TUESDAY, JUNE 25, 2024
We can't say his statement is wrong: Last Friday evening, former governor Andrew Cuomo guested with Bill Maher. on Bill's HBO show, Real Time.
During the program's Overtime segment, they discussed the recent New York City criminal trial of former president Donald J. Trump.
Oof. Midway through their exchange, Maher described a major downside to the recent trial:
MAHER (6/21/24): The trial in New York, the one he got convicted for, was the greatest fundraising bonanza ever. He is now—he was lagging behind Biden, and now he’s pulled quite a bit ahead. That trial was the greatest reason people had to send their checks for five, ten, 25, whatever dollars to Donald Trump.
So I mean, look, it’s a—it’s a Hobson’s choice always with him, because he’s always guilty. Yeah. It’s not like he’s not guilty of any of these crimes, but the repercussions might be worse.
For ourselves, we wouldn't necessarily agree with the claim that Trump was guilty of some sort of crime in that matter. That said, the fund-raising repercussion pretty much speaks for itself.
Bill noted an unfortunate downside to the Gotham "hush money" trial. What Cuomo said in their exchange was much more fundamental.
Before, then after, Bill's observation, the former governor said this:
CUOMO: The two trials in New York—New Yorkers said, 66 percent said the justice system is politicized. And there's nobody in New York who likes Trump. And still, 66 percent said the justice system is politicized.
That's why I think he's not paying the same price for these verdicts, because they believe it is political. And you want to talk about a threat to democracy—when you have this country believing you're playing politics with the justice system, and you're trying to put people in jail or convict them for political reasons, then we have a real problem.
MAHER: [Remarks on fund-raising bonanza, then this:]
...I was always with you on the one in New York, the hush money trial. I don’t think they should have brought that one. It was just always going to look like a sex case, and people were always just going to look at it that way.
CUOMO: That case, the attorney general’s case in New York, frankly, should have never been brought. And if his name was not Donald Trump, and he—if he wasn’t running for president, I’m the former AG in New York, I’m telling you, that case would have never been brought.
And that’s what is offensive to people. And it should be, because if there’s anything left, it’s belief in the justice system.
To watch the full exchange, in order, you can just click here. (Move ahead to minute 6.)
For the record, it isn't clear which case Cuomo was talking about. Was he talking about the "hush money" case—the criminal case brought by D.A. Alvin Bragg? Was he talking about the civil fraud case brought by Attorney General Letitia James?
Given the context created by Maher's remarks, it isn't clear what case Cuomo was talking about. It is clear that he was saying that at least one of those cases was brought for political reasons.
That isn't true just because he said it. But the fact that he said it is being widely bruited on Fox.
In Blue America, we won't be told that Cuomo offered this assessment. It isn't true just because he said it, but we Blues will be shielded from the task of having to think about what he said.
A certain termagant was pimping this matter on his primetime "cable news" program last night. He was also talking about Nancy Pelosi's alleged misuse of Botox—he does that pretty much every night—and he was talking about President Biden "sh*tting his pants," another favorite fantasy topic.
On balance, the termagant strikes us as sadly (and weirdly) disordered. So is a great deal of what we get told, and shielded from hearing, over here in Blue America, over here within our own aggressively segregated land.
MAHER: "That trial was the greatest reason people had to send their checks for five, ten, 25, whatever dollars to Donald Trump."
ReplyDeleteNot to mention that a reclusive Republican billionaire gave Trump $50 million (the largest campaign contribution ever).
Trump grifts off of every thing and manufactures reasons for people to send him money -- and they do. It is what he does. People are sending Trump money to buy coffee cups showing his mug shot and tiny pieces of the suit he wore to be arraigned, so it isn't as if the trial verdict itself were a special reason for them to donate.
Anything Trump seems to have value for his supporters, regardless of what it is.
Cult.
DeleteBiden is getting vastly more individual contributions, on the order of 70 to 1.
DeleteThis is a strong indication that Biden's support is much broader than Trump's.
I earned $5000 ultimate month by using operating online only for 5 to 8 hours on my computer and this was so smooth that I personally couldn't accept as true with before working on this website. If you too need to earn this sort of huge cash then come and be part of us. Do this internet-website online ...........
