Loquaciousness

Very.

🚨WAPO COLUMNIST MEGAN MCARDLE: "Jake, I would like to ask you: Do you think the media would have gotten this story sooner if it was Trump?"

TAPPER: "I don’t actually because, um *pause* these health issues are really sensitive to talk about and report."

Do you find his answer… pic.twitter.com/4X1S089Yno

— Jason Cohen 🇺🇸 (@JasonJournoDC) May 31, 2025

Tapper went on to say

Theses issues of health are so sensitive to talk about and to report and as you say, yes, we saw weird moments of Joe Biden. We also see weird moments and they're different. They're not the same issues. They're not acuity issues but we see weird moments of Donald Trump calling Nancy Pelosi "Nikki Haley" and the like but it's impossible to say, as as you noted, "this is what's going on behind closed doors" if nobody behind those closed doors is talking. 

So I really just don't think that. There are a million questions I'd like to ask about what's going on behind closed doors in the Trump White House that we can't get because they're not talking. I mean, I get that their job- their job is not to leak to us anymore and this is a much less leaky Trump White House than the first one. So I guess I just don't think so... 

Yes, some weird moments and some health moments. In the former category, not many Presidents have declared "I am the chosen one" (not once, but twice) and "A lot of people are saying, 'Sir, you can't just make yourself king.' But I checked- nowhere in the Constitution does it say I can't."  Obviously, that's even more tyrannical than evil. However, in the category of bizarre (awful, too, but weird) is

"HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY TO ALL, INCLUDING THE SCUM THAT SPENT THE LAST FOUR YEARS TRYING TO DESTROY OUR COUNTRY THROUGH WARPED RADICAL LEFT MINDS, WHO ALLOWED 21,000,000 MILLION PEOPLE TO ILLEGALLY ENTER OUR COUNTRY, MANY OF THEM BEING CRIMINALS AND THE MENTALLY INSANE,THROUGH AN OPEN BORDER THAT ONLY AN INCOMPETENT PRESIDENT WOULD APPROVE, AND THROUGH JUDGES WHO ARE ON A MISSION TO KEEP MURDERERS, DRUG DEALERS, RAPISTS, GANG MEMBERS, AND RELEASED PRISONERS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD, IN OUR COUNTRY SO THEY CAN ROB, MURDER, AND RAPE AGAIN — ALL PROTECTED BY THESE USA HATING JUDGES WHO SUFFER FROM AN IDEOLOGY THAT IS SICK, AND VERY DANGEROUS FOR OUR COUNTRY. HOPEFULLY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, AND OTHER GOOD AND COMPASSIONATE JUDGES THROUGHOUT THE LAND, WILL SAVE US FROM THE DECISIONS OF THE MONSTERS WHO WANT OUR COUNTRY TO GO TO HELL. BUT FEAR NOT, WE HAVE MADE GREAT PROGRESS OVER THE LAST 4 MONTHS, AND AMERICA WILL SOON BE SAFE AND GREAT AGAIN! AGAIN, HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY, AND GOD BLESS AMERICA!"

The difference, the cynic might suggest, is that Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson have written about President Biden and not the President who in a Memorial Day message would salute scum, USA-hating Judges, and monsters, but not soldiers who sacrificed their lives. However, Tapper honestly and accurately noted that information about President Trump is being withheld from reporters (as was information about Joe Biden while he was in office).

We know that their job is not to leak anymore about Trump and the rest of the Administration- until they fall out of favor. And so it was on Friday, May 30, The New York Times reported

On Wednesday evening, Mr. Musk announced that he was ending his stint with the government, after lamenting how much time he had spent on politics instead of his businesses.

In the very same article, we read

As Elon Musk became one of Donald J. Trump’s closest allies last year, leading raucous rallies and donating about $275 million to help him win the presidency, he was also using drugs far more intensely than previously known, according to people familiar with his activities.

Mr. Musk’s drug consumption went well beyond occasional use. He told people he was taking so much ketamine, a powerful anesthetic, that it was affecting his bladder, a known effect of chronic use. He took Ecstasy and psychedelic mushrooms. And he traveled with a daily medication box that held about 20 pills, including ones with the markings of the stimulant Adderall, according to a photo of the box and people who have seen it.

It is unclear whether Mr. Musk, 53, was taking drugs when he became a fixture at the White House this year and was handed the power to slash the federal bureaucracy. But he has exhibited erratic behavior, insulting cabinet members, gesturing like a Nazi and garbling his answers in a staged interview.

At the same time, Mr. Musk’s family life has grown increasingly tumultuous as he has negotiated overlapping romantic relationships and private legal battles involving his growing brood of children, according to documents and interviews.

For a long while, Elon Musk was suspected not to be substance-free, as the addiction community would diplomatically put it. Yet, there were only rumors, unadorned by anything approaching investigative reporting. Remind you of anything, Jake? 

With his DOGE, Musk- with or without drugs- did (has done?) more damage to government and people that President Biden ever could have, short of being alone, on his worst day ever, with the nuclear football. But there are parallels. Relatively little was reported by the media of the President's condition (whatever it truly was) during Biden's term because none of his people was talking. 

While Musk was destroying effective and somewhat honest government as President Trump wished, no one was talking while Elon remained in the King's good graces. When he became a political liability eclipsing his value in demolishing civil society, Musk was asked to leave and voila! Ketamine! Ecstasy! Psychedelic mushrooms! Adderall! (Trump's personal favorite, traditionally.) 

There are leakers in the Trump White House. Elon Musk knows, though he won't admit it. Journalists know, also. We'll find out whether they're as interested in listening to those issues as Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson have been in the issues of the prior, Democratic Administration.

Share |

Can Democrats Say "Hate?"

Citizens of the once-greatest republic ever on Earth awoke on Memorial Day to the president of the United States of America celebrating his favorite characters: scum, warped radical minds, USA Hating Judges, and monsters.

Trump’s Memorial Day message to America has zero mention of fallen soldiers pic.twitter.com/v1vj72Gsc3

— People For the American Way (@peoplefor) May 26, 2025

Chris Cillizza is right on a few counts in his podcast (video below). He states "It's all about grievances. It's all crazy stuff! If I'd posted that on the Internet, I'd probably be canceled- and rightly so." It is all about grievances and if Cillizza had posted that, he'd justifiably be canceled. And so would virtually anyone- but there are two sets of rules, one for President Trump, the other for the rest of  us. The Supreme Court said so.

