How does a married woman hear this echoed in her husband's demeanor, and not immediately call a lawyer?
Oy
Showing posts with label wingnuts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wingnuts. Show all posts
Oct 22, 2024
Oct 18, 2024
Sep 17, 2024
Sep 4, 2024
Jul 25, 2024
Today's Wingnuts
They're not fuckin' around. These assholes are very influential, and they're talking openly about ruling - crushing their enemies - rewarding their friends.
The only difference between these jagoffs and the Taliban is the brand name.
Democrats know they're called to serve.
Republicans think they're entitled to rule.
Mar 14, 2024
Joe's Alright
I've never been a Joe Biden fan. He's fucked up a fair number of times on some issues that his human instincts gave way to his political calculations. That said, I think he's a good and decent man, and he's been a really good POTUS so far.
And that said - Robert Hur is a complete dick, and a waste of otherwise perfectly good cytoplasm.
The special counsel was unfair to Biden and his transcript proves it
Special counsel Robert K. Hur was even more unfair to President Biden than we originally knew.
When Hur released his report on Biden’s mishandling of classified documents last month, his extensive characterization of the president as “a well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” came in for sharp criticism as gratuitous and beyond the bounds of proper prosecutorial commentary.
We now have the transcript of the president’s interview with Hur, and, to my astonishment, it’s worse than that. It turns out that the special counsel mischaracterized and overstated Biden’s alleged memory lapses. He consistently adopted an interpretation that is as uncharitable and damaging to Biden as possible.
Gratuitous is bad enough. This was gratuitous and misleading.
This isn’t to say that Biden’s performance was perfect, or anywhere close. He’s always had a penchant for mangling facts, and I don’t doubt that has worsened with age. After the Hur report was released, Biden blasted the special counsel for having brought up the painful topic of his son Beau’s death. “How in the hell dare he raise that?” the president asked. “Frankly, when I was asked the question, I thought to myself, it wasn’t any of their damn business.”
In fact, the transcript shows, Biden was the one who first mentioned the timing of Beau’s death.
“So what was happening, though — what month did Beau die? Oh, God, May 30?”
Two aides chime in with the year, 2015.
Then, according to the transcript:
President Biden: Was it 2015 he had died?
Unidentified male speaker: It was May of 2015.
Contrast this with the damning account in Hur’s report: “He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died.”
During his testimony on Tuesday before the House Judiciary Committee, Hur defended his conduct. “My assessment in the report about the relevance of the president’s memory was necessary and accurate and fair,” he said. “I did not sanitize my explanation, nor did I disparage the president unfairly.”
Well, that “even within several years” characterization seems unfair to me.
And it’s not the only example. Hur’s report also notes that Biden’s “memory appeared hazy when describing the Afghanistan debate that was once so important to him. Among other things, he mistakenly said he ‘had a real difference’ of opinion with General Karl Eikenberry, when, in fact, Eikenberry was an ally whom Mr. Biden cited approvingly in his Thanksgiving memo to President Biden.”
But the totality of Biden’s references to Eikenberry, who was U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan in 2009, when then-Vice President Biden was lobbying President Barack Obama not to send more troops to the country, presents a less definitive — and less damning — picture of Biden’s memory.
The first time Eikenberry comes up is during a discussion of the troop surge. Obama “knew I had a real difference with the key foreign policy types, particularly — whether it was Eikenberry or whether it was — anyway,” Biden said. Did Biden merely say Eikenberry when he was thinking of someone else — or was he misremembering the position of a key player in the Afghanistan debate?
Of relevance in determining that, Biden returned to the topic of Eikenberry’s position later in the deposition — and then he stated it correctly. He described telling the president, “You know, ‘I had a long conversation with Eikenberry, yes, I urge you to call him before you make a decision. Karl can speak for himself and he has eloquently in some of his cables, let me relay just a few things. Adding troops will not speed up the ability to train Afghans because …’ etc. So these are criticisms of the proposal that was being made to the president by, by others in the administration wanting him to double down.”
Somehow, this later, more flattering recollection, didn’t make it into Hur’s report.