DeleteHERE >>>> Online work
"For ourselves, we wouldn't necessarily agree with the claim that Trump was guilty of some sort of crime in that matter." Somerby says.
ReplyDeleteThis statement is yet more evidence that Somerby is not any kind of liberal, despite his pretense. Somerby is either senile or bent if he has reached the point where Trump's manifest criminality is not obvious. Trump is going to be convicted of the other crimes he has been charged with and I do not look forward to hearing Somerby's rationalizations and outright refusal to believe Trump has done criminal deeds. In that, he is behaving like the staunchest MAGA, and that is not a good thing to be.
Trump is guilty in general.
DeleteBob’s writing indicates, strongly, that Trump is also innocent of all the other cases brought against him. He’s had zero to say about how the judges Trump appointed have put up roadblocks in his defense to make sure he is not tried, at least before the election. This includes the documents case in Florida where Trump should quite clearly go to jail. Cuomo is (perhaps rightly) bitter about the way he was manhandled by the system, but many PEOPLE are quite happy Trump was finally convicted on some of the lawless behavior he has engaged in all his life.,
DeleteShorter Somerby: Two assholes seen on TV have thoughts about a convicted felon.
ReplyDelete"And there's nobody in New York who likes Trump. And still, 66 percent said the justice system is politicized."
ReplyDeleteCuomo doesn't cite any poll, but if people did actually say that, it may be because they are confusing their own animosity toward Trump with the dispassionate functioning of the legal system. People CAN all hate Trump and still the justice system can be objective and give him a fair trial. That is what happens with serial killers of people like Charles Manson. Perhaps 99% hate those guys and yet they get a fair trial because the procedures used to try and convict have precautions against biased deliberation built into how trials work.
There is no question that a lot of people in New York dislike Trump, but that is not the same question as whether the justice system can be fair. Our system of adjudicating the guilt of accused people is as fair as human effort can make it. Judges and juries lean over backwards to set aside their prior beliefs and animosity in order to consider ONLY the evidence presented, with procedures to keep bias out of the proceedings. Either you believe that is possible and support our legal system, or you do not, and it appears that some do not.
When we talk about attacks on our institutions, this is one of them -- the idea that people cannot be fair, even (and especially) to someone they dislike and consider likely to be guilty. Those who hold such biases may not be able to imagine that others are better able to give objective consideration to arguments and evidence, setting aside their own beliefs and feelings. I know there are such people because I realize that I myself would be a poor addition to a jury, but I have friends who would be. Somerby is not such a person because his knee-jerk rejection of Trump's guilt in the face of evidence makes him biased in a different way than I would be. People like Somerby were excluded from Trump's jury but so were people like me. But I have faith in our justice system (imperfect though it may be) and consider it the best way to deal with criminals. Somerby disagrees but doesn't say what should be done with those who ARE guilty of crimes.
At this point, Somerby appears perfectly willing to let Trump go on criming. He isn't concerned with the rubes who send Trump money he doesn't need. He isn't concerned with the harm Trump has done to the American people, to those who died because of his incompetence, to anyone who is a victim of Trump's wrongdoing. And that leaves me with no respect for Somerby as a human being. But I would recuse myself from any trial of Somerby, just as the large majority of people considered for Trump's jury were rejected and only those capable of being fair were retained. And they unanimously considered Trump guilty. That means something.
Cuomo cited a statistic about public confidence.
DeleteYou cited your faith in the dogma that power responds maturely to each situation.
Which is more prejudicial?
It is a system put in place with procedures to avoid bias. Power resides in the court. We have no choice about whether to trust it when accused. It is how our society works. I think it is better than other approaches with fewer controls on authority. No one says it is perfect.
DeleteFacts matter until they don't align with how you think society works
Delete"You have no choice but to support us, but that's a good thing because we are the good guys" is a really solid argument. I'm sure it won't come back and bite you in the ass later on.
DeleteThomas Sowell is alive, and he says Trump is unfit to be president.
ReplyDeleteThat can't be true. Sowell is one of the two acceptable black men for David in Cal.
DeleteJoe has died.
ReplyDeleteAfter Charles Manson was convicted and sent to jail, he received numerous proposals of marriage from women who had never met him. Should he not have been convicted because he benefitted romantically from his incarceration? Does receiving such proposals mean that he was possibly not guilty? Does the number of proposals make any difference?