"We cannot get numb," Cillizza argues to how different the Trump presidency is from any presidency that has come before it." Also 

But I feel like we have to stop occasionally and acknowledge how utterly bizarre his behavior is compared to every president who has been in the office prior to Donald Trump. Anyone of them saying or sending a message like this would be a massive national, and probably international, story.

Merriam-Webster defines "bizarre" as "odd, extravagant, or eccentric in style or mode."  Donald J. Trump's behavior certainly is odd, extravagant, and eccentric. He is one of a kind, in all the worst possible ways. Nonetheless, we should no longer be surprised that he speaks of "scum" and "monsters" and judicial officers "hating" the USA.

We're not surprised but we often act as if we are numb to it, as Cillizza warns against. Even as it's often noted that Trump is a master at projection, always accusing others of what he himself is, we neglect to identify the instances in which this arises. Trump tweets

.... Judges who are on a mission to keep murderers, drug dealers, rapists, gang members, and released prisoners from all over the world in our country so they can rob, murder, and rape again- all protected by these USA hating judges..."

Donald Trump overwhelms us by his incoherence, inanity, inaccuracy, and bigotry.  All the while, the charm of his broken syntax lures us to his message as we are lured to the scene of an automobile accident. 

We are overwhelmed by his inanity, incoherence, inaccuracy, bigotry, and even the charm of his broken syntax, luring us to his message as we are lured to the scene of an automobile accident. We are so thrown off balance by the incomparable and unparalleled wickedness of his message and the man behind it that we are unable to focus on a mere one or two idea or repulsive insult.

The anti-Trump message thus gets muddled. However, the President's condemnation of alleged "USA hating Judges" suggests a possible message. And it's not to defend Judges, notwithstanding the line of lawyers as guests and even hosts on cable news who jump at the chance to do that.

It comes with the "USA hating" thing, one of the most obvious examples of  projection practiced by Mr. Trump. "Our Country is Rigged, Crooked, and Evil," he posted on Untruth Social on October 30, 2022 (slyly posed by DJT on Mischief Night, albeit earlier in the day). Rigged or crooked is debatable- but do Americans believe our country, whom pre-Trump Republicans touted as "exceptional," is evil? 

"This country has gotten bloated, fat, and disgusting" claimed the Chief Executive on February 26, 2025 at his first Cabinet meeting

   

The President referring to federal employees- otherwise known as "workers"- is ironic coming from the head of the Party whose members (and the media) tell us repeatedly that it is the party of the "working class." The Democratic Party shouldn't need to be encouraged to remind citizens that our President has described America as "evil" and its workers as "bloated and fat and disgusting." The voters who did not hear of Trump's remarks could be told of them, and the others could be reminded.

Americans ought to be hear consistently that Donald Trump hates America or, alternatively, that he hates "you" or "us."  Repeated often enough by enough Democrats, the media would pick up on the criticism. It would be a politically powerful message- and the cherry on top would be that it is true.

Share |

Democrats Spanking Democrats

The great blogger Steve M recognizes

The Democratic Party's poll numbers are bad. Ever wonder why? We know that dyed-in-the-wool liberals and progressives are frustrated by the party's weak response to Trump. We know that Republicans have been told for decades that Democrats are history's greatest monsters. But what about the people in the middle? Why don't they say nice things about Democrats?

I think one big reason they don't is that they keep being told that Democrats suck by Democrats.

He notes the

story about Rahm Emanuel's all-but-declared run for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination. Emanuel apparently intends to run on the slogan "Rahm: Because Democrats Are Bad." (I made that up, but it's very close to the truth.)

Emanuel may be the biggest and most prominent offender but the blogger cites also Kentucky governor Andy Beshear. The WSJ reported "Saying someone has defeated “substance abuse disorder,” he said, minimizes the sheer human triumph of beating addiction; decrying “food insecurity” fails to convey the tragedy of hungry children." 

Similarly, there are Michigan senator Elissa Slotkin and Arizona senator Ruben Gallego. The latter, Steve M. points out, is "denouncing the use of 'Latinx.; (I'm not a huge fan myself, but I can't think of a single Democratic politician who's ever used it, except Gallego himself, pejoritavely.)" 

Gallego is an old hand at this. Here he is on a 2022 episode of Real Time with Bill Maher, stating "it's something that's used by white liberals and a small amount of Latinos but largely it's to satisfy white liberals, not necessarily..." After an approving comment by Maher, Gallego continues

Think about this. I had a little marketing firm when I was way younger. If I was working for a firm and I said "I'm going to use this term that only 3% of the population identify with and 40 of the population hate" that firm would probably get rid of me because, like "what are you doing? How are you actually reaching out to them? Why are you reaching out to them this way?"

Which is, of course, why nearly no Democrat used the term then and none does now. The tell is when, between remarks by the Senator, Maher comments "stop doing this. We have polling on it. And like, an extraordinary number, sometimes up to 99% of Latinos, either don't know it or when they here it, don't like it."

Or when they hear it, don't like it. Most people, even most Latinos, had not heard of it- until the likes of Maher and Gallego criticized Democrats for saying what they weren't even saying.

As with Gallego, Slotkin and Emanuel believe they're the smartest guys in the room, scoring political points while running down their own Party. (Slotkin probably wouldn't object to being considered one of the guys, and Beshear, bless his heart, never seems to believe that he has all the answers.) 

And maybe they are the most clever, elevating  themselves while, and by, demeaning their own Party, something which such progressives as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Joaquin Castro, Ayanna Pressley, and even Jasmine Crockett avoid doing. Following the mid-term elections of 2010, President Obama contended that the Democratic Party had taken a "shellacking,' a word- concept, even- Republicans know never to apply to themselves. It brought joy and optimism to Republicans but Obama didn't himself suffer politically, eventually winning a second term.

I haven't heard any recent remarks by Gallego. However, he still is trying to carve out an identity as a moderate or centrist. "White liberals, white liberals" he likes to excoriate, perhaps figuring that his political viability in Arizona is instead dependent upon Latinos and left-leaning Independents.

Whether that is his motive, white liberals, except myself and a few others, won't complain. But instead of analyzing  liberal whites, Gallego, a second-generation Mexican-and Colombian- America, might want to analyze the behavior of a different segment of the electorate.

