44 thoughts on “News/Politics 8-31-19

  1. Unintended consequences.


    “Researchers “Disappointed” That #MeToo Backlash “Even Worse Than Anticipated”

    This shouldn’t be the least bit surprising, and yet…”

    “Who could’ve foreseen the consequences of a movement that promoted believing all women over examining facts and evidence?”

    “From campus kangaroo courts to the nationwide #MeToo movement that sought to out serial sexual predators protected by their rank and wealth, #MeToo brought with it consequences of all stripes — positive, but mostly negative.

    The Weinsteins and Frankens of the world met long-overdue justice. But as the movement that began as a megaphone for those silenced or ignored morphed into a mantra and then the insistence that all men are secret predators, waiting for the opportunity to pounce on innocent women, the backlash rightly began. Add to that the bizarre trend among millennial women that allowed regret for lack of boundaries in sexual encounters to later be interpreted as sexual assault and quite frankly, I’m surprised the backlash hasn’t been more severe.

    The Harvard Business Review published a study, the results of which “surprised” researchers:

    The study’s biggest surprise has to do with backlash. Respondents said they expected to see some positive effects of the #MeToo movement: For instance, 74% of women said they thought they would be more willing now to speak out against harassment, and 77% of men anticipated being more careful about potentially inappropriate behavior. But more than 10% of both men and women said they thought they would be less willing than previously to hire attractive women.

    Twenty-two percent of men and 44% of women predicted that men would be more apt to exclude women from social interactions, such as after-work drinks; and nearly one in three men thought they would be reluctant to have a one-on-one meeting with a woman. Fifty-six percent of women said they expected that men would continue to harass but would take more precautions against getting caught, and 58% of men predicted that men in general would have greater fears of being unfairly accused.

    Because the data was collected soon after the #MeToo movement gained momentum, and because much of it focused on expectations, the researchers conducted a follow-up survey (with different people) in early 2019. This revealed a bigger backlash than respondents had anticipated. For instance, 19% of men said they were reluctant to hire attractive women, 21% said they were reluctant to hire women for jobs involving close interpersonal interactions with men (jobs involving travel, say), and 27% said they avoided one-on-one meetings with female colleagues; only one of those numbers was lower in 2019 than the numbers projected the year before.

    The researchers say that some of the behaviors are manifestations of what is sometimes called the Mike Pence rule—a reference to the U.S. vice president’s refusal to dine with female colleagues unless his wife is present. “I’m not sure we were surprised by the numbers, but we were disappointed,” says Rachel Sturm, a professor at Wright State University who worked on the project. “When men say, ‘I’m not going to hire you, I’m not going to send you traveling, I’m going to exclude you from outings’—those are steps backward.”

    In December of 2018, I blogged about a Bloomberg article that discussed the impact of #MeToo on Wall Street. SPOILER: The results were the same — men hesitant to be alone with female coworkers for fear their words or actions might be misconstrued.”


  2. Not surprising.


    “Ilhan Omar Calls for the Protection of a Notorious TERRORIST Organization”

    “Rep. Ilhan Omar has publicly declared her support for a notorious organization known for its terrorist leadership and financing of terrorism. But it almost went unnoticed, until the tweet was brought to my attention.”


    ““Peacekeeping forces”?

    Mrs. Omar has publicly called for the protection of Hormuud. Yet Hormuud Telecom has been mentioned as a sponsor of terrorism, not once, not twice, but many, many times. “


  3. The enablers, besides those in our govt.


    “How a Ring of Women Allegedly Recruited Girls for Jeffrey Epstein”

    “The United States attorney in Manhattan, Geoffrey S. Berman, whose office brought the charges against Mr. Epstein, said after his suicide that the investigation into the sex-trafficking conspiracy was not finished and prosecutors were committed to standing up for the “brave young women” Mr. Epstein had abused.

    One of the women under scrutiny, Mr. Epstein’s onetime girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, has been accused in several well-publicized lawsuits of overseeing efforts to procure girls and young women for him, a charge she has firmly denied.

    But Mr. Epstein is also accused in civil suits of relying on an organized network of underlings: those who trained girls how to sexually pleasure him; office assistants who booked cars and travel; and recruiters who ensured he always had a fresh supply of teenage girls at the ready.

    None of Mr. Epstein’s associates have been charged or named as co-conspirators in Manhattan. But federal authorities are eyeing possible charges that include sex trafficking and sex trafficking conspiracy, the two people with knowledge of the investigation said.

