You know the Mueller probe isn’t going the way rabid anti-Trumpers hoped (and built their whole lives around for two years) when even leftist-chic Vanity Fair magazine feels it must prepare its readers for the soul-crushing possibility that Mueller might have labored mightily to produce a mouse, and that his report will not prove that the President is a treasonous criminal in cahoots with Russia.
First, Charlie Brown was a racist, then Rudolph was normalizing bullying, and now “The Little Mermaid” represents a “heteronormative attack on women’s rights” and promotes sexual assault. Go ahead, try and guess why... No, you’ll need to think crazier than that.
Oh, go on, click the link. If you read this newsletter, you can’t possibly be deranged enough to guess.
Whoever would have imagined that running a magazine for conservatives that relentlessly attacks the Republican President and sides with Democrats would be a bad business decision? It’s sort of like trying to sell subscriptions to “Cat Fancy” at the National Dog Show. Or taking a strong pro-gun control stand when you own a chain of outdoor stores that caters to hunters. Oh wait, I forgot: someone also did that, with similar results.
As expected after the detailed expose by the New York Times of former CBS CEO Les Moonves’ alleged scheming with a talent agent to use promises of TV roles to hush up an actress who accused him of sexual assault, CBS is no longer resigned to signing the check for Moonves' $120 million golden parachute. They hope to hand him a well-deserved anvil instead.
CBS hired two law firms to conduct an independent inquiry, and their report is ready to present to the network’s annual meeting next week. The Times has already seen it. The attorneys interviewed Moonves and 11 of his 17 accusers. They judged the women’s stories to be credible, but they found Moonves to be “evasive and untruthful at times and to have deliberately lied about and minimized the extent of his sexual misconduct.” The report includes previously-undisclosed allegations and says that Moonves “engaged in multiple acts of serious nonconsensual sexual misconduct in and outside of the workplace, both before and after he came to CBS in 1995.” They also claim he destroyed evidence and misled investigators to try to save his reputation and severance deal.
The investigators also say they found multiple bases for CBS to say it fired Moonves for cause, which means, “Sorry, jerk, no jackpot for you!” It must be especially embarrassing since CBS, home of Stephen Colbert and the now-canceled “Murphy Brown,” is such a paragon of smug liberal piety when it comes to lecturing the rest of us on our many non-PC shortcomings. They’d probably love to have a time machine so they could go back and prevent this photo of Moonves and Harvey Weinstein speaking together at a forum called “Beyond Primetime: Will Media Help Grow Healthier Kids?” Not if they work in it around those two!
I’m sure someone will raise the issue of due process, so just to be clear: I still defend his or anyone else’s right to defend himself. And if Moonves has a defense against the accusations, he should be allowed to make it. His problems are twofold:
1. His dispute with CBS over his severance payout is about a contract violation, not a criminal case.
2. He had an opportunity to defend himself, and the investigators say his response was to lie and try to rig a cover-up.
Still, if the accusations result in criminal charges, Moonves should be guaranteed due process. And if CBS refuses to pay, he’ll have the right to sue in civil court. But he might want to save his money, because I doubt that even $120 million worth of lawyers could win that case.
Some liberals in Michigan are threatening to sue if the Newaygo Public School District doesn’t end a 40-year tradition and remove figures of the Three Wise Men from the town’s Christmas display. They claim it violates the separation of church and state. I suspect they're really just jealous because their side couldn’t come up with three wise men if we loaned them two.
This post is byLaura Ainsworth:
Now that we’ve all had some time to go through the special counsel’s “sentencing memo” for Gen. Michael Flynn, something really jumped out at me. In between all the glowing tributes to this “exemplary” man whose career they had destroyed, they included this as one of the reasons for why he had been helpful to them...
“Additionally, the defendant’s decision to plead guilty and cooperate likely affected the decisions of related firsthand witnesses to be forthcoming with the SCO [Special Counsel Office] and cooperate.”
Well, isn’t that special. How convenient for them that they got him to plead guilty for something he apparently didn’t even do, giving up the fight (which legal experts are saying he would have won) just to avoid sliding further into bankruptcy trying to defend himself and possibly protect other members of his family from the same nightmare. They’re rewarding him now because his decision got other witnesses to be more forthcoming with them. He was a useful pawn. Thanks, Gen. Flynn!
I am really too overwhelmed with disgust right now to say any more about this.
If you didn’t see the funeral for President George H.W. Bush at the National Cathedral, this link will take you to a video of Fox News’ broadcast of the full event. But I’ve set the link to take you directly to the beginning of former President George W. Bush’s eulogy for his father. It was funny, wise, moving and one of the most inspiring speeches you are likely to see this year, or any year. It was a loving depiction of someone who wasn’t merely a great statesman or politician, but a great husband, father, friend and human being.
I know it must have been difficult for him to deliver – at the very end, the grief he was holding inside escaped for a fleeting moment – but that only made his words even more indelible. It was a beautiful and masterful tribute, and I’m sure his mom and dad were looking down proudly.