Nonetheless, Gallego and others might want to ponder why Donald Trump pulled down 42% of the presidential vote last November. That would be the same Donald Trump who in December of 2023 condemned President Biden by claiming "They let- I think the real number is 15, 16 million people into our country. When they do that, we got a lot of work to do. They're poisoning the blood of our country.

They're poisoning the blood of our country. Not all Latino citizens of the USA are the same. They may be Mexican, Colombian, Nicaraguan, Puerto Rican, Cuban, or of another descent. And not all immigrants are Latino, though they comprise the largest group of recent immigrants.

Trump went on to argue that he was talking about immigrants from all over but one suspects he wasn't thinking about Norwegians. The candidate protested that immigrants from Latin America (and elsewhere) are poisoning the blood of native-born Americans. Poisoning; blood. No  dog whistle there; only pure racism.

And that was O.K. with more than two of five Latinos who voted. Although some undoubtedly were unaware of the remark, it was not out of character for Donald Trump. It was not out of character for him to believe it, nor out of character for him to promote hostility among his supporters toward those individuals.

Exploring that reality would be helpful. However, as long as there are progressive Democrats to bash, the anti-Democrat Democrats will leave reality untouched.

Share |

Weak Analysis

In mid-May, Chris Cillizza noted that when pollsters asked Democrats their opinion of the Democratic Party, the word that often came to mind was "weak."

There are many reasons for that. One, however, is that when major Democratic operatives are asked about the Party, they are loathe to be seen or heard defending it. At the beginning of the video below, David Axelrod contends "More and more, the Party has come to approach working people as missionaries and anthropologists. We show up and say "we're here to hep you become more like us..." 

"More like us." Black? Gay (or, rather, "queer")? Former federal prosecutors? Axelrod continues "... and we know what you need and we're fighting for it. And there's a fundamental disregard associated with that and I think that's been communicated and I think that disdain has been weaponized by Trump.."

At 1:51, Axelrod claims

But look, there's a larger problem, uh. And I think Democrats do themselves a disservice by not doing, engaging, in some introspection here.  It is that the party that sees itself as the party of working people came to be seen by so many working people as the party of elites and institutions.

Oh, good gravy. Democrats are forever and ever looking themselves in the mirror. They are the party of introspection.  Republicans do not do this, though at least not since early 2013, when they conducted an "autopsy" which concluded that it must be a more inclusive party, more welcoming to immigrants, blacks, and other minorities. They then nominated Donald Trump, and the rest is history.

There is a modicum of validity to Axelrod's observation. However, at least in this segment, the veteran consultant, as is common among similar critics, does not specify what "elites" or institutions Democrats are enamored with. Further, the assessment might be a little more credible, or at least genuine, if it hadn't come from a chief strategist and senior adviser to a famous former President, who once remarked.

You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.

And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Barack Obama did not offer this "introspective" and definitely not elitist comment after his presidency or even during his presidency. He said this on the campaign trail in April of 2008- seven months before he would be elected President. And this fellow, who maintained Americans in the heartland "get bitter (and) cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them" was re-elected. Sometimes, smug prevails. And elitism.

Of course, it's not that Obama was wrong. Nor is his former consultant/adviser arguing that the policy prescriptions or analysis of Democrats is inaccurate. However, Barack Obama's success at winning presidential elections suggests that the perception that Democrats are elitist is not a cause of electoral failure bur a result, or proxy for, something else.

I don't know what that is. But if talk is cheap, diagnosis without prescription- as practiced by Axelrod- is nearly worthless, or worse. He and others try to distance themselves from the Party, which reinforces the perception of Democrats as weak: if its heavyweights don't stand up for the party, why should others

Share |

Leadership Needed

On May 13, 2025

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries warned Republicans and federal law enforcement against sanctioning or arresting three Democratic New Jersey lawmakers who were involved in a tense immigration protest.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries warned Republicans and federal law enforcement against sanctioning or arresting three Democratic New Jersey lawmakers who were involved in a tense immigration protest.

“They’ll find out. They’ll find out. They’ll find out,” Jeffries said Tuesday when asked how he’d respond if officials arrested or sanctioned Democratic Reps. Rob Menendez, LaMonica McIver and Bonnie Watson Coleman. “That’s a red line. It’s a red line, it’s very clear.”

The three Democrats were inspecting the new ICE facility, which is set to play a major role in White House Northeast immigration operations, and were involved in a scrum when federal agents arrested Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, who authorities said was trespassing.

Six days later we learned 

The Justice Department has filed charges against a Democratic member of Congress, alleging that she assaulted law enforcement officers during a protest outside an immigration detention facility in New Jersey earlier this month.

Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-N.J., faces two counts of assaulting, resisting, and impeding law enforcement officials in connection with an incident at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Newark, according to court documents made public on Tuesday.

Interim U.S. Attorney for New Jersey Alina Habba, who served as Trump's personal attorney and previously worked as counselor to the president, announced the charges against McIver on X on Monday night, before they were made public.

On Tuesday, McIver told NBC News that she had learned of the charges on social media after Habba posted about them.

After President Trump in April reduced federal aid to Harvard University by $2.2 billion, thus slashing medical research, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer stated "We sent him a very strong letter just the other day asking eight very strong questions about why this isn't just a pretext," everyone laughed. Broadly mocked, Schumer faced faced calls for his resignation from leadership of the caucus as criticism of the Democratic Party for being leaderless grew.

But now that Hakeem Jeffries' "red line" was crossed with the charging of Representative McIver, the House Minority Leader has responded with..... a strongly worded press release. "Everyone responsible for this illegitimate abuse of power," read the joint statement from Jeffries, Whip Katherine Clark, Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar, Vice Chair Ted Leu and Assistant Leader Joe Neguse, "is going to be held accountable for their actions."

Fat chance, that. It's possible that the caucus will in the next few days do something more than it has, or that Senator Schumer did in the Harvard matter, but it has not done so thus far. However, as of now, this looks a lot like President Obama's reverse Theodore Roosevelt, "speak softly and carry a big stick."

In the summer of 2012, President Obama pledged that if President Bashar al-Assad were to cross a "red line" by employing chemical weapons against domestic rebels, Syria would face "enormous consequences."  Assad called Obama's bluff a year later by dropping sarin gas outside of Damascus with no military response from the most powerful nation on earth. 