    Four women were apparently so instrumental to Mr. Epstein’s operation that they were named as possible “co-conspirators” and were granted immunity from prosecution in a widely criticized plea bargain Mr. Epstein struck with federal prosecutors in Florida more than a decade ago. That deal allowed Mr. Epstein to plead guilty to state charges and to spend 13 months in a county jail rather than face a federal sex-trafficking indictment.

    The four women — Sarah Kellen, Lesley Groff, Adriana Ross and Nadia Marcinkova — could still be subject to criminal charges in Manhattan. The United States attorney’s office has said it is not bound by the Florida agreement.”


  4. The Bad Guy.


    “The Department of Justice Inspector General Report revealed what many of us suspected all along: James Comey was the Bad Guy in the ‘Russia Collusion’ story.

    He lied to the President, lied about lying to the President, leaked government information to cover up his lying, and lied to the public about his lying. Comey tried to set up the President soon after he took office and failed, and covered up the attempt.

    Comey is revealed to be a completely manipulative bureaucratic infighter who maneuvered the government into a two-year Executive Branch paralysis in the form of the Mueller investigation, while falsely proclaiming himself the only holy player in the saga. His defense when unmasked in the IG Report is to crow that he wasn’t indicted.”


    It’s almost like there IS a deep state……


  5. And one of his accomplice.

    Suing, while pleading for mercy for his crimes.


    “While Clinton’s mishandling of classified information got all the attention, it was just the tip of the felony iceberg. Thousands of the 33,000 emails she withheld and undertook to “bleach bit” into oblivion related to State Department business. It is a felony to misappropriate even a single government record. The destruction of the emails, moreover, occurred after a House Committee investigating the Benghazi massacre issued subpoenas and preservation directives to Clinton’s State Department and Clinton herself. If Andrew Weissmann and the rest of the Mueller probe pit-bulls had half as solid an obstruction case against Donald Trump, the president would by now have been impeached, removed, and indicted.

    And that dichotomy is the point, isn’t it?

    In the Obama Justice Department — as extended by the Mueller investigation, staffed by Obama Justice Department officials and other Clinton-friendly Democrats — justice was dispensed with a partisan eye. If you were Hillary Clinton, you skated. If you were Donald Trump, they were determined to dig until they found something — and, even when they failed to make a case, the digging never stopped . . . it just shifted to Capitol Hill.

    No one knows the skewed lay of the land better than Andrew McCabe.

    The FBI’s former deputy director is in the Justice Department’s crosshairs. His lawyers are reportedly pleading with top officials not to indict him for lying to FBI agents who were probing a leak of investigative information, orchestrated by none other than McCabe.

    McCabe is feeling the heat because the evidence that he made false statements is daunting. So daunting, in fact, that even he concedes he did not tell the truth to investigators. Listen carefully to what he says about the case — there being no shortage of public commentary on it from the newly minted CNN analyst. He never “deliberately misled anyone,” he insists. Sure, he grudgingly admits, some of his statements “were not fully accurate,” or perhaps were “misunderstood” by his interrogators. But “at worst,” you see, “I was not clear in my responses, and because of what was going on around me may well have been confused and distracted.”



  6. Andrew McCabe is the guy who Ricky predicted would be regarded as a hero who would eventually receive a Presidential or Congressional medal. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Tychicus, I stand by that prediction. Almost all of the 55% of the people who detest Trump regard him as a hero today.

    McCabe will probably get his medal from Attorney General Adam Schiff in late 2021 or early 2022.


  8. In hindsight, was there a Congessional leader to whom Comey could have turned to detail Trump’s efforts to impede the Flynn investigation, Trump’s demands for loyalty and the other circumstances leading up to Comey’s firing? This would have been an alternative to going to the press.

    Was there a brave, honest Senator who put his loyalty to his country above his loyalty to any man or party? Yes. In those days, John McCain still lived.


  9. That’s it Ricky. Keep making excuses for their crimes against the president and the American people. You’re a classic enabler.

    Sheep like you are why wolves like these prowled our institutions to begin with. You’re still attempting to justify their crimes and holding them in high regard. They are unworthy of their stations. Exposing and removing them was the best thing Trump could have done.


  10. And another Deep State Obama plant gets exposed as a partisan fraud, a non-no for generals, thanks to Laura Ingraham.

