Latest member of the “I’m the real victim here!” club: ex-FBI lawyer Lisa Page. In a fawning profile/interview with The Daily Beast, Page claims that she’s suffered intimidation and humiliation at President Trump criticizing her when “I know there's no fathomable way that I have committed any crime at all.” The mind reels and the eyes roll.
Expect to see more of these ludicrous preemptive spin attempts by the media to protect the Deep State cabal as the release of the IG report draws closer. Let’s just hope that the IG also doesn’t bend over backwards to try to justify the “Who are you gonna believe, us or your lying eyes?” excuses that we’ve seen from these people thus far.
As long as we’re on the subject of Page and her alleged paramour Peter Strzok, the Office of Professional Responsibility has released its 27-page response to Strzok’s challenge of his termination. It reminds me of that moment in “The Producers” when the jury foreman says, “We find the defendants incredibly guilty!”
This blog post also highlights a quote from an FBI agent in New York who had Anthony Weiner’s laptop with Hillary Clinton’s emails on them, and how he contacted US Attorneys out of concern that nobody in charge of investigating the case (i.e., Strzok) was even contacting him to get copies. Read about his suspicions and concerns and how he expressed them. That’s what a real whistleblower who sees firsthand indications of official misconduct sounds like.
Ronan Farrow, whose reporting on Harvey Weinstein was quashed by NBC before going on to kick off the #MeToo movement and win a Pulitzer Prize, revealed that his relationship with Hillary Clinton “cooled” after word got out that Farrow was looking into sexual abuse allegations against Weinstein, a major Clinton ally and fundraiser.
Farrow told the Financial Times, “It’s remarkable how quickly even people with a long relationship with you will turn if you threaten the centers of power or sources of funding around them. Ultimately, there are a lot of people out there who operate in that way. They’re beholden to powerful interests, you become radioactive very quickly.”
That’s hardly news to anyone who’s followed the Clintons for very long. But you might find the story at the link interesting. I’m also linking to it as a reminder that the same big media outlets that constantly blast President Trump for not being forthcoming enough not only circled the wagons around Bill Clinton when he was accused by women, and tried to kill the Weinstein story, but just recently, ABC News was exposed as killing a report on Jeffrey Epstein that allegedly involved other powerful people, including Clinton. Rather than investigating to identify and punish whoever killed the story, they set out to identify and punish the whistleblower who leaked the tape (while simultaneously promoting the “whistleblowers must be protected” line, if it hurt Trump), even getting CBS to fire a former ABC employee who claims she was not the person who leaked the tape.
I recount all this to remind you that ABC covered for a notorious but rich and well-connected pedophile, targeted the whistleblower, and encouraged CBS to fire an innocent young woman, who as far as I’ve heard, hasn’t even gotten an apology, much less her job back. So when these media outlets whine about having their credibility questioned, remember that the proper question to ask on that topic is, “What credibility?”
This could easily be the first time you’ve heard that Montana Gov. Steve Bullock and former Admiral and Pennsylvania Congressman Joe Sestak were running for President as Democrats. That’s probably why they’re both giving up their Presidential campaigns.
Bullock is the third Governor or former Governor of a Western state to drop out of the race. He’d touted himself as a Democrat who’d won in a state that Trump carried, and he wanted to help Democrats win back places they’ve lost and get “dark money” out of politics. That combination of executive experience, rejecting money from shady sources and caring about states where the “Deplorables” live pretty much doomed him in the current Democratic Party.
One of the most disgusting features of modern politics is the dehumanizing of your opponent, often seen these days in people who wish for or cheer health problems or deaths of people whose politics they oppose. No matter which side it comes from, it should be one of those “take a long look in the mirror and contemplate what you have become” moments.
While openly rooting for people’s deaths is mostly confined to (anti-)social media, there’s a subtler form of it on the big media stage, as Joy Pullman points out at the Federalist. It manifests as stories that play up the health problems of Republicans such as Trump and suggest they’re hiding something while covering up obvious health problems of liberal political figures they support. Ms Pullman illustrates by comparing the coverage of President Trump and Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Note that a simple doctor visit for Trump is depicted as a scandalous cover-up of a severe health crisis, while Ginsburg is painted as being as invincible and immortal as Wonder Woman. I confess that until I read this article, even I wasn’t aware of just how many health problems Ginsburg has struggled with. We’re not allowed to know that because RGB must stay on the bench at all costs to prevent Trump from appointing her replacement.
As Ms Pullman points out, this way of thinking is irresponsible and inhumane, not only to people who expect Supreme Court rulings to represent the highest levels of legal reasoning, but to any Justices who are expected to put political advantage ahead of their own health. It’s happened because the SCOTUS has morphed from an independent body that determines the Constitutionality of laws into an unelected super-legislature that votes based on politics and writes laws from the bench. That needs to be reversed. Appointing conservative constructionist judges is the most important thing, but maybe term limits also need to be thrown into the mix.
I told you about Newsweek reporter Jessica Kwong, who wrote about President Trump spending Thanksgiving tweeting and golfing when he was actually on a secret flight to Afghanistan to visit the troops. In an update, Newsweek has now fired her.
I admit I’m a bit torn on this. I hate to see anyone lose their job, especially during the holidays. Ms. Kwong wrote her story the day before Thanksgiving, based on what turned out to be a cover story to prevent anyone knowing that Trump was going to Afghanistan. So while the snarky attitude was her own, she couldn’t have known that the details of Trump’s holiday were deliberately false. Also, she did delete her tweet and admit she was wrong, calling it an “honest mistake,” which is more that her bosses did.
As I said before, I think it wasn’t really an honest mistake but was motivated, perhaps without her realizing it, by a pervasive anti-Trump bias that reporters at outlets like Newsweek might not even realize they have, just as a fish has no concept of what water is because it’s surrounded by it at all times. Rather than firing her, I think Newsweek should have used this as a “teachable moment” for all their reporters, and encouraged them to take stock of their prejudices and be more diligent about not inserting them into their reporting. But if they did that, then Newsweek wouldn’t be Newsweek. It’s much easier just to fire one reporter and claim the problem is solved. Although if every liberal media outlet fired every reporter who wrote a negative story about Trump that turned out to be fake news, they’d have no employees left.
I guess we’ll know whether this firing solved the problem if negative “fake news” about Trump suddenly stops appearing in Newsweek. I won’t be holding my breath.