Chuck Schumer did not rise to the occasion. Thus far, Hakeem Jeffries has done even less in response to a direct attack upon his caucus, a criminal charge against one of its members.  He has not only failed to deliver, he threatened and then failed to deliver. The caucus cannot afford a paper tiger and if he does not respond forcefully in a manner at least reasonably effective, the Minority Leader should be replaced.

Share |

Little Man

In a less sophisticated age with far less scientific information available, orthodox doctors with patients interested in their own health would say of nutritional supplements "if you think they'll help you, go ahead. They won't help you but they can't hurt you." 

In a political, contemporary variant, President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador had an idea. He probably figured it wouldn't work because, well, who would be stupid enough to buy it? But it was worth a shot and he took it. The senior senator from the State of Maryland went to El Salvador on April 17 and as reported then by ABC7 Chicago

"Everything happens because Bukele says it could happen. And if you look at the video you sent out right afterwards with the fake margaritas, you can see that all of that was a setup," Van Hollen told reporters.

The senator poked holes in the story that was being spread by Bukele's and Trump's allies and said the entire meeting was suspect from the beginning.

After being denied access to CECOT, the super prison that the government originally said was holding Abrego Garcia, Van Hollen said he was ready to fly back to the U.S. Thursday but got a message that the deportee was available to meet.

The El Salvador government tried to have the meeting poolside, but the senator said he had them take it indoors in a dining area. During the meeting, Van Hollen and Abrego Garcia had glasses of water and a coffee cup on their tables, which appeared in a photo posted by the senator.

The senator said that at one point during the hourlong meeting, officials put glasses on the table that appeared to have liquid inside with salt or sugar rims on top. Van Hollen said he had no idea what the liquid was.

The glass in front of Abrego Garcia had less liquid than the other glass, according to Van Hollen.

"They tried to make it look like, I assume, that he drank out of it," the senator said.

Van Hollen said the insinuations about the margarita glasses don't hold up under scrutiny.

"They made a mistake," he said of the government officials. "If you sip out of one of those glasses, some of whatever it was, salt or sugar, would disappear. You would see a gap. There's no gap. No one drank anything."

Facts be damned, someone fell for the deepfake. In a fiery confrontation with Van Hollen when Little Marco testified on May 20 before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee

“In the case of El Salvador, absolutely, absolutely. We deported gang members, gang members, including the one you had a margarita with,” Rubio said during the hearing, a reference to the cocktail glasses that Salvadoran officials brought to the senator during his meeting with Abrego Garcia....

“And that guy is a human trafficker, and that guy is a gangbanger,” Rubio said, before Van Hollen cut in and began talking over the secretary.

He's a little man with a big job, that Marco. Democrats should henceforth refer to Secretary Rubio as Little Marco and if he complains or asks for respect, remind him that he was first recognized as Little Marco by Donald Trump.  If instead Donald Trump defends the Secretary, Democrats can point out that in the spirit of bipartisanship, they will side with the President when he is right, as he was when he called Rubio out.

    

This wouldn't be difficult to understand and apply, if Democrats are committed to winning. They can continue to play by Marquis of Queensberry Rules- or come to realize that this is real life and a constitutional republic slipping through our hands.

Share |

Genocide, Genocide, Genocide

Is it all genocide now?

BRENNAN: President Trump claims there's a genocide underway in South Africa. That's a legal determination. Are you trying to determine that now?

MARCO RUBIO: They can call it whatever they want, but these are people that on the basis of their race are having their properties… pic.twitter.com/sl0or0UaRB

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 18, 2025

 At a news conference on May 12, President Trump contended

Because they're being killed and we don't want to see people be killed. Now, South Africa leadership is coming to see me I understand sometime next week and we're supposed to have a, I guess a G20 meeting there or something, but we're having a G20 meeting. I don't know how we can go unless that situation's taken care of, but it's a genocide that's taking place that people don't want to write about, but it's a terrible thing that's taking place. And farmers are being killed. They happen to be white, but whether they're white or Black, it makes no difference to me, but white farmers are being brutally killed and their land is being confiscated in South Africa and the newspapers and the media, television media doesn't even talk about it.

However, as the BBC explained last week

None of South Africa's political parties - including those that represent Afrikaners and the white community in general - have claimed that there is a genocide in South Africa.

But such claims have been circulating among right-wing groups for many years and Trump also referred to a genocide during his first term.

The claims stem from attacks on white farmers, or misleading information circulated online.

In February, a South African judge dismissed the idea of a genocide as "clearly imagined" and "not real", when ruling in an inheritance case involving a wealthy benefactor's donation to white supremacist group Boerelegioen.

South Africa does not release crime figures based on race but the latest figures revealed that 6,953 people were murdered in the country between October and December 2024.

Of these, 12 were killed in farm attacks. Of the 12, one was a farmer, while five were farm dwellers and four were employees, who are likely to have been black.

You aren't surprised that Trump was lying- his lips were moving. However, his attitude deserves to be placed in context. Where "racist" is bandied about almost exclusively by the left and "socialist" (or "Marxist" or "communist") by the right, "genocide is becoming a bipartisan buzz word, and lie. 

Even Amnesty International is confused. In December of 2924 it claimed Israel is committing a genocide in its "specific intent to destroy Palestinians in Gaza. These acts include killings, causing serious bodily or mental harm and deliberately inflicting on Palestinians in Gaza conditions of life calculated to bring abut their physical destruction."

Yet, a month ago, John Spencer, chairperson of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point, and Arsen Ostrovsy wrote

The acts that could constitute genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention include killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm; deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the groups physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births; and forcibly transferring children to another group. Crucially, however, these acts only amount to genocide when committed with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such.

None of Israel's actions meet this threshold. Israel targets Hamas- an armed terrorist entity that initiated the war with mass atrocities on October 7. The IDF issues evacuation warnings, facilitates humanitarian aid, and restricts military operations to lawful targets There is is no Israeli policy, order, or pattern of  action that suggests an attempt to destroy the Palestinian people.

Earlier in the war against Hamas, Spencer had argued that Israel had attained "the gold standard" in harm mitigation. If once true, that appears no longer to be the case, though a closer approximation to reality than the claim it is practicing "genocide."

Nor is genocide taking place in South Africa, no matter the failings of the current government This has included confiscation of land from whites, under color of law, undertaken by President Cyril Ramaphosa of the African National Congress party.