    The first half the video is funny. It’s all the media talking heads doing their Ricky impression where they ignore the facts and pretend the IG report doesn’t destroy Comey’s lies.

    The interesting part starts at around the 14:50 mark. That’s when Mattis gets exposed by 2 Army Colonels as the partisan fraud Obama plant he was, along with all the Obama deep staters that Trump mistakenly kept on board. Silly Trump thought they’d be loyal. They weren’t/aren’t.


  11. The Squad and Democrats built this.


  12. McCain voted to retain Obamacare because Donald Trump was a meanie to him. Overall, McCain was a lousy senator and R Pres candidate.


  13. McCabe’s story gets a lot more dramatic if he is indicted. If that happens, Hollywood will make a movie about him. You can count on Hollywood’s most attractive couple to play the McCabes and they will find someone much uglier than Alec Baldwin to play Trump.


  14. And coming in at #9 on next weeks NY Times Best Seller List despite being completely ignored by the hoax pushing media…..

    Andrew McCarthy’s Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency


    Having read an advance copy of Andrew McCarthy’s Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency, I posted my review/appreciation on the book’s official publication date earlier this month under the heading “All the president’s men, Obama style.” In the book McCarthy provides a penetrating analytical framework within which to understand the biggest scandal by far in American political history.

    The Department of Justice Inspector General report released this past Thursday exposes one key thread of James Comey’s misconduct in the counterintelligence investigation of Trump the candidate and Trump the president. I posted a PDF of the report yesterday in “Jumpin’ Jim Flash.” This counterintelligence investigation was the so-called “insurance policy” intended to prevent Trump’s election or to take Trump down if he somehow prevailed. That’s what it was all about.

    The IG report vindicates McCarthy’s analysis in crucial respects. He explains how so in his NR column “Trump Was Always the Target of the Russia Investigation.” Do not miss it. It is essential and chilling reading.

    I think I disagree with my friend Mr. McCarthy on his concession in the book to Comey’s good faith in running the investigation of Trump the candidate and Trump the president. (I say “I think” because if I had the opportunity to talk with him about it he might persuade me otherwise.) By contrast with McCarthy, I think that the conduct of Obama, Brennan, Comey and their underlings in the investigation is rife with bad faith.”


    The aforementioned piece from PL…..


    Yesterday the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General released its long awaited report on certain elements of James Comey’s misconduct as Director of the FBI. Contrary to his assurance to President Trump — an assurance that projected something of his essence — the report demonstrates that Comey is a weasel (and worse). He is also (again to borrow the words of his own denial to Trump) a sneak, a leaker, and a liar (and worse), but these are venial sins in the panoply of Comey’s misconduct. There is no substitute for reading the report. I have posted it below via Scribd.

    Byron York elaborates on one particularly disgusting thread of the report in his Washington Examiner column “New report details Comey plan to ambush Trump with Moscow sex allegation.” Having assured then candidate Trump that he was not under investigation, Comey sought to elicit incriminating statements from Trump in connection with the counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign that the FBI dubbed “Crossfire Hurricane.” President Trump was its target and victim.
    We await the proper identification of the operation’s true Jack Flash.

    In her Wall Street Journal column, Kim Strassel draws on the report for a portrait of “Sneaky, Leaky James Comey.” Asked by the Inspector General how a memo detailing an official dinner between an FBI head and the President of the United States could ever be “personal,” as Comey asserted, Comey explained that he was also there in the capacity of…”human being.” Perhaps a depraved human being.”


  15. “You may have seen him on a prayer candle, but James Comey is no saint

    New revelations have made clear the conclusion many of us had already come to: James Comey was a reckless and untrustworthy FBI director.”


    “Since President Trump fired FBI director James Comey in May 2017, Comey has been portrayed as a martyr and saint by much of the media. Comey fueled the adulation with his memoir, “A Higher loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership.” But today’s report by the Justice Department Inspector General should obliterate whatever halo Comey still possesses.

    Comey wrote seven memos summarizing his interactions with Donald Trump. After he was fired, Comey sent one of those memos to a personal friend and lawyer and directed him to leak the contents to a specific New York Times reporter. The leak achieved the result Comey sought — the appointment of a special counsel to investigate President Trump.