ReplyDeleteCity Bike Karen is factually guilty of attempting to bully a Black kid off a bicycle, and then weaponizing her failure to do so in order to monetize hers and others' racism.
ReplyDeleteMore topical trolling please.
DeleteTopical definition: "(of a subject) of immediate relevance, interest, or importance owing to its relation to current events"
It is relevant to present an example of someone committing a crime and then using it to make money, even if the example is not recent.
DeleteShe didn't monetize the incident. She started her go-fund-me because she was in danger of losing her job. The young man, who didn't lose anything and wasn't in danger of losing anything, also started a go-fund-me, for no other purpose than to monetize the incident.
DeleteHe started a go-fund-me to hire a lawyer.
DeleteHe didn’t need a lawyer, because he hadn’t lost anything.
DeleteKaren hired a lawyer and threatened to sue him.
DeleteKaren did not threaten to sue him. She hired a lawyer because her job was at risk. That lawyer publicly said that she was not going to sue the young man.
DeleteBoth parties raised about $100,000. She threatened to sue everyone. The media was uninterested in thee kis’s side, so of course his family was frightened. The family didn’t set up the go-fund-me. Others did on their behalf, to maintain their anonymity in the face of pro-Karen wackos making violent threats.
DeleteKaren did not threaten anyone. Her lawyer specifically and publicly said that she wasn’t going to sue anyone. She feared for her job and had good reason to fear for her life.
Delete"and had good reason to fear for her life."
DeleteI"ll allow it.
I've seen her act.
Maher said:
ReplyDelete"I was always with you on the one in New York, the hush money trial. I don’t think they should have brought that one. It was just always going to look like a sex case, and people were always just going to look at it that way."
Does this mean that if Trump committed a sex crime, such as his E.Jean Carroll assault, he should not be prosecuted for it because it "was just always going to look like a sex case" and "people were always just going to look at it that way..."? Are sex crimes not crimes in the eyes of the people? Does Maher really think that?
Somerby seems to think that, because he worked very hard to portray this felony business falsification of records as a sex case instead of an election interference case. Somerby has declared #MeToo performative and over, which suggests he thinks our society is no longer concerned about how women are treated (from rape to discrimination). That is another area of overlap between Somerby's attitudes and the right wing, especially the white supremacists, who hold neanderthal beliefs about women (no offense to neanderthals).
More problematic is the idea that if a trial looks like a sex crime or looks political, it shouldn't be prosecuted. That would make prosecution political -- decisions based on public opinion or "looks" or polling. The standard must be the penal code and the evidence in hand, not how the public will react. Otherwise our justice system would be biased in a way that undermines the protection of the public inherent in criminal laws. No one should be above the law, including those who appear to have committed sex crimes or who are widely disliked. Somerby and Maher do not appear to understand how the law works, what it is for, or that women are entitled to as much protection as men when it comes to prosecuting crimes involving sex.
Does this mean that if Trump committed a sex crime, such as his E.Jean Carroll assault, he should not be prosecuted for it...
DeleteHe wasn't prosecuted for his assault.
Somerby and Maher are part of the standup comedy assembly line factory in the United States, especially the kind where everything is turned into a joke, everything is mocked. It breeds a kind of arrogant cynicism, and the comedian doesn’t need to take any actual stances on policy. He leaves that to the politicians and community organizers that he mocks. There’s a place for comedy, but it’s too much of a racket in the US. That has contributed in a big way to this “imitation of life/discourse” that Somerby talks about.
ReplyDeleteIn my view, Maher’s views are about as interesting as a sack of bricks, and you couldn’t pay me to listen to him.
Maher had a business model: PLAY to everyone. Since he’s a pretty lazy pothead too, that means he has to bullshit to make things even out.
Delete"On balance, the termagant strikes us as sadly (and weirdly) disordered."
ReplyDeleteSomerby is back to using the plural "we" instead of owning his own opinions. His inclusive "us" assumes there is someone out here who agrees with him (or that he is speaking for more than himself when he writes his essays). For the record, I am not part of his "us."
