SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2025
But also, what Lincoln once said: A treasured word was (almost) completely missing from this morning's Fox & Friends Weekend. That treasured word was this:
Communist Communist Communist Communist Communist Communist Communist!
In recent weeks, it happened again and again. Rachel would call Candidate Mamdani a Communist. Charlie would then go with this:
"A full-blown Communist!"
So it would go on Fox & Friends Weekend as Charlie would make the whole thing even dumber. On various Fox News Channel shows, the personalities would tell Fox viewers how many tens of millions of people had died, during the past century, under worldwide Communist rule.
Today, the friends were pushing a newer line right from the start of the program:
Yesterday's friendly session in the Oval Office was the latest masterpiece by the infallible President Trump.
During the New York City mayoral campaign, President Trump had also routinely denounced Candidate Mamdani as a Communist. But now the transformed prince of peace had showered Mamdani with praise.
(Our own reaction? Good!)
Suddenly, the magic word was missing from Fox & Friends. In this morning's first ninety minutes, it was mentioned only when Griff Jenkins brought on a guest at 6:25 a.m.:
JENKINS (11/22/25): New York Post columnist Karol Marcowicz, who fled Soviet Communism as a child, joining us now to react.
Eventually, the chyron said this as Marcowicz stated her views:
KAROL MARCOWICZ / FLED SOVIET COMMUNISM AS A CHILD
"We didn't come here to have Communism follow us," she eventually said, apparently referring to Mamdani's proposal to have free buses.
We're glad that Marcowicz and her family were able to leave the Soviet Union—and she's of course entitled to state her views. That said, we were surprised to see the "Communist" taunt disappear as three friends discussed yesterday's meeting during several chunks of the program's first ninety minutes.
Campos-Duffy seemed to have dropped her favorite word, but she continued to spill with praise for the masterful President Trump. As for Mayor-elect Mamdani, possibly not so much:
"We still don't know if he can run a lemonade stand," she said of him at one point.
That claim struck us as technically accurate. Also, if less colorfully, we ourselves don't know how the mayor-elect will end up performing in office.
Soon, though, the friends were advancing the standard bogus statistics about the way President Trump has supposedly brought inflation down during this term in office. We had to chuckle when Campos-Duffy eventually complained about the way liberals won't spend time with people who don't share their views, not even on Thanksgiving Day.
Frankly, we had to chuckle! When did these three friends ever bring a guest on their show who was going to disagree with their infallible claims? When one of the analysts asked that question, we could recall no such time!
The flooding of the zone now moves at the speed of light. Within a day, we moved from the president's furious response to a somewhat peculiar presentation by six congressional Democrats to yesterday's extremely friendly Oval Office session.
There is no way to keep up with this flow. We can say that because we've tried.
That said, also this: We don't think a modern nation can prosper under current pseudo-journalistic arrangements, in which MAGA supporters are aggressively scripted by personalities like these while our own news orgs in Blue America agree to avert their gaze.
Yesterday, we had occasion to discuss President Lincoln with a lifelong friend. We recalled Sandburg's poetical account of the president-elect's last meeting with his stepmother, Sally Bush Lincoln.
In Sandburg's account, she knew what her stepson, the president-elect, would be thinking as he was cheered in vast parades in New York City or in D.C. He'd still be thinking about the ways of life on her small farm in Coles County, Illinois, where he'd partially been raised.
That said, we also went back and reread the text shown below. Our friend was present, long ago, when we read that text for the first time, accompanied by a group of Baltimore City fifth graders on a field trip to Washington:
Lincoln's astounding second inaugural address is inscribed, opposite the text of the Gettysburg Address, on a wall inside the Lincoln Memorial. Reading this text for the first time, we instantly knew that Abraham Lincoln had plainly not been human.
This is the bulk of the text:
Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address
[...]
On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it, all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war—seeking to dissolve the Union and divide effects by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. And the war came.
One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war, while the Government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with or even before the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let u
The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully.
The Almighty has His own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him?
Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."
For the full text, click here. When we first read that astonishing text, we were astounded to think that a human being had ever said any such thing in public here on this earth.
We did this too, the president said. We in the North are one of the parties "by whom the offense came."
(It's said that Lincoln added the line which starts with "It may seem strange" because he knew that many people in the victorious North wouldn't like his fuller assessment. We don't know if that's accurate.)