    James Comey’s decision that he was above FBI policy

    Today’s report documents how Comey brazenly violated federal and FBI policies regarding with his disclosures. Top FBI officials told the IG that they were “shocked,” “stunned,” and “surprised’ that Comey would leak the contents of one of the memos to a reporter. The IG concluded: “The unauthorized disclosure of this information — information that Comey knew only by virtue of his position as FBI Director — violated the terms of his FBI Employment Agreement and the FBI’s Prepublication Review Policy.”


  16. This is why The Cult has turned on General Mattis.

    Interestingly, Mattis refused to criticize Trump. However, Mattis’ friends said he believed Trump to be of “limited cognitive ability and generally dubious behavior.” My neighbor Rex Tillerson used slightly more colorful language.


  17. Meanwhile PolitiFact loses what little credibility they had left.

    They really jumped the shark on this, using the fanciest of linguistic and mental gymnastics to deem an historical photo as “mostly false.”

    You couldn’t make this up if you tried. 🤣🤣🤣




  18. So decorated Marine James Mattis is considered to be a “traitor” by The Trump Cult?
    Is decorated Marine John Kelly (another Trump selection) also a Traitor?
    Is veteran H R McMaster (another Trump selection) also a traitor?
    Is Rex Tillerson (another Trump selection) a Traitor?
    I think I know you consider Comey and McCabe to be traitors.
    Was POW John McCain a traitor?
    Was Trump pick Jeff Sessions a traitor?
    Was Trump selection Dan Coats a traitor?
    How about Chris Cox?
    Justin Amash?
    Gary Cohn?
    What about Steve Bannon?
    Former Trumpkins Omarosa and Scaramucci have to be traitors, right?

    Trumpkins find more “traitors” than Kim Jong Un, David Koresh and Jim Jones combined.

    Thank goodness the Trumpkins don’t have the North Korean Security Service, cans of gasoline or barrels of Kool-Aid!


  19. Like Pumpkin Spice stuff?

    I hope you all are happy with yourselves for the genocide you’ve wrought.

    It’s the WaPo’s turn to jump the shark. 🙂



  20. The PolitiFact article states that the photo is indeed authentic, but that “By the time this photo of Byrd and Biden was taken, Byrd’s public expressions of regret and shame over his earlier involvement in the KKK was well-documented and often-repeated.”

    So it seems that the point of their article is not that that the photo is “false” (because they acknowledge that it is authentic) but that what the Facebook post is trying to imply – that the photo shows that Biden was buddies with with a KKK leader – is what is false.

    Quite frankly, that Facebook page could have made their point without stretching the truth that way. That sort of thing is so common on social media, from both sides of the political aisle.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Daniel Dale used to write for The Toronto Star. Now he works for CNN. He is world’s foremost expert on Trump lies. Amazingly, he can Tweet corrections of the stream of Trump lies at cult rallies about as fast as Trump can spew them out. I used to wonder how he did it. The trick is that most of Trump’s lies are repeats of prior lies or slight variations of an old lie. Dale has heard most of them before.

    This is where Trump has really changed the rules. Before Trump, if a politician told a falsehood, the press would give him a hard time. It was then the staff’s job to explain the truth to the candidate and remind him if he ever slipped again. Trump lies so frequently that the correction sessions (if there were any) would last for hours. Trump knows that his cult (about 20% of the people) doesn’t care if he lies, 55% know he is a liar and oppose him and the remaining 25% are Republicans/conservatives who are just holding their noses.


  22. Dale is a true nerd. This chart is like a guide to his favorite fishing holes. It chronicles the locations where Trump tells the most lies. We just have to laugh and enjoy it. We will never see anything like this again.


  23. Speaking of pathological liars, Kevin D. Williamson devastates Biden here.

    How far have we fallen?

    1. Twenty to thirty years ago, Biden was the worst of the Democrat candidates, forced to drop out because of plagiarism or lack of support. Now he is their leading candidate.

    2. Twenty to thirty years ago, Trump was pretending to be his imaginary friend or aide, calling gossip columnists, and lying about his sex life. Now he is telling equally ridiculous lies to auditoriums full of cheering dupes.


  24. Kizzie,

    “but that what the Facebook post is trying to imply – that the photo shows that Biden was buddies with with a KKK leader – is what is false.”

    Just admit it. They were carrying water for a Democrat. Again.

    And yeah, well known fact Biden and Byrd were buddies. You don’t give the eulogy at the funeral of strangers, right?

    Or is the video where Biden tells you what great friends they were at this link lying too? Enough with the revisionist history.