It’s always hard to judge a witness from the words of a cold transcript. Hur was in the room, and he left with a clear impression of what he considered Biden’s “diminished faculties in advancing age.”
I read the transcript from the perspective of someone who’s watched Biden — and watched him stumble over his words — for decades now, and I came away with a different impression. Yes, there are numerous instances in which the president appears unnervingly clueless. “If it was 2013 — when did I stop being vice president?” he asked at one point. At another, “In 2009, am I still vice president?” To me, this is, at least in part, Biden being Biden — working through out loud what the rest of us do silently.
Hur is entitled to his own interpretation, and it’s relevant, as he explained on Tuesday, to his assessment of how a jury would assess Biden’s conduct. Hur said he needed to “show his work” in explaining his decision not to pursue charges.
But the special counsel well understood that his report to Attorney General Merrick Garland would be made public — and he understood, or should have, the political fallout that would result from his scorching assessment of Biden.
So, he had a dual responsibility here, and he failed twice. First, he went beyond, far beyond, what was necessary to outline his concerns about Biden’s memory, and how that would impact any case against him. Second, as we just learned, his recitation of the facts was one-sided.
“Necessary and accurate and fair,” Hur said. I’d say he was zero for three.
Special counsel Robert K. Hur was even more unfair to President Biden than we originally knew.
When Hur released his report on Biden’s mishandling of classified documents last month, his extensive characterization of the president as “a well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” came in for sharp criticism as gratuitous and beyond the bounds of proper prosecutorial commentary.
We now have the transcript of the president’s interview with Hur, and, to my astonishment, it’s worse than that. It turns out that the special counsel mischaracterized and overstated Biden’s alleged memory lapses. He consistently adopted an interpretation that is as uncharitable and damaging to Biden as possible.
Gratuitous is bad enough. This was gratuitous and misleading.
This isn’t to say that Biden’s performance was perfect, or anywhere close. He’s always had a penchant for mangling facts, and I don’t doubt that has worsened with age. After the Hur report was released, Biden blasted the special counsel for having brought up the painful topic of his son Beau’s death. “How in the hell dare he raise that?” the president asked. “Frankly, when I was asked the question, I thought to myself, it wasn’t any of their damn business.”
In fact, the transcript shows, Biden was the one who first mentioned the timing of Beau’s death.
“So what was happening, though — what month did Beau die? Oh, God, May 30?”
Two aides chime in with the year, 2015.
Then, according to the transcript:
President Biden: Was it 2015 he had died?
Unidentified male speaker: It was May of 2015.
Contrast this with the damning account in Hur’s report: “He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died.”
During his testimony on Tuesday before the House Judiciary Committee, Hur defended his conduct. “My assessment in the report about the relevance of the president’s memory was necessary and accurate and fair,” he said. “I did not sanitize my explanation, nor did I disparage the president unfairly.”
Well, that “even within several years” characterization seems unfair to me.
And it’s not the only example. Hur’s report also notes that Biden’s “memory appeared hazy when describing the Afghanistan debate that was once so important to him. Among other things, he mistakenly said he ‘had a real difference’ of opinion with General Karl Eikenberry, when, in fact, Eikenberry was an ally whom Mr. Biden cited approvingly in his Thanksgiving memo to President Biden.”
But the totality of Biden’s references to Eikenberry, who was U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan in 2009, when then-Vice President Biden was lobbying President Barack Obama not to send more troops to the country, presents a less definitive — and less damning — picture of Biden’s memory.
The first time Eikenberry comes up is during a discussion of the troop surge. Obama “knew I had a real difference with the key foreign policy types, particularly — whether it was Eikenberry or whether it was — anyway,” Biden said. Did Biden merely say Eikenberry when he was thinking of someone else — or was he misremembering the position of a key player in the Afghanistan debate?
Of relevance in determining that, Biden returned to the topic of Eikenberry’s position later in the deposition — and then he stated it correctly. He described telling the president, “You know, ‘I had a long conversation with Eikenberry, yes, I urge you to call him before you make a decision. Karl can speak for himself and he has eloquently in some of his cables, let me relay just a few things. Adding troops will not speed up the ability to train Afghans because …’ etc. So these are criticisms of the proposal that was being made to the president by, by others in the administration wanting him to double down.”
