THURSDAY, AUGUST 3, 2023
Steve Benen gets it right: Life in this age of Trump has been an anthropology lesson—a lesson in human nature.
On the one hand, it's been a lesson in the ability of tens of millions of people to place their fervent belief in wholly unfounded claims.
(It started with Obama was born outside the U.S., then went downhill from there.)
Also, it's been a lesson in the apparent ability of millions of people to believe claims which basically seem insane:
Americans who say they agree with this statement: "A secret group of Satan-worshiping pedophiles is ruling the US government."
Republicans: 16.5%
Democrats: 8.0%
Independents: 16.0%
Seriously, though. Go figure!
Beyond that, it's been a lesson in how far many people will go as they struggle to retain influence, position and power. That brings us to Steve Benen's instructive post over at MaddowBlog.
At issue is a pitiful statement by Senator Marco Rubio. When Donald J. Trump got indicted again, Rubio posted this pathetic assessment:
“Apparently it is now a crime to make statements challenging election results if a prosecutor decides those statements aren’t true. So when should we expect indictments of the democrat politicians who falsely claimed Russia hacked the 2016 election?”
In his subsequent post, Benen ticked off some of Rubio's more childish artefacts—his insistence on "Democrat" in lieu of "Democratic," followed by his refusal to capitalize the word.
But then, Benen noted the uniquely pathetic aspect involved in Rubio's denial concerning Russia and 2016. At issue is a lengthy report about Russia's behavior in 2016, a report issued by the Senate Intelligence Committee:
BENEN (8/2/23): After Russia launched an expansive and expensive covert military intelligence operation that targeted the U.S. political system in 2016, the Senate Intelligence Committee launched a lengthy and thorough investigation. That committee was chaired at the time by a gentleman by the name of Marco Rubio.
In his insightful post, Benen reminds us of what that Senate committee said about Russia in 2016. And yes:
"That committee was chaired at the time by a gentleman by the name of Marco Rubio!"
In the parlance of the age, Rubio "is [apparently] willing to do and say anything." That seems to be true of many in powerful positions during this instructive age.
Go ahead and read Benen's post. An anthropology lesson—a lesson concerning human behavior—is involved in Rubio's silly, pathetic new post.
No one has a beef with Steve Benen and no one is surprised that Marco Rubio is one of the people defending Trump.
ReplyDeleteThis is appalling, but few people would consider this behavior that typifies humanity either. Rubio is engaged in partisan politics (as Benen pointed out) and he is not insane but rather a suck-up to Trump because he thinks it is a way to stay powerful and maintain his own base among Trump loving Republican voters. That has nothing at all to do with anthropology and it is not part of normal human behavior -- Rubio's actions are warped by the political context he finds himself in, but that doesn't typify or characterize humanity in general. So there is no lesson cocerning human behavior in Rubio's actions.
Interestingly, Somerby was inclined to blame Hillary, not Russian interference, for her loss. He said she was a spectacularly bad candidate. And yet she only lost in the electoral college by small margins accountable by the things Russian did to meddling in the 2016 Presidential Election, including funding Jill Stein, whose votes alone could have swung three states back to Clinton (WI, MI, PA). Somerby said nothing about that meddling at the time, but he feels fine picking on Rubio for his own short memory about Russian support for Trump. Is that instructive about human behavior too?
Somerby says: "When Donald J. Trump got indicted again, Rubio posted this pathetic assessment:
ReplyDelete“Apparently it is now a crime to make statements challenging election results if a prosecutor decides those statements aren’t true. So when should we expect indictments of the democrat politicians who falsely claimed Russia hacked the 2016 election?”
----------------------
The indictment says, explicitly:
"3 . The Defendant had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely,that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election andthat he had won . He was also entitled to formally challenge the results ofthe election
through lawful and appropriate means, such as by seeking recounts or audits of the popular vote in states or filing lawsuits challenging ballots and procedures. Indeed, in many cases, the Defendant did pursue these methods of contesting the election results. His efforts to change the
outcome in any state through recounts , audits,or legal challenges were uniformly unsuccessful.
4. Shortly after election day, the Defendant also pursued unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results ."
The elements of Trump's criminal conspiracy were then enumerated. Rubio says that Trump is being tried for his speech. The indictment clearly states that Trump is being prosecuted for his conspiracy and behavior, as enumerated, which is not speech but actions that were intended to maintain power and harm democratic processes.
A child could appreciate the difference, but Rubio and other Republicans are not motivated to understand that speech becomes unprotected by the 1st Amendment, when it is used in service of criminal motives and actions, as occurred with Trump when he engaged in the conspiracy described in the indictment.
For example, the 1st Amendment would not protect the speech of someone who knowingly lied by telling elderly people that they have a big check waiting for them if they only advance a Nigerian Prince a chunk of their savings to help him send them their money. That person would be engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud gullible old folks. The criminal cannot argue that he has the right to tell old folks whatever he wants, because the 1st Amendment guarrantees free speech.
Rubio knows this, and so do other Republicans. Ask yourself why these Republicans are pretending that this is a free speech matter when Trump solicits money and encourages both lawbreaking and violence in order to stay in office after losing an election. Hint: the answer has nothing to do with anthropology and no, both sides don't behave like this because of a shared human nature.
Benen has his thumbs on the scale here:
ReplyDelete"This, of course, was the same Senate panel that literally described a “direct tie between senior Trump Campaign officials and the Russian intelligence services" as part of its official findings."
This is the actual quote from the report which was is not describing a “direct tie between senior Trump Campaign officials and the Russian intelligence services" why the only direct tie they had was inconclusive.
"Manafort's obfuscation of the truth surrounding Kilimnik was particularly damaging to the Committee's investigation because it effectively foreclosed direct insight into a series of interactions and communications which represent the single most direct tie
between senior Trump Campaign officials and the Russian intelligence services."
So Benen is either misinformed or lying.
DeleteBenen used the quote fairly.
DeleteThe Committee says it’s aware of communications and interactions between Trump officials and Russian intelligence officials, but because Manafort lied so much, they could not have direct insight into why Manafort did these actions.
That still leaves the Committee describing a “direct tie between senior Trump Campaign officials and the Russian intelligence services”, thus Benen’s quote was appropriate.
No, they are not describing a lack of direct insight as to why it was done. They are describing a lack of insight about the entire matter. Once again, you've misread it and or are intentionally misinterpreting it.
Delete