    “Biden, under fire for comments on segregationists, gave eulogies for Strom Thurmond, Robert Byrd”


    “In 2010, Biden also eulogized the late West Virginia Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd, a former KKK member who later regretted that affiliation and described it as a mistake.

    “Although I and my colleagues behind me revered the Senate, Robert C. Byrd elevated the Senate,” Biden said in his remarks in 2010.”


    And they were friends before Byrd’s late life conversion as well. Biden has his own issues on race as well. Byrd wasn’t his only racist friend. This stuff is well documented.


    “In the 1970s, twenty years after Brown vs. Board of Education, Biden embraced the “separate but equal” doctrine. Biden told NPR that segregation was “a matter of black pride.” Biden amassed a coalition of liberals and George Wallace supporters to oppose racial integration,[4] and considered a Constitutional Amendment to outlaw court-ordered school desegregation.[5][6][7] Biden wrote an Amendment that gutted portions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.”


    “Biden was a staunch opponent of school desegregation in the 1970s and leading crusader for mass incarceration in the 1980s and 1990s. Biden described African American felons in the aftermath of the Central Park 5 jogger case as ‘predators’ too sociopathic to rehabilitate,[34] and white supremacist senators as his friends.

    Biden boasts as one of his greatest legislative achievements passage of the 1994 Crime bill which locked up 10% of the Black adult male population of the United States.[13][35]”


    “In 1977, two black men nominated for key Justice Department posts by President Jimmy Carter easily won approval from the Senate Judiciary Committee. After confirmation by the full Senate, Drew Days III became the nation’s first black head of the department’s civil rights division and Wade McCree became the second black solicitor general. Only one member of the committee voted against them. It wasn’t segregationists Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.) or James Eastland (D-Miss.). It wasn’t even former Ku Klux Klan member Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.). The lone Judiciary Committee vote against the two men was Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.).[85]”



    Biden reopened the debate over the crimes of the Democrats slave power[79] at a time some far leftists were pushing for slave reparations.[80] In 1972 Biden argued that segregation was good for Blacks and was what they wanted.

    “I think the concept of busing … that we are going to integrate people so that they all have the same access and they learn to grow up with one another and all the rest, is a rejection of the whole movement of black pride, a rejection of the entire black awareness concept, where black is beautiful, black culture should be studied; and the cultural awareness of the importance of their own identity, their own individuality.”[81]

    Biden led a coalition of segregationists that was opposed by Republican Sen. Edward Brooke, the first African American senator elected since Democrats forced the end of Reconstruction after the Civil War. National Public Radio’s David Ensor asked Biden, “What about a constitutional amendment? Isn’t that what you’re gonna have to end up supporting if you want to stop court ordered busing, too?” Biden responded,

    “That would clearly do it. I’m hopeful, and I have — now that I have some sort of new allies in this area, it’s become respectable now for liberals to at least say publicly what they’ve been saying in private, that busing doesn’t work. We are trying to figure out whether or not we can come up with an innovative piece of legislation which would limit the remedy, and I don’t — honestly don’t know whether we can come up with something constitutional. And if we can’t, I will not in an attempt to eliminate busing violate the Constitution. I won’t do that. The only way, if I’m gonna go at it, I’m gonna go at it through a Constitutional Amendment if it can’t be done through a piece of legislation.”

    Ensor reported that Biden proposed renewing segregation because busing wasn’t working, and Biden was afraid that older liberal colleagues were blind to how Black separatists felt about their children being bused to white schools.

    “There are those of we social planners who think somehow that if we just subrogate man’s individual characteristics and traits by making sure that a presently heterogeneous society becomes a totally homogeneous society, that somehow we’re going to solve our social ills. Quite to the contrary.”

    Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.[82] By 1975, Biden authored an amendment to gut Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Politico writes of the whole sordid affair,

    Biden morphed into a leading anti-busing crusader—all the while continuing to insist that he supported the goal of school desegregation, he only opposed busing as the means to achieve that end. This stance, which many of Biden’s liberal and moderate colleagues also held, was clever but disingenuous. It enabled Biden to choose votes over principles, while acting as if he was not doing so….In a seminal moment, the Senate thus turned against desegregation. The Senate had supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 1965 Voting Rights Act and 1968 Fair Housing Act….the Senate remained the last bastion for those who supported strong integration policies. Biden stormed that bastion…[78]

    Sen. James Abourezk of South Dakota related how Biden reacted when Abrourezek tried to block the amendment:

    ‘Abourezk, you **********, if I ever vote for another one of your bills, it’ll be a cold day in hell.’
    ‘Calm down, Joe,’ I told him, ‘You’re eventually gonna thank me for doing this.’