Somehow, this later, more flattering recollection, didn’t make it into Hur’s report.
It’s always hard to judge a witness from the words of a cold transcript. Hur was in the room, and he left with a clear impression of what he considered Biden’s “diminished faculties in advancing age.”
I read the transcript from the perspective of someone who’s watched Biden — and watched him stumble over his words — for decades now, and I came away with a different impression. Yes, there are numerous instances in which the president appears unnervingly clueless. “If it was 2013 — when did I stop being vice president?” he asked at one point. At another, “In 2009, am I still vice president?” To me, this is, at least in part, Biden being Biden — working through out loud what the rest of us do silently.
Hur is entitled to his own interpretation, and it’s relevant, as he explained on Tuesday, to his assessment of how a jury would assess Biden’s conduct. Hur said he needed to “show his work” in explaining his decision not to pursue charges.
But the special counsel well understood that his report to Attorney General Merrick Garland would be made public — and he understood, or should have, the political fallout that would result from his scorching assessment of Biden.
So, he had a dual responsibility here, and he failed twice. First, he went beyond, far beyond, what was necessary to outline his concerns about Biden’s memory, and how that would impact any case against him. Second, as we just learned, his recitation of the facts was one-sided.
“Necessary and accurate and fair,” Hur said. I’d say he was zero for three.
Feb 29, 2024
Today's Wingnut
It always amazes me to hear these boneheads saying their all-powerful god is such a pussy that he can't make his way past a few worthless congress critters, or a couple of office ladies at the local middle school.
Feb 26, 2024
Feb 8, 2024
Today's Wingnut
Love your neighbor, and welcome the stranger - until we find it politically useful to make you feel afraid of them.
There's no hate greater than Christian love.
Feb 4, 2024
Jan 3, 2024
Today's Wingnut
No matter what else, the god-knobbers always bring it down to, "That's what god told me, so that's what all of you have to go along with it."
It doesn't matter that the founders wanted to keep god and religion out of government. It doesn't matter that they wrote it down. The bible-thumpers are going to revise that history, in order to make the claim that this is a Christian nation, and therefor its government must be imbued with Christianity.
Dec 18, 2023
More Than Just A Wingnut
My simple advice to young men:
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) December 18, 2023
Find a woman.
Fall in love.
Get married.
Have more children than you can afford. Have an insane amount of kids.
God loves you and He has a purpose for you.#AMFEST2023 pic.twitter.com/dq9ZuAtcJ7
The German Reich needed a robust and growing population and encouraged couples to have large families. It started such encouragement early. Once members of the distaff wing of the Hitler Youth movement, the League of German Girls, turned 18, they became eligible for a branch called Faith and Beauty, which trained these girls in the art of becoming ideal mothers. One component of that ideal was fecundity. And so each year, in honor of his beloved mother, Klara, and in memory of her birthday, a gold medal was awarded to women with seven children, a silver to women with six, and a bronze to women with five.
Dec 17, 2023
Today's Wingnut
Sen Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)
I can't confirm this one
(I also can't confirm there's a banjo playing in the background)
This one -
with the White Power hand sign -
is official
I imagine Marsha's C Street Family gang is quite proud
The Fellowship (incorporated as Fellowship Foundation and doing business as the International Foundation), also known as The Family, is a U.S.-based nonprofit religious and political organization founded in April 1935 by Abraham Vereide. The stated purpose of The Fellowship is to provide a fellowship forum where decision makers can attend Bible studies, attend prayer meetings, worship God, experience spiritual affirmation and receive support.
The Fellowship has been described as one of the most politically well-connected and one of the most secretly funded ministries in the United States. It shuns publicity and its members share a vow of secrecy. The Fellowship's former leader, the late Douglas Coe, and others have justified the organization's desire for secrecy by citing biblical admonitions against public displays of good works, insisting that they would not be able to tackle diplomatically sensitive missions if they drew public attention.