Somerby strikes me as sadly and weirdly disordered, although in a different way than Gutfeld. Somerby and Maher have quite a bit of overlap in the weirdness category.
When Gutfeld changes his gender identity, Somerby can call him a termagant and be accurate. If someone were to repeatedly refer to Gutfeld as a pussy, would it be considered clever or would it be tiresome and a bit sexist/homophobic? Why then does he insist on calling Gutfeld termagant, when it is a similar affront to women and gays?
DeleteI get it that Somerby considers breaking social rules to be his own kind of culture war, but why does he think it is OK to offend bystanders when his target is supposedly Gutfeld himself? I suspect that this is Somerby's sly way of thumbing his nose at lefty propriety without it being obvious what he is doing, because most people don't know what the word means and won't recognize the insult. Everyone knows what pussy means, or the other offensive terms men call each other to hint that a man is gay.
Gutfeld isn't Somerby's target. Somerby is trying to advance Gutfeld's visibility and career.
DeleteGutfeld is a male termagant.
DeleteAs I said, if Gutfeld admitted to a female gender identity, there wouldn't be any problem with using that word to describe him.
DeleteRegardless of gender, Gutfeld is a termagant. This is one of the few things Bob gets right.
DeleteWhatever else he may be, Gutfeld is not a shrewish woman thus he is not a termagant. Somerby cannot assign new meanings to words, at will, and expect to communicate.
DeleteIt's not a new meaning, it's an old meaning. And yes, anyone can assign meanings to words. They're not defined by God.
Delete"In all honesty, we can't necessarily say that his assessment is wrong."
ReplyDeleteIf Somerby were being honest, instead of this negative construction, he would say "I think his assessment is right." Note the hedge (weasel) word "necessarily." If you stick that into your sentences then you can never be called wrong because you have made the statement absolute while reserving the chance that anything is possible. That makes the statement impossible to refute or falsify.
This ridiculous refusal to say what he means is why I dislike Somerby so intensely. It is dishonest.
Watched a good bit of the “Better Call Saul” saga for the second time last week. In the final shows Saul, with his back against the wall, demonstrates to the prosecutors how he might sway a jury to let him off easy. They ask him if he really thinks a jury can be swayed by his flights of fancy.
ReplyDelete“I only need one.”
Bob and Trump, who share a basic contempt
for humanity, think alike. Somehow Trump lost round one. Bob will always be a little heartbroken.
Actually, Trump has lost several cases, including both E.Jean Carroll defamation cases, the business fraud case in NYC, and the hush money case. He also lost all but one of his election fraud cases (where Trump sued to overturn election results), cases involving Trump U fraud, and the misuse of his charity foundation funds. He loses a lot cases so this is not round one but the latest of ongoing legal action against him. But you are correct that it won't be the end.
DeletePoint taken, but never by Bob of course.
DeleteSomerby hinted at this Rachel Morin case a few days ago but then never talked about it explicitly. Today, Rawstory is saying that Trump plans to spring these stories (about young women who were killed by immigrants) at the debate and then blame Biden for the murders. Sort of the way MTG tried to ambush Biden with Lakin Riley at the State of the Union Address. Perhaps Somerby planned to discuss it and then got an instruction to back off from his handler, given that it would undercut the surprise and shock if it were all over right wing media BEFORE Trump has a chance to spring it on Biden at the debate.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.rawstory.com/trump-angel-families/
"For ourselves, we wouldn't necessarily agree with the claim that Trump was guilty of some sort of crime in that matter. "
ReplyDeleteThe judge and the jury felt otherwise.
After the attack on contraception, the right's next target will be to eliminate no-fault divorce. Digby explains why:
ReplyDeletehttps://digbysblog.net/2024/06/25/what-comes-after-a-ban-on-contraception/
"Of course they want to make sure that women are held prisoner in abusive marriages. That’s kind of at the heart of patriarchy.
[Quoting The Guardian]:
When they liberalized the divorce laws there were some consequences that these throwbacks just can’t stand:
Between 1976 and 1985, states that passed the laws saw their domestic violence rates against men and women fall by about 30%; the number of women murdered by an intimate partner declined by 10%; and female suicide rates declined by 8 to 16%."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jun/25/republicans-no-fault-divorce
The word "attack" covers a wide variety of meanings. In its mildest definition, "attack" means only "criticize.