    ‘Like hell I will you dirty *******.’

    A few days later, Biden came into the scheduled committee meeting, this time with a broad, friendly grin aimed directly at me.

    ‘Jesus, Abourezk, you were right,’ he said. ‘I am gonna thank you. You should see the Delaware newspapers—big front-page headlines saying, ‘Biden Battles Liberals in Washington.’ He was unabashedly elated. ‘They love me back home, how did you know this would happen?'[83]


    Biden owns all of this.


  25. Yeah,

    You’ll love that blue wave from Cali in a few more election cycles, when it flips your state blue Ricky.

    First up on their agenda when they take your state legislature, you’ll be paying state income taxes. 🙂

    Enjoy! 🙂


  26. AJ – If that Facebook page wanted to make that point, then it could have used the examples you gave. But that particular photo was at a time when Byrd had turned away from the KKK and expressed regret about that time.

    Maybe that’s merely a pesky detail but those kinds of details matter to me. So many social media memes use photos or statements that are twisted to make a point, even though the main point may actually be accurate. So why not use something accurate to make the point? Not doing so is just sloppy.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. Speaking of social media memes and such. . .twisting things and downright lying is common with many liberal sites and conservative sites.

    A Christian friend (someone I know in real life) shared something about Richard Blumenthal and his wife. (Note: I am not a fan of Blumenthal’s at all.) As you may or may not know, Blumenthal is much older than his wife. I looked it up, and read that although he met her when she was still a teen – as her parents were family friends – he did not get “involved” with her until she was in her early 20s. But the post heavily insinuated that he was messing around with her when she was still a teenager.

    What I found particularly dismaying about it was that not only was it shared by a Christian friend, but the post was by a Christian “minister” of some sort. Sadly (very much so), many Christians on social media seem to have thrown out the commandment about not bearing false witness.


  28. Jennifer Rubin and Bill Kristol need to answer this: Will any of the Democrat candidates keep us entertained with juvenile spats with celebrities if any of them are elected president?


  29. That’s it Ricky,

    Anything to distract from how wrong you were about everything…… 🙂

    Still no mea culpa, no apologies?……

    Just press on and continue the ruse, huh?

    So predictable…..


    And speaking of predictable….

    Only the hackiest of hacks get to work at the NYT, right Jen?

    She’s such a principled leftist, like Kristol now, openly routing for Democrats. Just like Ricky!


    “On Sunday’s AM Joy on MSNBC, Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin renewed a previous attack on former Donald Trump administration members as she declared that they should be “shunned” for the rest of the lives, and that the Republican Party should figuratively be “burned down” so that there are no “survivors,” punishing Trump’s “enablers.””


    “Rubin then repeated her call for “shunning” and “shaming” Trump administration members and complained that the University of Virginia had employed a former Trump staffer for a while. The disgruntled ex-Republican then aimed further vitriol at her former party:

    It’s not only that Trump has to lose, but that all his enablers have to lose — we have to collectively, in essence, burn down the Republican party. We have to level them because if there are survivors — if there are people who weather this storm, they will do it again — will take this as confirmation that, “Hey, it just pays to ride the wave — look at me, I’ve made it through.”

    A bit later, the MSNBC contributor and supposedly right-leaning columnist further cheered for Democrats and against Republicans:

    This has become a dysfunctional anti-government party. That is not what the country wants and what it needs. And the proof is in the pudding. The reason they engage in voter suppression is because their underlying agenda is very unpopular. No one’s in favor, it turns out, of taking away people’s health care. People don’t like it when you come after Medicaid and Medicare.

    After hoping that a “leveled” GOP would try to adhere to the famous “autopsy” of Mitt Romney’s 2012 election loss, she suggested that she’d be satisfied with Democrats in power:

    And if they don’t, then they’re going to lose election after election. And, frankly, that would be fine, too. My hope is that Democrats don’t blow it. My hope is that Democrats are able to pull together a coalition that’s large enough to govern, and that we can have some sane governance for a period of time.”


    Now why would any real conservative or Republican give two flying pieces of monkey poo what this hack has to say about anything?

    Figures you’d be a fan though, birds of a feather and all…..