We did this too, that president said—and then he took things a great deal farther. In our own estimation, we Blues would do well to remember that astonishing judgment as we try to assess the devastating war of the worlds into which our two Americas, Red and Blue, have been so unhelpfully thrown, out in Coles County and everywhere else, over the past many years.
Monday: Greg Gutfeld RE President Trump, back then as compared to now. To read ahead, click here.
Abraham Lincoln had very little formal schooling, amounting to less than a year total in his childhood. OTOH, college graduates today don’t write this well. Modern day education is not working right.
ReplyDeleteImplying that formal schooling is all there is to education is hugely misleading, David. Lincoln "read" law, which means he studies the law in a lawyer's office with a mentor, in preparation for joining the bar and becoming a lawyer himself. That is education. Lincoln read books and that is where he acquired a sense of language. Note that Somerby is praising the content of Lincoln's speech, the meaning, not the wording of it.
DeleteLincoln didn’t study science and mathematics.
DeleteTrump is a Wharton Grad.
DeleteI agree with you @11:00, but I had a different point in mind. Formal education is supported by an enormous, expensive structure of schools, teachers, colleges, professors, researchers, government grants., regulators, etc. This effort and expense ought to result in a populace that's a lot better educated than mere self study would produce. It isn't doing so. That tells us that a lot of money and effort are being wasted.
DeleteLincoln descended from a wealthy family - frontier gentry, his grandfather owning a large tract of land (as a benefit of being a Revolutionary War vet).
DeleteLincoln's grandfather was killed by a raiding Native American party, and Lincoln's dad was saved by the older brother shooting the assailant.
Lincoln's dad was 8 when this happened, and due to the chaos of land rights in that area at the time, he was never able to secure any land for himself.
So Lincoln grew up in some level of poverty but was privileged by the cultural and psychological inheritance of his father coming from a well off family.
"It isn't doing so. That tells us that a lot of money and effort are being wasted."
DeleteTell us more. Share your expertise.
Interestingly, Lincoln's uncle - his dad's older brother, Mordecai - was deeply antislavery, and thus avoided parts of the territory that engaged in slavery which meant he also avoided the areas where elites had control of the land and where land speculation was rampant, which meant Mordecai farmed land in more stable areas so he was able to hold onto his land and succeed very well.
DeleteWhy did he not lend a hand to his young brother, Lincoln's dad? Maybe it was a sign of the times.
Lincoln did hold some resentment for his dad's struggles, which fueled Lincoln's strong distaste for ruling elites and their use of slavery to hold monopolies of power; this was the original ideology of the Republican Party, now completely twisted in modern times since they now endorse those ruling elites and their monopolies.
Trump cheated his way through college.
Delete"Modern day education is not working right." No worries there as the republican party engages in a war on STEM in higher education. You think it is by accident that they are putting so much emphasis on trade schools? You don't seem to grasp the big picture here. The base of the republican party is the same group you argue is being underserved: the uneducated. They know this. The last thing a republican politician wants to find in his district is a majority of highly educated voters. The future of the republican party, like the present, is represented largely by those bottom dwellers academically. The demographics speak for themselves. There is no denying the numbers.
Delete
ReplyDelete"We had to chuckle when Campos-Duffy eventually complained about the way liberals won't spend time with people who don't share their views, not even on Thanksgiving Day."
Chuckle away, Bob, you're perfectly entitled to it. You're sooo superior to 'em Others, 'em smelly Walmart shoppers. So, so smarter. You da Man.
Why would anyone want to disturb the pleasure of the holiday arguing with people like Cecelia. Just imagine her around your Thanksgiving dinner table and you'll see why liberals have cut-off their divisive friends and relatives. Life is too short to spend it arguing politics with peope who are unwilling to see what they did to our country.
DeleteAnonymouse 11:13am, it wouldn’t go like that. By the time we got the dishes put away, we’d practically be sisters.
Delete“Why would anyone want to disturb the pleasure of the holuday arguing with people like Cecelia.”
DeleteIt looks to me like you’re itching to pick a fight with CC. So, you seem to be the one who can give us the answer to your question.
AKA DG, I’m aware of the CC thing.
Delete"smelly, Walmart shoppers."
DeleteDidn't know you shopped there.
DG, you and Cecelia come around like clockwork to pick a fight with me and whoever else you decide to target. It is tiresome. That is why you and Cecelia are not welcome at my Thanksgiving table.
DeleteI would welcome both Cecelia and David to my Thanksgiving dinner.
DeleteAnonymouse 1:03pm, how? You’re one of several anonymices.