Of course, motivations differ. The individuals and groups who have accused Israel of genocide the past two-and-a-half years typically believe what their rhetoric and are merely badly mistaken. By contrast, Donald Trump is either lying (knowingly stating a falsehood) or has a reckless disregard for the truth. Whether race or the influence of co-President Elon Musk, Trump is pursuing his own agenda for his own malicious reasons. It's a big difference with one commonality: abuse of the term "genocide." Responding to charges against Israel- but with more general application- the Florida Holocaust Museum recognized

Every time an unfounded  accusation of genocide is leveled, the word loses some of its necessary gravity, making it harder to call out real genocides as they occur. Under the protesters' definition, every war could be labeled a genocide- at which point the word would no longer have meaning at all.

Share |

8647 or S647: Take Your Pick

This guy is an idiot; well, sort of

Make no mistake…. THIS is what he meant.

Arrest James Comey. pic.twitter.com/TCqp46m0QZ

— Derrick Evans (@DerrickEvans4WV) May 16, 2025

This right-wing fellow knows that he has carte blanche to post recklessly because under Trump puppet Pam Bondi, the gloves are off. Any Democrat or left-leaning Independent is fair game for prosecution and, down the line, deportation. Moreover, the tweeter in his bio identifies himself as a "Christian," so he is entitled to say whatever he wishes to say or do in the name of "faith."

And anyway, this fellow is significantly brighter than James Comey, which is to say, smarter than the tree growing in your backyard. Or dying in your backyard. As TIME notes

The Obama appointee who was fired by Donald Trump in 2017 is being investigated by federal law enforcement after posting a photo of seashells on a beach that appeared to form the shape of “86 47,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Thursday, claiming that the since-deleted post was a call for the assassination of the President….

“Cool shell formation on my beach walk,” Comey wrote in the caption accompanying the Thursday Instagram post. Comey later clarified in a follow-up post, “I posted earlier a picture of some shells I saw today on a beach walk, which I assumed were a political message. I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence. It never occurred to me but I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down.”

Oh, dear Lord. The proper response is "I didn't know it was political" (or better, "It is not political.") Conceding that he thought it was "political" begs the question of "what political message was it sending?'

TIME explains

Eighty-six is slang broadly meaning “to throw out,” “to get rid of,” or “to refuse service to,” according to Merriam-Webster, although the dictionary notes that it has recently, albeit sparsely, also been used to mean “to kill.” Forty-seven, meanwhile, is an apparent reference to Trump, who is the 47th President of the U.S.

To a male growing up in the mid- to late- twentieth century, "86" meant "to eliminate," anything from avoiding to kill, depending on the circumstance. However, Matt Gaetz would have accepted the TIME definition:

Oops!!! Hey did you see this @FBIDirectorKash and @KristiNoem? pic.twitter.com/Fzq7qTjH4K

— Fred Guttenberg (@fred_guttenberg) May 16, 2025

James Comey is a 64-year-old former FBI director who should have known better. Instagram is not a social network service  for 74-years-olds and Comey has gotten himself into a bucket of (mostly undeserved) hot water because he thought that he was one of the cool kids. It is especially not a service or platform for lawyers, engineers, and other individuals whose imagination run the gamut from A to B- who sees things as they are rather than as they are widely misinterpreted as.

When such individuals see four letters strung together with an emphasis on one letter, they should read the number in that manner. In this case,  the numbers 8647 ran together with one number- the 8- standing out.

 

That 8- which looks a little like an S- stands  apart from the 647. It is most logically seen as an 8 followed by the three-digit 647. That would be logical but, of course, Instagram.

Jim Comey posted this probably because he is not the brightest bulb in the pack. In 2016, he reported an investigation into Hillary Clinton, which was ongoing, but not an investigation into the Trump campaign, which was ongoing. With fewer than two weeks before the 11;16 election, he was informed of a cache of emails between Clinton and  aide Huma Abedin had been found on a computer belonging to Representative Anthony Weiner (her husband). In order to determine whether any was classified, he needed to ask a Court for a search warrant, which would have been leaked to Republicans. They in turn would have leaked the news to the public.

Comey could have waited until after the election to obtain a warrant. However, convinced that Hillary Clinton would win, he was afraid that he'd be accused of playing politics to have ensured the defeat of Donald Trump. He notified congressional leaders because he had earlier promised Congress to notify it of any developments.

Then-Republican National Committee chairperson Reince Priebus claimed "The F.B.I.'s decision to reopen their criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton's secret email server just 11 day before the lection shows how serious this discovery must be." 

It is unknown whether, just as presciently, Priebus earlier this year declared "extensive Super Bowl success ensures that the Kansas City Chiefs will wallop the Philadelphia Eagles in the upcoming Big Game." Following a dip in Clinton's numbers following Comey's announcement in late October, voters had largely forgotten about the announcement. But when the FBI director on November 6, two days before the election, stated that the emails were only ones which previously had been reviewed, the public was reminded about this exaggerated scandal. HRC then lost an election she was expected, but not certain, to win.

The FBI director declined to vote in the election because he believed in that position he needed to project objectivity and neutrality. However, he really, really wanted Donald Trump to be defeated, while his actions probably were the deciding factor getting Trump elected.

As we first learned in the Ashcroft-Comey-NSA episode during the Bush 43 Administration, Comey is not someone lacking integrity. At the same time, he is not someone excessively imbued with intelligence or sound judgement. He should have left the seashell photo alone, and it is a mystery why he would say he thought it had political significance when it was unclear what it was about or that it wasn't even S647. It is a tempest in a teapot, though excellent fodder for a media which would rather not focus on Donald Trump, who has recommended that Mark Milley and Elizabeth Cheney be executed, that Judges be prosecuted, and his political opponents be imprisoned.

Share |

Trump: Praise the Pain

Ladies and gentlemen, Donald J. Trump, the purported populist:

Trump: And now after studying the industry, it's a very complex industry but I figured it out and I said it's not going to happen. The Democrats fought very hard to keep the prices of drugs very high. They really are to blame for this pic.twitter.com/rikV9ug66l

— Acyn (@Acyn) May 14, 2025

             

The major pharmaceutical companies, which make obscene profits, aren't to blame for the prices they charge or the profits they make. It's the Democrats!

And not surprisingly, Trump's proposal isn't half of what it's hyped up to be.  As reported by The New York Times on Monday

President Trump on Monday signed an executive order asking drugmakers to voluntarily reduce the prices of key medicines in the United States.