DeleteContraception was "attacked" in the sense that some people criticized it. No fault divorce was "attacked" in the same sense. In reality, nobody has been deprived of contraception or of the opportunity for a no fault divorce
Attack in this case means “attempt to eliminate or change, by power of law”.
DeleteAccording to Political Wire: “ Republican lawmakers in Louisiana, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas have discussed eliminating or increasing restrictions on no-fault marriage laws.”
DeleteContraception was "attacked" in the sense that some people criticized it.
DeleteIt was a lot more than that, dickhead.
In the devastating Burwell v. Hobby Lobby ruling, on June 30, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed certain bosses to block their employees’ access to birth control. The decision on this Supreme Court birth control case applied to more than half of all U.S. workers — that’s the tens of millions of workers at companies in which five or fewer people own more than 50%.
Two privately owned companies brought the case: cabinet manufacturer Conestoga Wood Specialties, and the Hobby Lobby national chain of craft stores, which employs 28,000.
nobody has been deprived of contraception
How the fuck would an 80+ year old retired actuary know that, DiC. Have you taken a personal survey of all women in this country?
Uh @5:50 -- that court decision did not allow certain bosses to block their employees’ access to birth control. It allowed certain employers to exclude coverage for certain contraception from certain employer-provided insurance. People remain able to buy any type of birth control. People also remain fully able to buy insurance that covers birth control for themselves. (However, unfortunately, some states prohibit abortions and abortion-inducing drugs.)
Delete@5:50 -- You put that wrongheaded quote in italics. Is it copied from somewhere? If so, can you provide a link? I would like to know who is providing such inaccuracies
Selective exclusion of coverage IS a restriction on access to birth control, especially for lower income people. Similarly, in places where Planned Parenthood is denied funding or excluded from programs, access to birth control, especially among lower income and younger women, will be restricted too. How it is restricted is irrelevant when women are unable to use contraception, including when they cannot afford it (or medical care required to access it). There are a variety of ways opponents of contraception use to prevent women from access to control over the own reproduction and family planning.
DeleteSteve M. at No More Mister Nice Blog says that Trump's people are delegitimizing the debate in the same manner as they have delegitimized his conviction in the hush money case:
ReplyDeletehttps://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2024/06/trump-and-his-allies-are-delegitimizing.html
"Because delegitimizing works. Trump and his allies are doing what they've done to the recent criminal trial in which he was found guilty of 34 felonies. As a recent Monmouth poll makes clear, much of the public agrees with Trump that the prosecution wasn't on the level, even though a majority of poll respondents believe Trump is guilty...
...So even though 56% of respondents think Trump is guilty or lean that way, 57% believe the trial was politically motivated. And that helps explain why the trial had no impact on presidential preference..."
It is interesting that the attacks on Biden before the 2020 debate was the same as the attack now, that Biden has dementia, etc. It didn't work during the general election, so perhaps it won't "work" in this election, despite what people say to pollsters.
What to say when Republicans say that Trump is the Peace President:
ReplyDelete"John Fugelsang helpfully supplies a corrective:
Since the right wing MAGA guys are pulling the “There Were No Wars Under Trump” lie, let’s quickly cover this propaganda you’ll be hearing that Trump was the “Peace President.”
Because the same angry white guys who berated us for opposing the Iraq War, now berate us for not appreciating Donald Trump’s incredible commitment to world peace. And being blindly obedient, true MAGA males view critical thinking skills as “woke.”
1. Once in office, Trump massively increased the U.S. defense budget. He quickly escalated our existing wars in multiple theaters, which led to skyrocketing casualties.
2. Trump sent MORE troops to Afghanistan, ordered missile strikes on Syria in 2017 and 2018 & abandoned our Kurdish allies to slaughter.
3. In Afghanistan, the star of “Celebrity Apprentice” substantially increased the airstrikes, leading to a 330 % increase in civilian deaths. He bragged about dropping of the “Mother of All Bombs” (MOAB), the largest non-nuclear bomb in the US arsenal, on Afghanistan in 2017.
4. Trump also tore up a peace deal with Iran, which our own generals uniformly maintained Iran was honoring (I know, Real Christians love tearing up peace deals when it’s w/countries they’re allowed to hate).