DeleteThat’s why I say “I would”, not “I will”. I would gladly entertain you and David, but in the real world it’s not going to happen.
DeleteAnonymouse 1:44pm, my comment at 1:27pm was addressed to anonymouse 1:03pm.
DeleteThough she’s anonymous, she says I seek to personally abuse her daily. How? Ironically, she’s attacking Bob everyday.
Sorry, I meant anonymouse 11:03am
DeleteWhy would anyone invite a man pretending to be a woman to anything other than some kind of psychological therapeutic intervention?
DeleteAnonymouse 2:11pm, hell…why would they invite them to women’s sports teams?
DeleteThere are about 500,000 athletes in the NCAA, about ten of which are trans, it is a non issue.
DeleteThere's a difference between a man pretending to be a woman as a way to "own the libs" and someone genuinely identifying as a woman but who was assigned as male at birth.
That you would weaponize such a circumstance, exposes your toxic masculinity.
Neither Cecelia, nor David, are rich enough to have for Thanksgiving dinner.
DeleteAnonymouse 3:09pm, there’s nothing that denotes toxic masculinity as much as a man demanding that we call him “her”.
DeleteCecelia, keep working on timestamps. Practice makes perfect!
DeleteAnonymouse 3:18pm, so your guest list is determined by who is willing to lend you money.
DeleteAnonymouse 3:41pm, I’m allergic to my glasses.
DeleteYes Cecelia, you are proving 3:09's point, even though you seem to think you are countering it.
DeleteIt is wild how the hate of these right wing trolls makes them stumble over themselves and shoot themselves in the foot.
"who was assigned as male at birth."
DeleteWow. 'Assigned.' Sounds so...random. Was there any rational basis for the assigment?
Anonymouse 3:48pm, no one proves a point simply by expressing it. You’re so smart… but you don’t understand that? There are physical difference between men and women. That fact is linked to biology. Women athletes should not be forced to play against biological men, and no one should be forced to use any pronoun that isn’t based upon biology,
DeleteTo me, while I'm eating my turkey,
DeleteMy comments seem witty and quirky.
But, the rest of the guests
Come from liberal nests.
They think I'm an ignorant jerky.
Tofurky
DeleteThose who insist sex is a simple matter of biology are those know the least about human sexuality, physiology and gender. Cecelia seems to know nothing about hormones.
DeleteCecelia at 3:45,
DeleteAdd that swing and miss to your rest of your sorry attempts to understand human nature.
My Thanksgiving menu is determined by who deserves to be eaten.
Anonymouse 8:22am, no doubt.
Delete"Those who insist sex is a simple matter of biology are those know the least about human sexuality, physiology and gender."
Delete'Gender' is a linguistic term only recently co-opted by transgender ideologues to mean...well, it's never clear what it means other than the license to be what one is not.
Only idiots know what "woman" is.
DeleteMy child was born with a penis and vagina. It has been hard but think they have it together now. People can be monsters.
Delete“Things that didn’t happen for $500, Alex.”
DeleteGender is a sociological term with a real meaning ignored by undereducated right wing morons.
DeleteAlso used by developmental psychologists and by cultural anthropologists.
DeleteChildren are born with genitalia of both sexes. Cecelia is ignorant.
DeleteMy favorite porn, if I watched that is.
DeleteAnonymouse 12:13pm, where did I say that never happens?
Delete"In our own estimation, we Blues would do well to remember that astonishing judgment as we try to assess the devastating war of the worlds into which our two Americas, Red and Blue, have been so unhelpfully thrown..."
ReplyDeleteWe are not engaged in a "war of the worlds" but in a political struggle between two parties, just like we encounter every four years as we elect a president and every two years for members of congress.
War of the Worlds is the name of a sci fi book written by H.G. Wells, in which the world is invaded by aliens from outer space. It was made into a movie with Tom Cruise. It has nothing to do with current politics and there is no reason why Somerby should have "borrowed" that title to refer to American politics.
Our main problem today is that the right wing aided by Russia has put a conman and criminal into office. He has destroyed American institutions and ignored both laws and norms to acquire great wealth in office and now his crimes are coming to light. We will shortly go through another impeachment and hopefully the Senate will remove him this time. That so many Republicans support this fraud is what is ailing our nation today, not any fundamental conflict between red and blue, much less aliens. (Is that a shout-out to Q-Anon and their reptilians, Somerby? If so, it is venal to encourage craziness as if it had some real place in politics on either side.)
