinzinger to be on display in this committee than the Dems on it. I think their careers are probably more than "virtually lost".
The voter base will never accept her, even if the party leaders come to their senses.
Sure, Cheney and Kinzinger have put a lot on the line and have sacrificed politically more than any D on the committee. I'm pretty sure I've always acknowledged that and voiced my support for their work on the J6 committee.
And Cheney's speech last night was really good and I'd think any American of any political party can and should thank her for her work on the committee.
But I would never vote for Cheney unless I was able to vote in the Republican primary and the choices were her or Trump/DeSantis.
I wouldn't vote for her either except in those kinds of circumstances, but were she to win, I'd at least be secure in the knowledge that no matter what else, she isn't a fascist.
Of course, the most important part of what I just wrote above is that I can't believe I have to write that in earnest (not towards you, just in general).
Yes, if Liz were to win the presidency I would at least be able to sleep peacefully knowing our Constitutional system will be there in the morning.
Ha ha. I know! "Not being a fascist" is a pretty low bar.
Without Liz they wouldnтАЩt be half as effective, sheтАЩs a very gifted prosecutor & speakerтАФ thereтАЩs nobody else on the committee thatтАЩs the full package like her. Not to mention a political career and family history that add significant credibility to the prosecution, considering how most squirrels in the party simply circled the wagons around Trump, regardless of any evidence
The J6 Committee is full of gifted prosecutors and speakers that don't have an R next to their name. Cheney is not special in that regard. What makes her special is the R next to her name.
Her political career and family history are littered with dead Iraqis, poverty-stricken American families with services taken away from them, voter suppression, Roe eliminated and the public rejection and attack upon her own sister for being a lesbian.
Liz Cheney the politician is the antithesis of my idea of a politician I can vote for.
You can't blame her for father.
I wasn't blaming her for her father. The person I was responding to said her family history lent her credibility.
I agree that there are plenty of gifted prosecutors and speakers that have a D after their name, and some that are on the committee. They made a very smart choice, however, to have Liz Cheney, also a gifted prosecutor and speaker, be the main speaker and leader, because she DOES have an R after her name, and does have the background and history of being a loyal Republican, with the family name, etc. Thus, she is more likely to be considered credible by the Republican sitting in their den watching, and somewhat protected from the charge that what is coming out of the committee is just mudslinging by Dems for political reasons.
Yet she's still a member of the party
Completely agree, but this is why what she is doing is so important--even Trump-skeptical Republicans would be unable to hear a word of these devastating revelations if they weren't coming from the mouth of one of their own.
Which kind of puts the lie to the whole "Democrats are terrible at messaging" since putting Liz and Adam out front is part of the Democratic messaging strategy.
Bennie Thompson and the other D members have been impeccable.
Can you imagine a group of Republican representatives going for hours and hours in private/public hearings without grandstanding for their own egos?
Also, if the Never Trumpers here were unable to commend how well these hearings are going if everything was presented the same but it was Adam Schiff, Jamie Raskin or Zoe Lofgren doing the presenting then that speaks badly about them.
But the Republicans have already said the committee is partisan. If they had no Republicans it wouldn't even be televised.
There is an argument to be made that what marks an endeavor as non- partisan or bi-partisan is not the party affiliation of the participants. Party affiliation is a very superficial criteria. What marks an endeavor as non or bipartisan is the good faith and objectivity in the conduct of the participants. To compare, even though the recent Supreme Court confirmation hearing was nominally bi-partisan because of the presence of both Democrats and Republicans, the actual conduct of especially the Republicans was highly partisan. If McCarthy's picks were on the J6 committee, it might be nominally bi-partisan, but those guys were determined to turning the committee into a partisan circus.
It sure is. I keep hearing from Republican after Republican. Many of them hired / appointed by Trump and at least a few confirmed by a Republican Senate.
Again, brilliant strategy by the Democratic leadership.
As his constituent, I have written him an effusive letter that he allowed such an effective hearing to be held without the usual heckling obstruction tactics. :)
And because of that failure, the committee is actually nonpartisan as I explain in another comment.
Comment of the decade