  30. Like Ricky, the media ignores the facts they don’t like with regard to slime ball Comey. So we have to let their betters explain things to them.


    “Comey’s classified misconduct and the media’s flawed coverage of it”

    “A major headline from the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) latest inspector general report is that fired FBI Director James Comey mishandled classified information. But you’d never know it from most of the day-after media reporting on the historic findings.

    The internal DOJ watchdog documented, irrefutably, that Comey leaked the contents of a classified memo to his legal team, first orally and then by providing a copy of the document. Some of the memo’s content was then leaked to a media organization by one of his lawyers.

    I first reported this when sources contacted me in late July and told me the inspector general (IG) had referred Comey to the Justice Department for possible prosecution for mishandling classified information. Attorney General William Barr’s team declined to bring charges.

    My reporting was directly confirmed when the IG released its final report Thursday. The information I laid out in my July 31 column was laid bare in the IG report’s official timeline. IG Michael Horowitz declared Comey’s conduct so egregious that it created a “dangerous example for the over 35,000 current FBI employees — and the many thousands more former FBI employees — who similarly have access to or knowledge of non-public information.”

    For some reason, not one but two Washington Post columns have emerged, suggesting I misled readers. Media critic Erik Wemple suggested I had “slimed” Comey. Another columnist, Aaron Blake, suggested my reporting led to a misleading narrative on Fox News.

    When confronted like this, a professional journalist has an obligation: Either retract and correct what you got wrong, or show the public the facts that affirm the reporting. I will do the latter.

    But first, a word about the world of intelligence: I have covered it for 30 years, and it is one of the most complicated subjects for everyday journalists, especially if they are not steeped in the nuances and requirements of classified information. I keep a copy of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s (ODNI) guide to document classification, Executive Order 13526, and the FBI’s Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide on my computer’s desktop. (You may soon conclude Comey might have benefitted if he had done the same!)

    Now for the facts.”


    “But it doesn’t change the fact that Comey, both verbally and physically, leaked the contents of Memo 2 — a document deemed at that moment to be classified in its entirety under the intelligence community’s rules — to his lawyers. And one of his lawyers then provided information derived from Comey’s recollections in the memo to the news media.

    “Under the FBI’s rules, that would be an unauthorized classified leak, potentially worthy of prosecution,” said Bassem Youssef, a decorated FBI agent who supervised the bureau’s super-secret NSA surveillance program until his retirement in 2015. He is regarded as one of the FBI’s experts on classification issues.

    The seriousness of transmitting the classified memo is re-emphasized in the report, which noted that the FBI spent months scrubbing Richman’s and the other Comey lawyers’ computers to erase the confidential data.

    In mid-June 2017, the “FBI begins the process of recovering or deleting the Memos from the computer systems of Richman, Fitzgerald, and Kelley, a process that is completed in January 2018,” the report noted.

    Given these facts, why would two Washington Post columns insist it was wrong or misleading to suggest Comey leaked classified information?”


    Because they’re dishonest hacks.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. 1:01 and 1:36 A question for all Trumpkins: Don’t you think it might just be a little bit important for a President to have some minimal understanding of what the Supreme Court does?

    Trump’s hilarious and profound ignorance is the elephant in the room throughout the entire 2nd half of the Mueller report :

    Can a four year old commit obstruction of justice? Not being a daycare worker, Mueller laid out the facts and punted the question to Congress.


  32. Its interesting to note that for all supposed problems Biden had with African Americans, his largest group of primary voters is African Americans. Maybe his detractors are reaching too far back in his past and miss who he is today. Perhaps Obama saw something when he chose Biden as a running mate.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. HRW – Many people tend to remember and judge by the past those with whom they disagree. When someone brings up the past bad deeds of their favored politicians, they insist that that is all in the past and we should get over it. 🙂


  34. I happened to record CBS’s Sunday Morning show yesterday because a friend of a friend had mentioned a Connecticut story that was supposed to be on that episode (but it wasn’t). I fast-forwarded through most of it, but I did watch an interview with James Mattis.

    I know he is now persona non grata with some Trump supporters these days. But he came across as a fairly humble man (whether that was authentic or put on, I don’t know), and when asked about Trump, towards the end of the interview, said that he would not criticize a sitting president.


  35. I am afraid that I am becoming cynical in my old age. The name of this responder to President Trump suggests that he is of mixed Canadian and Mexican ancestry. However, for some reason I have doubts about whether he is legit.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.