Meanwhile, there is now evidence that Epstein talked about Katie Johnson, and more support for her testimony that Trump raped her when she was 13, along with another girl who was 12. There is also evidence showing that Epstein considered himself a Trump supporter, was in constant touch with Steve Bannon, helping him strategize on behalf of Trump, and that Epstein denied being a Democrat but never denied being a pedophile.
There is a lot going on in our country. None of it concerns a civil war and none of it concerns aliens. It is about getting rid of a man who should never have been elected president, if the press had done its job and covered the lawsuits of Katie Johnson (back in 2016, before Trump's first election). The mainstream press is still not covering her story. Why?
"War of the worlds" can be used to refer to Wells' story, but since it is comprised of two common, everyday words, 'war' and 'worlds', it can be applied in any way a writer chooses to.
DeleteYou're a bit persnickety in your criticism.
“if the press had done its job and covered the lawsuits of Katie Johnson”
DeleteUnknown person files, then immediately dismisses, lawsuits against Trump. What more is there for the press to cover?
She was threatened. Just like Stormy Daniels and who knows what others. If men rape women, why wouldn't they also threaten them? Why on earth are you defending these known and convicted sex abusers?
DeleteThere are no "worlds" involved in the differences between red and blue America. There are no aliens. Why is it persnickety to point out that there are no actual parallels between the content of War of the Worlds and our current political situation? Not even poetically. Somerby has just grabbed another phrase that he likes and misapplied it to obfuscate whatever sense might exist in his ramblings.
DeleteActually there are perhaps 20 - 30 million aliens here. Trump and Tom Homan are dealing with the invasion.
DeleteMake Aliyah, Dave.
DeleteHoman is dealing with being involved in a FBI sting operation where he was caught receiving $50k in cash in a paper bag. womp womp
DeleteDavid in Cal,
DeleteAt least aliens make the effort by coming here.
Israel sucks the teat of the USA like they're ordering dinner with Door Dash.
Immigrants are not invaders. The word invasion implies that they all came at once with a coordinated purpose.
DeleteThere are an estimated 51.9 million immigrants in the USA. Half are naturalized citizens, which makes them citizens. They are 15% of the total US population. About 77% of immigrants held permanent legal status or a long-term nonimmigrant visa as of 2022. That means 77% of the 51.9 immigrants have the right to live here permanently. The rest, 23%, have some documented status that is temporary or pending court action. Trump has been detaining and deporting these people despite their documented status.
It is estimated that 14 million undocumented immigrants are in the US. That is far less than the 20-30 million "aliens" David mentions. An alien is a foreigner, someone who is not from here, not necessarily someone who is illegal. Tourist is a better term for temporary visitors on tourist visas. Naturalized immigrants are not generally called aliens because they have become citizens, even though they were born elsewhere. But it is hard to know what is meant by David's term alien. The number David gives doesn't match any of the categories found in population surveys.
Calling the people who come here for jobs, family reunification, to marry a US citizen, to pursue education or professional opportunities (as Melania did) by some negative term like invader is ridiculous. People move around within the US and the same thing happens across country boundaries (especially within the European Union and in Asia). There is no reason why strict lines must be drawn to prevent the natural circulation of human beings on our planet.
Anyone who isn't a bigot, or isn't perfectly fine with bigotry, left the Republican Party more than two dozen years ago.
DeleteWhat are the five bills Johnson is working to on today to help average Americans? Why do you accept nothing as normal?
DeleteLincoln's second inaugural address was given a month before the Civil War ended. Somerby implies that it had ended when the address was given, but it had not.
ReplyDeleteSomerby reads this as Lincoln blaming the war on both the North and South, but look what he says:
"Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. "
The North accepted war to preserve the nation. The South made war because it would not accept the law imposed by the NATION on slave-owners. The South would not accept the will of the people and abide by the laws enacted which threatened slave ownership. So, the civil war was about slavery, yet, but also about wealth. The rich men who owned slaves wouldn't surrender their wealth to free men held in bondage. That is not the offense of the North which Lincoln says fought to preserve the nation as a unified whole comprised of states under the same government.
Somerby keeps babbling about secession, asserting that the red states have engaged in a secession from the blue states. There are people who might wish for that outcome, but I do not see what Somerby thinks is so wonderful about Lincoln's address. It seems obvious that both the North and the South were involved in the civil war, with different purposes, but how is that some wonderful revelation. There is greater nobility in fighting preserve the union than in fighting to own slaves.