The Fellowship holds one regular public event each year, the National Prayer Breakfast, which is in Washington, D.C. Every sitting United States president since Dwight D. Eisenhower has participated in at least one National Prayer Breakfast during their term.[citation needed]
The group's known participants include ranking United States government officials, corporate executives, heads of religious and humanitarian aid organizations, and ambassadors and high-ranking politicians from across the world. Many United States senators and congressmen have publicly acknowledged working with the Fellowship or are documented as having worked together to pass or influence legislation.
Doug Burleigh is a key figure in the organization and has taken over organizing the National Prayer Breakfast since the death of his father-in-law, Doug Coe.[citation needed] The current president of the organization (starting in 2017) is Katherine Crane.
In Newsweek, Lisa Miller wrote that rather than calling themselves "Christians", as they describe themselves, they are brought together by common love for the teachings of Jesus and that all approaches to "loving Jesus" are acceptable. In 2022, Netflix released a documentary called The Family which depicts the organization's influence on American politics throughout history.
History
The Fellowship Foundation traces its roots to Abraham Vereide, a Methodist clergyman and social innovator, who organized a month of prayer meetings in 1934 in San Francisco. The Fellowship was founded in 1935 in opposition to President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal. His work spread down the West Coast and eventually to Boston.[9][dead link]
The author Jeff Sharlet described the beginning of the Family as a reaction to union activities of Harry Bridges, "The Family really begins when the founder (Abraham Vereide) has this vision, which he thinks comes from God, that Harry Bridges, this Australian labour organiser who organised really the biggest strike in American history, a very successful strike, is a Satanic and Soviet agent."
- more -
Dec 13, 2023
Today's Wingnut
It doesn't make sense because it's not supposed to make sense. Or rather, it's supposed to not make sense.
If an authoritarian keeps it all straight, he's not an authoritarian. So the point of the exercise is to maintain a consistency of being inconsistent. That way, the devotees must always come back and ask you what they should be thinking at any given moment about any given thing.
THE BASICS:
- The Daddy State lies as a means of demonstrating power.
- The lies have practically nothing to do with the subject of the lies.
- Lying about everything is a way to condition us - to make us accept the premise that they can do anything they want.
The goal is to dictate reality to us.
Nov 28, 2023
The Turning Worms
Steve Deace is a star in the evangelical firmament, as is Bob Vander Plaats.
They're finally decided to admit they've been hornswoggled part of the whole fucking scam all along.
And when Vander Putz carps about how his support isn't for sale? Bullshit. He listed his price:
- Moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem
- Three SCOTUS seats that killed Roe v Wade
Trump did what they paid him to do - what they traded their integrity for - and now suddenly they've discovered what a fuckin' dirt bag the guy is?
Nov 9, 2023
Today's Wingnut
- Democrats want no restrictions on abortion... "up to the moment of birth - and beyond."
- We need to stop being shy about this and paint with bright red colors (WTAF, Bob?)
- Bob Good - even his name is a lie
Nov 6, 2023
Overheard
The wingnuts who exalted 'Purity Balls', where daughters would pledge abstinence - promising their dads to maintain their virginity until their husbands "take it from them" - are now scolding us all about "sexualizing children".
Oct 26, 2023
Today's Wingnut
Our rights don't come from a god, and they don't come from a government.
Saying our rights are god-given (endowed by a creator), or granted under the US Constitution - all of that is euphemism. It's just a convenience of language.
Nobody "gives" us our basic human rights - life, liberty, pursuit of happiness - we're born with them. So what we do is create institutions of law to keep powerful people from denying us those rights.
If we allow Mike Johnson's imaginary friend to inform us about our rights, then we're opening the door for Mr Johnson to tell us he gets to fuck us out of our rights because that same imaginary friend said so.
You believe what you want to believe, and sorry not sorry, but fuck you and the god you rode in on, Skeezix.
Oct 19, 2023
The Great Karen-ing
Don't sleep on this.
Republicans want to strip away as much of our protections as possible - while gaslighting us with their spiel about "defending the real America from government tyranny".
This is not conservative ideology - this is Daddy State fuckery of the highest order.
Oct 10, 2023
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)