But the order cites no obvious legal authority to mandate lower prices. The order said the administration would consider taking regulatory actions or importing drugs from other countries in the future if drugmakers do not comply.

It was something of a win for the pharmaceutical industry, which had been bracing for a policy that would be much more damaging to its interests.

The President was expected to call for lower drug prices for American consumer, and the stock prices of major pharmaceutical companies dropped before the announcement. They then recovered when the corporations realized that Trump's primary proposal was toothless. However, the President's approach and reasoning reinforce a major operating principle of his. The Washington Post noted

Far from demonizing pharmaceutical companies for high prices, Trump focused his fire on countries, particularly in the European Union, for negotiating drug prices so low that they leave the United States to subsidize the global costs of innovation. He is directing his administration to investigate countries that “extort drug companies by blocking their products unless they accept bottom line and very low dollar amounts for their product, unfairly shifting the cost burden onto American patients”…

While other countries directly negotiate with drugmakers to lower prices, the United States generally has left it up to the companies to set their own price, with complex and opaque negotiations with industry middlemen determining what Americans pay out of pocket. In targeting this international price disparity, Trump has zeroed in on a potent, bipartisan political issue.

“So they’re going to have to pay more for health care, and we’re going to have to pay less,” Trump said Monday.

This might be a wild idea but: how about the federal government force lower drug prices in the USA upon the companies?  An analysis reported in late 2024 by The Campaign for Sustainable Rx Prices "found the pharmaceutical industry’s average annual net income margin was nearly 23 percent, while the average for other sectors of the U.S. prescription drug supply chain, including distributors, retail pharmacies, pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) and health insurers, was just 2.3 percent." And 

In 2023, 16 of the largest drug companies reported $684 billion in earnings, a figure that is higher than the gross domestic product (GDP) of 88 percent of the countries in the world...

While drug companies increased their innovation budgets, they also rewarded their shareholders handsomely. Each company spent at least approximately $1 billion on dividends and stock buybacks. Johnson & Johnson, AbbVie, Bristol Meyers Squibb, and Novo Nordisk spent more lining the pockets of shareholders than on their research and development budgets

But wholly in character, Donald Trump's answer to all this is to lecture Europeans with "So they're going to have to pay more for health care and we're going to have to pay less." 

That's not necessarily the case, and it's a slimy tactic, sticking it to our European allies. who per capita and relative to GDP have been more generous to Ukraine defending itself against the invasion launched by Trump's pal in the Kremlin.  

However, it demonstrates also Donald Trump's fealty to the zero-sum game: if others pay more and hurt as a result, we'll be paying less. Reinforcing that interpretation, the President did not say those other countries will "pay more for health care but we'll pay less." Instead, he said they'd pay more "and we're going to have to pay less."  If we're to believe the President- always a dubious proposition, to be sure- he considers it a net loss for Americans to pay less: we're going to have to pay less."

O.K., maybe  President Trump was speaking hurriedly or had something else on his mind or for some other reason didn't speak his mind. There must be a reasonable explanation, though, because as the media has been avidly suggesting recently, Joe Biden is the only recent American President with cognitive issues.

Share |

The Corruption Continues

French President Emanuel Macron is quite pompous. He also may may have been figuratively caught with his pants down.

So here we have French President Emmanuel Macron while asking for sacrifices from the French people, when he suddenly realizes he is wearing a very expensive watch.

And voila, just like a magician it disappears under the table......
😂😂😂😂 pic.twitter.com/lCfqkYRJCw

— Richard (@ricwe123) May 11, 2025

The watch was much less expensive than claimed by Macron's critics and leaving it on the table in full view suggests that he wasn't trying to hide it. In either case, as for being the "epitome of a centrist elitist," as one lefty podcaster labels him, well, the French are pikers when it comes to elitism.

ABC News reports

In what may be the most valuable gift ever extended to the United States from a foreign government, the Trump administration is preparing to accept a super luxury Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet from the royal family of Qatar -- a gift that is to be available for use by President Donald Trump as the new Air Force One until shortly before he leaves office, at which time ownership of the plane will be transferred to the Trump presidential library foundation, sources familiar with the proposed arrangement told ABC News.

The gift had been expected to be announced next week, when Trump visits Qatar on the first foreign trip of his second term, according to sources familiar with the plans. But a senior White House official said the gift will not be presented or gifted while the president is in Qatar this week.

In a social media post Sunday night, Trump confirmed his administration was preparing to accept the aircraft, calling it a "very public and transparent transaction" with the Defense Department.

Trump had previously toured the plane, which is so opulently configured it is known as "a flying palace," while it was parked at the West Palm Beach International Airport in February.

ABC News adds

The highly unusual -- unprecedented -- arrangement is sure to raise questions about whether it is legal for the Trump administration, and ultimately, the Trump presidential library foundation, to accept such a valuable gift from a foreign power.

That's a major question- but it must not be the only question.  For a President who stole classified, even top-secret, documents from the federal government, a gift from Qatar comes with troubling possibilities.

The relationship between the USA and Qatar, as described here by the Trump-friendly New York Post, is, for better or worse (both, mostly the latter) complex and complicated.  On May 7, Amine Ayoub, a foreign policy analyst based in Morocco for the hawkish, pro-Israel Middle East Forum, wrote in response to President Trump's three-day visit to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE, beginning on May 12.

Ayoub argued that Trump "understands the cost of being used by regimes that speak the language of partnership while pursuing their own agendas behind closed doors. The President's base expects candor, not ceremony." (O.K., political psychology is not his forte.) He added, while unaware that "disruptive clarity" should be replaced by "chaotic opacity"

This moment gives Trump a choice: lend his brand to a carefully choreographed narrative, or reaffirm the disruptive clarity that has defined his foreign policy.  Qatar needs Trump more than Trump needs Qatar. That leverage should be used not to flatter, but to demand more- more transparency, more accountability, and more alignment with the values that the US claims to defend.

Fat chance of that happening now, as in "slim chance."  There are roughly 400 million reasons that leverage won't be used, with the jet valued at a little under a half billion dollars, according to "aviation industry experts."

Not only has Trump been bribed- not exactly the first or second or even third time in recent history- but with potentially catastrophic consequences. Not only will he be tempted to deliver intelligence information, but there is a serious possibility that the aircraft will be efficiently outfitted with spyware by Doha.