Today, there is no nobility whatsoever in defending the pedophile and con artist, the greedy bastard who allied with a foreign enemy to put himself in office, solely to exercise power and acquire greater wealth. Trump must go. He is not now and never was fit to be our president. We are waiting him out -- he will have to leave office at the end of his term (if not before), but any attempt to stay beyond that will result in more fighting to preserve our law-governed nation.
Blues are not now fighting against red America. We are resisting the dissolution of our government and rule of law because we do not support tyranny. That is far from Lincoln's context, no matter how much Somerby gushes over Lincoln's address, simply because it holds the North complicit in Civil War, to prevent the South from dissolving the union. Somerby does not exactly say what he considers so wonderful about that. It IS consistent with his repetitive theme that Blue America is as complicit as Red America in our current conflicts -- except that is untrue. We didn't give Trump authority to loot our nation, red America did that. We are the only ones fighting to keep America free and to restore prosperity (against Trump's destructive actions). We are the only ones who care about ALL of the people of our nation -- not Red America, who is scapegoating diversity and trying to restore bigotry to American life.
Meanwhile, Somerby has nothing to say about the daily revelations about Epstein and Trump's relationship, Trump's participation in the rape of underage girls, and his efforts to conceal his wrongdoing. Lincoln had nothing to say about pedophiles, but he was certainly against slavery and he said so. Somerby will not do the same. He pretend to admire Lincoln's moral courage while failing to endorse the only side against pedophilia and greed these days, blue America. We do not deserve Somerby's chiding. It is aimed at the wrong people.
“Somerby reads this as Lincoln blaming the war on both the North and South”
DeleteLincoln says: “[God] gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came”
So I can see why Somerby reads this passage the way he does. But the “offense” is slavery, so I’m wondering what Lincoln meant in saying the woe of war is due not only to the South, but also to the North. Why did he include the North within the scope of “those by whom the offense came”?
Because the North had recently held slaves, too. Because the North continued to profit from trade in slave-grown commodities.
DeleteRather than intending that both the North and South earned the offense equally, Lincoln is pointing out that regardless of who earned the offense the burden of war fell on both sides. God gives to both...as the woe due to those by whom the offense came (the South). It can mean that regardless of who started things, both sides have suffered, not that both sides deserve the woe. So, it is ambiguous and Somerby picks his preferred meaning because it lets him excoriate Blue America for woes that Red America has inflicted on all of us. That doesn't mean that we in Blue America deserve or started things or inflicted the woes. Red America did that (I don't believe God gets involved in political wars).
Delete1:31 and 1:32 — I’m not sure I agree with either of you (I’m still pondering), but I think your responses are intelligent and thought-provoking, and I thank you.
DeleteAnonymices, remember that the war was a civil war (brother against brother, sister against sister). It took place inside our own house (our nation, our community, our home, sweet home).
DeleteWhen people say 'house,' they can mean it like a family estate or kingdom. It’s not simply that everyone in the house ends up suffering the consequences, it’s also that no one walks away with spotless hands. That’s always the way with war. That’s how it goes with evil.
CC — Also a thought-provoking comment. Thanks.
DeleteDG,
DeleteThere is no way to know if Cecelia's comment is thought-provoking, or not.
Please take your rank speculation elsewhere.
Cecelia knows how evil goes thru personal deeds and thoughts.
DeleteDamn it, DG…. Anonymouse 8:27am will tell us when something is thought-provoking.
DeleteAnonymouse 11:52am, duh. We all do.
Delete“Somerby has nothing to say about the daily revelations about . . . Trump’s participation in the rape of underage girls”
ReplyDeleteI missed today’s revelations about Trump raping young girls, and yesterday’s, too. Perhaps you could fill me in. (And, please, spare me a rant about the unverified, decade-old “revelations” by an anonymous accuser.)
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/11/21/2354976/-Trump-s-alleged-child-rape-victim-Katie-Johnson-is-in-the-Epstein-Files
DeleteThe latest confirmation is in the tranche of released Epstein documents that were supplied by the Epstein estate in response to the House Oversight Committee subpoenas.
DeleteWhat’s the “revelation” here? That “Johnson” filed, then dismissed, lawsuits in 2016? And that some people believed her story?
DeleteJust for the record - even though I understand it will go right over your head - I’m perfectly OK with your believing “Johnson’s” story. What I object to is your habit of asserting her story to be true when you have no knowledge, whatsoever, whether it really is. Accusing someone (even a monster like Trump) of child rape requires serious evidence, not unverified statements by anonymous accusers.