5. Trump pardoned convicted war criminals, assassinated Iran’s top general, and was the 1st POTUS to order an attack on the Syrian govt.
6. Trump sent troops to take Syria’s oil — openly admitting he wanted to give the reserves to ExxonMobil. “We’re keeping the oil. I’ve always said that. We want to keep the oil. Forty-five million dollars a month? Keep the oil.” Oh, FOX didn’t tell you any of this? Did wee Ben Shapiro’s serious journalists at Daily Wire somehow forget to convey this info? Breitbart failed to bring this information to you as well? I’m shocked. Well, Hunter Biden affects your life more.
7. In Iraq and Syria alone, Trump’s drone strikes killed an estimated 13,400 civilians.
8. Trump carried out more airstrikes against Somalia than Obama did; Trump sold unguided “dumb” bombs to the Saudis to use against Yemen.
9. Trump negotiated to give Afghanistan to the Taliban, & freed 5,000 Taliban terrorists, which turned out great!
10. He even established “Space Force” so we can have war in brand-new places.
11. Donald Trump is so anti-war he put on a cheerleader skirt & pom poms for Putin’s murderous imperialist invasion of Ukraine, which Trump called “genius” & “savvy” you amoral knob. Trump called the invading army, killing children & raping women, “peacemakers.”
12. Trump wanting to remove our troops from Germany & S. Korea wasn’t “anti-war” – it was Donny’s most passionate hobby, “doing what Putin wants”
13. He withdrew from the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) agreement & the Open Skies Treaty.
14. Oh and he’s already asked advisers for “battle plans” to invade Mexico so US troops can fight cartels. Having surrendered their critical thinking to a reality TV landlord with an addiction to too-much makeup, MAGA dudes know none of this. Donald Trump stole from US vets with a fraud online University. Stealing from vets – along with sexual assault – was not a dealbreaker for these good Christian folk.
The notion that Trump is a peacenik is a one of the most preposterous ideas they ever came up with."
https://digbysblog.net/2024/06/25/the-peace-president/
I love the folks like DIC who say there was no war in Ukraine when convicted felon, fraudster, and sexual assualter Trump was president. Like who can remember the impeachment of CFTrump for withholding military aide to support their fight against Russian aggression?
DeleteWell, there WAS no war in Ukraine while Trump was President. And, Russia DID annex portions of Ukraine while Obama and Biden were President? No matter how miserable a human being Trump is, those are facts @4:38.
DeleteCalling Trump a peacenik based only on what he did while president, does not tell us much about what he will do if reelected. For example, his current support for Russia over Ukraine does not sound much like a peacemaker to me:
Delete"11. Donald Trump is so anti-war he put on a cheerleader skirt & pom poms for Putin’s murderous imperialist invasion of Ukraine, which Trump called “genius” & “savvy” you amoral knob. Trump called the invading army, killing children & raping women, “peacemakers.”
My recollection is that Trump allowed Putin to keep the Crimea, which Putin had previously taken by force.
7:44, correct, not only did he allow Putin to keep Crimea, he lobbied hard for Russia to be re-admitted to the G7. Russia had been thrown out of the G8 precisely for the Russia's invasion and annexation of Crimea.
Delete@7:44 and @ 7:49 your words make Crimea sound like Trump’s fault. It was Obama who allowed Russia to TAKE Crimea. If you want to blame Trump for letting Russia keep Crimea, then you also should blame Biden for allowing Russia to keep Crimea.
DeleteBut you’re not really serious. You would not have wanted Trump to start a war aimed at retaking Crimea.
If you’re president, the buck stops with you. You own it, just like Biden dealt with covid even though it started with Trump.
Delete"... Well there WAS no war in Ukraine while Trump was President..." I would say that you can do better than this, DIC, but that is doubtful. Just one more piece of evidence that you cannot process information that is counter to your preconceptions, or that you get your information from some right wing garbage heap.
Delete@11:20 - In what ways do you believe Biden dealt with covid? There were more covid deaths when Biden was President than when Trump was President.