That won't necessarily occur and the Qataris, sensitive to public relations, may even reconsider their "gift"  to a guy who can never surround himself with enough gold nor accumulate enough wealth. However, this matter stands as another example of the adage that there is "no such thing as a free lunch.

             ." 

Share |

No Corruption Here: Move On

This could be a comedy routine. However, Karoline Leavitt must be deadly serious when she states

I think it's frankly ridiculous that anyone in this room would even suggest that President Trump is doing anything for his own benefit. he left a life of luxury and a life of running a very successful real estate empire for public service not just once, but twice. And again, the American public re-elected him back to the White House because they trust him to act in the best interests of our country and putting the American people and the public first. This is a President who has actually lost money for being President of the United States.

Karoline Leavitt shot back at a reporter’s “frankly ridiculous” question about President Trump meeting business contacts in the Middle East, reminding the reporter that he “left a life of luxury” for public service. pic.twitter.com/qFsKx9skIR

— Fox News (@FoxNews) May 9, 2025

 

She might be serious but is probably, and wisely, kept ill-informed. CBS News on May 2 reported

President Trump's venture into crypto products has increased his family's wealth by billions in the last six months, according to a new report, as his administration continues to loosen the federal government's regulatory approach to the digital currency industry as a whole.

The group State Democracy Defenders Action estimated in a new report that the president's crypto holdings now represent nearly 40% of his net worth — or approximately $2.9 billion. That increase is due in part to his release of the $TRUMP and $MELANIA meme coins, in addition to a large stake in World Liberty Financial, a crypto exchange affiliated with the Trump family that launched in October 2024. State Democracy Defenders Action identifies itself as non-partisan, but it is overseen by frequent critics of President Trump, with an agenda focused on "the autocratic threat to our nation."

The president's net worth is expected to get another bump, with World Liberty Financial's announcement this week that a Abu Dhabi-backed firm will invest billions of dollars in the Trump family-affiliated crypto fund. The Emirati firm, MGX, will purchase $2 billion in a stablecoin product offered by World Liberty, the company said in a statement to CBS. The currency, called "USD1" will then be used to invest in Binance, one of the world's largest cryptocurrency exchanges.

World Liberty has ties to the president and his sons. The fine print on the company's website says an entity affiliated with Mr. Trump and his family members own a 60% stake in the company.

According to the company's public reports, a Trump family entity also holds 22.5 billion of the $WLF tokens –- and takes an additional 75% in net revenue from future token purchases.

This is on top of the unprecedented corruption of the first term, much of which probably constituted was a violation of the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, . A report last year of the House oversight Committee and analysis by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington revealed that President Trump "likely benefited form $15.6 million in payments from foreign governments" during that term.

On King Trump's birthday on June 14, the USA Army will stage a celebration, complete with "a spectacular fireworks display, a parade, and a daylong festival on the National Mall."  Including the parade with 6600 soldiers, 150 vehicles, and 50 helicopters, the gala will salute the American military and Donald Trump, cost tens of millions of dollars, and rip up tens of millions of dollars to roads in the District of Columbia and Virginia.

The issue should not be whether Donald Trump does anything for his own benefit. Rather, it should be whether he ever does anything to benefit anyone else or the "disgusting" country he's bent on wrecking. 

Share |

The Comforting Choice of Blaming Biden

Former President Joe Biden is right, wrong, and right, respectively:

Former President Joe Biden said in a new interview that the timing of his pullout from the 2024 election wouldn’t have made a difference, suggesting that Kamala Harris’ loss to Donald Trump was inevitable. (Watch the video below.)

“Should you have withdrawn earlier?” the BBC’s Nick Robinson asked in the interview, shared Wednesday.

“I don’t think it would’ve mattered,” Biden replied. “We left at a time when we had a good candidate. She was fully funded.”

Chris Cillizza disagrees with Biden's first claim, that it would have not mattered); presumably agrees with the second that "we had a good candidate", and ignores the third point, that "she was fully funded." He argues (at 4:39 of the video below)

There was no primary. Biden gets out Harris gets in, that's it. She gets zero actual votes from Democrats to be the Democratic nominee for President. It just got handed off to her. I think that rankled a lot of voters, including a lot of Democrats. 

I think- let's imagine Biden gets out a year before. Let's imagine he gets out in June- July 21, 2023. We had a robust primary process at that point. Kamala Harris is in. There probably are other people who run. She might still wind up being the nominee. But it seems to me that that process would have yielded someone who could say "I won this. I campaigned for this and I won the nomination as opposed to it was handed to me by a guy who is not popular and I'm now going to have to own that guy and his record for the entire campaign."

So, all of those things plus the fact that again, an intangible, but it's really hard to set up a presidential campaign on July 21, July 22, whenever Kamala Harris started and try to win an election on November 5, right?  It's just a massive undertaking and to do it that late, you are trying to do everything while sprinting and that's never easy. So to me, it's just Joe Biden in a state of denial.

Yet, in early morning on Tuesday, March 5, 2024, Andrew Feinberg of The Independent appeared to capture the zeitgeist, and did capture the vibe, of the campaign when he wrote

Harris, who just a few weeks ago appeared to have run out of the momentum she’d quickly gathered after President Joe Biden ceded the Democratic ticket to her this past July, is surging thanks to a series of late-game missteps by Trump and his allies. Those missteps include the disastrous decision to include a comedian who called Puerto Rico an “island of floating garbage” in the lineup at Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally late last month.

On Saturday, renowned pollster Ann Selzer released her annual survey of Iowa voters which showed Harris with a three-point lead, 47 per cent to 44 per cent, in the Hawkeye State based on an incredibly strong showing with female voters. Harris, who’d trailed Trump by a four-point margin among Iowans in September, had also inherited a whopping 18-point deficit when she took over the Democratic nomination from Biden.

Another national poll released by NPR and Marist College on Monday showed Harris garnering support from 51 per cent of respondents, compared with Trump’s 47 per cent — a lead greater than the survey’s 3.5-point margin of error. And the final NBC News poll of the election cycle showed Trump hemorrhaging support from Black and Latino voters, while Harris was shown to be garnering support from 87 per cent of Black voters.

The Harris campaign appears to have met the moment and is finishing strongly with what it describes as the largest coordinated get-out-the-vote event in history on Monday.

