And, yes, as the book (and my writing) should make plain, this is not a problem exclusive to either coalition. But there is a cottage industry that promotes the notion that the right is the font from which all political violence springs. It requires a book-length rebuttal.
I am genuinely vexed as to why Kelly – sterling service record in uniform and a loyal soldier for Trump, who only stepped on one PR rake as I recall in his time as DHS sec, and whose credibility is tied to people who backed him like Tom Cotton – deserves less benefit of the doubt in a he said/she said than Donald Trump.
I would love to hear a sincere, non-hysterical case for why we should disregard his word and the stakes to which he is committing by retailing this accusation and take Trump and his defenders’ word as gospel.
I think Goldberg muddied his own piece by including the funeral expenses allegation in the same item, which is more dubious and now has on-record denials. But that’s a motte to which those who have dismissed the Kelly accusation on vague credibility issues have established.
The really weird part is that Rs convinced themselves they needed a totally new voting base after they won a 234-seat House majority, a 54-seat Senate majority, 68 of 99 state legislative chambers, and had 33 governors, 25 of whom presided over GOP-led trifectas.
That was the point at which the vaunted “base” decided all the GOP does is lose, somewhere between the period when Obama complained that the GOP blocked “500 bills” and the scuttling of the Iran deal in the Senate. That kind of losing sounds like a dream today.
Even today, every signal voters are sending in the polls suggests something like a generic conservative R resurgence would produce an epochal electoral shift. But R primary voters maintain media would polarize everyone anyway, so might as well go with the raving lunatic.
A story in two parts. Part one, Ben Rhodes pronounces a grim verdict on the Biden admin’s support for Israeli self-defense against the genocidal terrorist group Hamas. nytimes.com/2023/11/30/opi…
Part two, via @TeviTroy who actually read Rhodes’s memoir, the guy’s nickname in the White House was literally “Hamas.” politico.com/news/magazine/…
@TeviTroy Not sure we've got a reliable narrator on this one, folks.
The @NRO editors’ view is that Jack Smith’s latest Trump indictment is an overreach that seeks to “criminalize protected political speech” and undermine the rule of law.
Summarizing some points: Smith’s charges, conspiracy to defraud the gov’t and obstruct it’s proper workings, are distinct from Trump’s 2021 impeachment article on “incitement to insurrection.” This is not a “do-over” of impeachment by Biden’s DOJ.
Is this an overcharge because fraud is understood as “a scheme to swindle victims out of money or tangible property?” Relevant SCOTUS precedents indicate that obstructing or impairing legitimate gov’t proceedings defraud gov’t. That must be reckoned with.
Was it an intelligence-gathering instrument? If so, why would a state that operates a sophisticated assortment of orbital reconnaissance satellites deploy this relatively crude alternative?
Is it likely that China lost control over two harmless weather balloons that just happened to menace America’s continental defenses? Is it likely two airships, which typically fly at altitudes outside the range of the naked eye, descended to observable altitudes by accident?
Was Beijing seeking to test America’s response to a potentially hostile incursion? Was it a test of U.S. defense capabilities? Was it designed to provide Beijing with a pretextual justification to ratchet up tensions in its neighborhood?