Deletehttps://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-have-more-americans-died-covid-under-joe-biden-donald-trump-1661528
DIC, thank you once again for linking to a site that discredits your statement. There is a level of consistency to your habit of doing this that is at this point comical. If you were to read the articles you link to, it is possible that you would avert this. The death count cited before and after Jan 20, 2021 is clearly stated in the article. In themselves the numbers refute you, but it should also be recognized that there is a lag period to be expected between the inauguration date, implementation of policy and the effects of such. Taking that into account, the numbers would favor Biden even more. The problem with Covid, that started at the top, was that counties voting republican were more prone to higher mortality after the implementation of vaccines. The number of unnecessary deaths due to misinformation about appropriate Covid treatment can be squarely laid at the feet of your orange idol, and anti-science luddites
Deletelike DeSantis. Covid had become so politicized by the time Biden took office, by outlets like Fox and other right wing conduits, that there was no helping those who refused to get vaccinated and believed in ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine as therapies.
From Lancet:
Deletehttps://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/02/lancet-study-40-percent-u-s-covid-19-coronavirus-deaths-avoidable-unnecessary.html
Your choice for president is responsible for much of this.
9:54, Russia was kicked out of the G8 in response to their invasion and annexation of Crimea. Trumped lobbied hard with G7 to bring Russia back in for no apparent reason. Why don't you respond to that instead of what you imagine I said.
DeleteAccording to Decoding Fox news (decodingfoxnews@substack.com), Fox spent 30% of its screen time last week bashing Biden. It was the #1 topic on its various shows. Does bashing a political opponent of Trump count as news reporting? It seems more like a propaganda outlet than a news outlet.
ReplyDeleteI pretty much agree with you @4:45. I do not watch FoxNews.
DeleteBut, I will quibble. Most of Fox is opinion, not news reporting. I suspect that if one analyzed only the news shows, then the percent of time devotee to bashing Biden would be lower.
7:04,
DeleteGood for you. No one should watch Fox News.
Do you watch Fox Opinion?
"According to Cuomo, at least one of those trials was an inappropriate political hit."
ReplyDeleteAnd it will be quickly overturned based on Supreme Court's decision in Erlinger vs United States that just ruled 6-3 that juries must be unanimous on each criminal count. This was clearly not met in Trump’s New York case, where the corrupt judge allowed the jury to return a 4-4-4 verdict on the underlying crime.
Quickly overturned unless the New York appeal court is corrupt as the trial judge that is.
That 4-4-4 ruling was appealed before the trial, when jury instructions were created. The appeal was denied then.
DeletePlease David in Cal stop the blatant lying. One of my Ukrainian co-workers asked if he could skip work in an area of Ukraine (Donbas) that was under heavy shelling in 2014. In 2015 another Ukrainian coworker was drafted by the Ukranian army. And fucking Trump not only illegally withheld an arms shipment while President, just this past year the fucker had arms funding delayed for over six months by lickspittles in Congress - killing Ukraians. With the MAGA crowd and right wing news saying why give more money, Putin (their hero) will win.
ReplyDeleteObama was President in 2014 and 2015. Trump became President in January, 2017
DeleteWell done, DiC, and as you have pointed out, the war in Ukraine began during the Obama administration, stopped when Trump was elected, and resumed when he lost to Biden. These facts cannot be contested.
DeleteSo Trump was Putin’s man in the White House.
DeleteThe Republican platform in 2016 was modified under the direction of Trump in order to soften support for Ukraine. There can be no question that the wording change made it clear to Putin that Trump and the Republican party were less supportive of Ukraine than the prior platform had outlined. Back in the day, Republicans supported our military and our allies. This all changed with Trump.
DeleteI earned $5000 ultimate month by using operating online only for 5 to 8 hours on my computer and this was so smooth that I personally couldn't accept as true with before working on this website. If you too need to earn this sort of huge cash then come and be part of us. Do this internet-website online ...........
ReplyDeleteHERE >>>> Online work
Some DIC saying no war in Ukraine with CFTrump:
ReplyDelete"David in CalJune 25, 2024 at 7:01 PM
Well, there WAS no war in Ukraine while Trump was President."
Some DIC saying the war is Obama's fault:
"David in CalJune 25, 2024 at 11:17 PM
Obama was President in 2014 and 2015. Trump became President in January, 2017"