The campaign is running simultaneous events across all seven battleground states, including rallies featuring Harris and Minnesota governor Tim Walz, plus programming tying the events in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin together as part of a national livestream program.

Harris campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon told reporters on a call on Monday afternoon that the coordinated event is intended to “capture the grassroots enthusiasm that we are seeing everywhere, to focus on mobilizing our voters heading into Election Day tomorrow”.

“Tomorrow, we’ll have elected officials and performers and speakers that really reach such a wide network across all social media platforms, helping to make sure that our message is breaking through in these final hours to voters that maybe are harder to reach or less engaged. These events will serve as a massive mobilization and volunteer engagement opportunity,” she said.

Privately, Democratic sources who spoke to The Independent are projecting confidence, with one swing-state party chair noting what they described as “a serious crossover vote among Republicans” and “explosive” turnout in early voting among key constituencies, including Latinos.

Trump’s response to a Biden gaffe in which the president appeared to call the ex-president’s supporters “garbage” in return seemed to have only prolonged the news cycle stemming from Hinchcliffe’s racist diatribe. His decision to stage a photo op with a garbage truck looks to have failed to shift the focus back to Biden and instead reminded Latino voters of what had touched off the controversy to begin with.

And while the Trump campaign had hoped to make hay out of an Associated Press report revealing that the White House communications team had tried to doctor the official transcript of Biden’s remarks to make it look as if he hadn’t said what he’d said, Trump stepped on his own campaign’s messaging over the weekend with a series of bizarre and unhinged appearances. At one rally, he even appeared to fellate a malfunctioning microphone.

One Democratic operative suggested that the stars had aligned to bring about the ex-president’s collapse at the exact time Harris has been surging.

“Aaron Sorkin couldn’t have written it better,” they said.

Meanwhile, Trump and running mate JD Vance closed out their electioneering with a rally in Grand Rapids, Michigan. It’s the same place where Trump closed out his victorious 2016 run against Hillary Clinton, and it’s where Trump ended his re-election race against Biden four years later.

Not only is Michigan a key swing state — and Grand Rapids a historically strong Republican area — but Trump is notoriously superstitious and has insisted on closing out both of his post-2016 campaigns there for no reason but vibes, even as he was forced to open his day in North Carolina, a reliable GOP stronghold that he might well lose to Harris.

At Trump’s appearances this past weekend, the arenas he visited looked noticeably emptier and the candidate himself looked lost at times, vacillating between bewilderment and menace. He suggested that an assassination attempt against him would need to shoot through a packed media contingent to have a chance at hitting him, in one particularly concerning moment.

Harris "quickly gathered" momentum "after Joe Biden ceded the Democratic ticket to her this past July. While Democrats were "projecting confidence," Trump "stepped on his own campaign's messaging.... with a series of bizarre and unhinged appearances." Harris was "surging" and combined with "the largest coordinated get-out-the-vote event in history," one Democratic operative boasted "Aaron Sorkin couldn't have written it better."

Democrats were well-funded, organized, disciplined, and confident while the Trump campaign was well-funded and not much else. Nonetheless, Cillizza would maintain

So, all of those things plus the fact that again, an intangible, but it's really hard to set up a presidential campaign on July 21, July 22, whenever Kamala Harris started and try to win an election on November 5.  Right?  It's just a massive undertaking and to do it that late, you are trying to do everything while sprinting and that's never easy. 

It may have been hard but it was done, and impressively, as everyone recognized at the time.. Perhaps the Democratic Party may have won the presidential election if Joe Biden had dropped out a year earlier. However, that would have given the GOP time than it eventually had to batter whomever the presumptive Democratic nominee would have been. 

It would have been a better situation for the party's nominee only if the process had yielded someone other than Kamala Harris. That is far from certain, though, and for reason(s) unrelated to the quality of the candidate. In September of 2023- over a year before the November, 2024 election- three NBC reporters noted

A quirk of the 2024 presidential cycle is the chasm that’s emerged between the party establishment and rank-and-file voters. For Democrats, more than half don't want to see Biden run again, an April NBC News poll found.

But those rank-and-file voters counted for little compared to party insiders who were intimidated. The reporters added

Biden allies have not been shy about getting the word out that it would be self-defeating for ambitious white male candidates like Newsom to try to snatch the nomination away from Biden and Kamala Harris, who made history as the first woman and person of color to become vice president….

“When you had people who were trying to test the waters” for a presidential bid, “the party rose up and made it clear to those individuals — who were mostly white men — that to disrespect the vice president would not be well received by women and people of color within the party,” said Karen Finney, a longtime Democratic strategist. “They got a little bit of a smack in the face.”

So let's be clear in the manner which can be understood by Cillizza and the other pundits chiming in on the failure to capitalize on the unpopularity of Donald Trump. The Democrats did not lose the White House because Kamala Harris did not have enough time. She came out surging and ran an effective campaign until individuals realized they were being asked to vote for, well, Kamala Harris, an extremely qualified, unlikable person.

The party establishment wanted to anoint her in part in part because she was the sitting vice-president, hence the closest thing to a default candidate. However, the times did not call for nominating someone because it would be easy but for the individual most likely to win. Harris had flamed out in her initial run for the presidency, as a candidate for the nomination in the 2020 cycle, and there was great suspicion that she would not turn out to be a strong candidate.

That turned out to be the case but not for the reason Cillizza claims. Assuming Feinberg of The Independent was  not making things up, Harris ran a nearly flawless campaign, one which most people admired at the time, and which was better than could have been expected.

Nonetheless, she lost the general election and the words of Karen Finney, an admirer of Harris, gives more than  a clue of why. A challenge to the vice-president, were it to have come from a white male (from any white, more likely) would not have been "well received by women and people of color within the party."  Finney wouldn't acknowledge it, but a challenge even from a white female would have been problematic. 

This severely narrowed the range of possible alternatives to Biden, which would make Vice-President Kamala Harris the odds-on favorite were the President not to seek a second term. Top Democrats got their preferred candidate, even though nearly everyone suspected she was nowhere near the individual most likely to defeat Trump.

If it makes Cillizza and others feel better, they can continue to blame the November, 2024 loss on Joe Biden. If it impels them not to challenge the prevailing wisdom of the Democratic Party that an individual's value is to be determined in part by the inherited characteristics of race and gender, even better. Ignoring reality can be satisfying to oneself, though destructive to a political party.

 

Share |