1. Walter Cronkite "objectivity" was an illusion. 2. It was a small group of elite white men who were deciding what you would see. 3. They were also far more willing to adhere to the gov't line than media today. cnn.com/2023/02/15/med…
4. Trust in media is declining not because it is worse but because it is better! 5. Much more diverse and willing to probe its own errors and mistakes than ever before. 6. It's also declining because authoritarian politicians deliberately try to undermine trust in media.
7. If they make you distrust media than you won't believe the press when it tells the truth about those leaders. 8. Some distrust in media is a good thing: it makes you less willing to trust disinformation. 9. Journalists should have a bias—a bias in favor of the truth.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We can't say we haven't been warned. The opening assumption of this important piece is that Trump will not willingly concede. Under any circumstances. And that he will be aided in this by compliant Republicans. /1
The story suggests that Republicans are planning what might be called a constitutional coup. Trump will dispute the results, allege fraud, and Republican-led legislatures in swing states will assign their own electors regardless of how the state voted./2
Trump will contend he won even though he loses the popular vote and loses the electoral college. The constitution does not say that electors must vote as the majority of voters did. /3
So, Mitch McConnell wants states to declare bankruptcy and not get what he calls federal "bailouts" for what they're spending to combat the virus. The irony is rich here because one of America's top ten "debtor" states is none other than Kentucky.
Kentucky gets back $2.35 for every $1 it contributes to the federal treasury in taxes. It is also in the top ten of states that get federal money from the SNAP program for "food stamps."
And, Mitch, guess who gives you all that extra money? Blue states like New York, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Minnesota all of whom get back less money from the federal government than they pay in.
With all the debate about process, let's point out that even though this is a "trial," it is not a trial like any other in our justice system. As Rehnquist said, the Senate is not the jury, it is the court.
The Senate makes the rules, decides on the evidence, votes to convict or not convict. This doesn't happen anywhere else under any other circumstances but this one.
I would argue that is because the Framers saw an impeachment trial as essentially a "political" one, to use Hamilton's phrase. That is, it's not a court of law, but a court that decides whether a president has over-reached, which is not simply a legal matter.
At the Constitutional convention, Madison argued that the impeachment of a president should be tried in the Supreme Court. Hamilton countered that the Court was too small and it was susceptible to corruption as there would be justices appointed by the then sitting president.
Hamilton argued for the Senate, asserting that it was larger, less susceptible to corruption, more independent and impartial. Fair enough. But let's remember how the Senate was elected in 1789: Not by popular vote, but by State legislatures.
They were not members of parties, or "factions" as the Framers called them. They did run for election. They were insulated from politics. I'm all for direct voting, but this elected politicized Senate is very different than what the Framers intended for a trial of a president.
Jan. 1, 2020. The Enlightenment model of liberal democracy, as embodied by the American experiment, has had a pretty good run. Longer than the Framers thought it would. Their idea was that human beings—the People—could rule themselves. That was—and still is—a radical idea.
Ever since WWII, we've all pretty much assumed that this liberal world order of pluralistic democracies would continue to grow and expand. We saw it as inevitable. That was naive. Just like the idea that the fall of the Berlin wall was "the end of history." It wasn't.
Now we are in a time where liberal democracy is under threat. That threat comes from without and from within. The threat from within is greater, but it's aided by bad actors around the world who seek to end the American experiment of republican government.
--> Extremely important story. Connects the dots behind Trump's obsession with the Ukraine conspiracy theory. washingtonpost.com/national-secur…
Officials believe Putin planted this theory in Trump's ear in their private sessions in Hamburg in 2017. Putin's dream has always been a US president who disdains facts as well as his own intelligence community.
What he could never have imagined was a Republican party that would become a witting asset to discredited Russian disinformation.