DeleteThe revelation is that the info from Johnson's perspective is mirrored in what Epstein and Bannon discussed contemporaneously, which is corroboration by the perpetrator of the acts against Johnson.
Delete"Now, Stansbury is claiming that a 2016 lawsuit, accusing Epstein and Trump of repeatedly raping a 13-year-old girl in 1994, is mentioned in the files. As she’s mentioned, an April 2016 email exchange between Michael Wolff and Epstein has surfaced.
In the exchange, Epstein forwards an email chain began by Reuters News’ David Ingram. Ingram emailed Martin G. Weinberg, giving a heads up about the outlet preparing to report on the newly-filed lawsuit accusing Trump and Epstein of raping a minor. Ingram told Weinberg the outlet requested to speak with Epstein or a comment on his behalf.
Weinberg then warned Epstein that the federal court case was going to press in a few hours. Forwarding the chain to Wolff, Epstein said, “Here we go.” Wolff replied, “Well, I guess if there’s anybody who can wave thus [sic] away, it’s Donald. Let me know if there’s anything I can do.”
And that is exactly what happened. The lawsuit was "waved" away.
You clearly did not read the extensive discussion about the reasons why those who interviewed Johnson believed her story to credible.
Has anyone ever considered Trump to be credible on any subject? He lies continually and yet you believe him instead of the many victims, whose stories hang together in their details without coordination. Epstein himself admitted his guilt in his plea agreement. Epstein implicated Trump. And here Epstein acknowledge's Johnson's lawsuit and Trump's involvement.
There's no problem with her habit of asserting that the moon is made of cheese. She is retarded. What do you people want from her?
DeleteI have been asserting that (1) Trump and Epstein were rapists and pedophiles, with convictions to back that up; (2) there is considerable circumstantial evidence supporting Johnson's story and that of the other victims (1000+); (3) that would convict Trump if he were brought to trial, just as it convicted Epstein in 2009 and again in 2019 had he gone to trial then; (4) it is fair to believe that someone did a crime if they have been convicted (and confessed in Epstein's case). Maintaining Epstein and Trump's innocence of the accusations against them by various women when he has been convicted in the trial where Stormy Daniels testified and in the E.J. Carroll case, and by Trump's own words to Billy Bush, not to mention all of those victim depositions and Virginia Guiffre's book, strikes me as bias in favor of these two pedophiles (and their accomplices, Maxwell and others, and the sex ring Johns).
DeleteStanding by a very thinly split hair over whether it is right to refer to these accusations as proven or not puts you way out on a limb where your concern for thoroughly rotten men outweighs any concern for justice toward these young girls. Please explain why the scales of justice for you tilt so radically in favor of clearly guilty men and away from redress of grievances for real crimes against teens whose lives were ruined by these men.
“I have been asserting that (1) Trump . . . [was a] pedophile[], with convictions to back that up.”
DeleteYour statement that Trump is a convicted pedophile is a pure and unadulterated falsehood.
1:40 - The only reason I could possibly doubt the truth of an unverified accusation by an anonymous accuser is because I favor the practice of grown men raping seventh-grade girls. No other reason could possibly make sense to you, right?
Delete1:40 wrote "I have been asserting that (1) Trump and Epstein were rapists and pedophiles, with convictions to back that up".
DeleteAnd then DG edits it to “I have been asserting that (1) Trump . . . [was a] pedophile[], with convictions to back that up.”
And then DG wonders why his integrity is being impugned?
The lack of self awareness among these right wing trolls is wild.
Indeed, Trump was found liable in court for rape, and his good friend Epstein was convicted for sex crimes against minors, and Trump and Epstein spent many years partying together with young girls.
Actually, I’m done. Go ahead and tell us over and again about how “Johnson” — whoever she might be — was raped by Trump. And if someone points out that her accusation is unverified, go ahead and brand them as a defender and patron of pedophiles.
DeleteTrump was a rapist (sex abuser). Epstein was a rapist and pedophile. This is supported by their convictions. I should have put their names in separate sentences but that doesn't change what they did.
DeleteTrump was convicted of defamation when he claimed he did not commit sexual abuse (rape with an object) against E.Jean Carroll and the judge said there was evidence showing that he had committed the crime she accused him of. The jury found him guilty. Trump was convicted of fraud on the basis of Stormy Daniels' (and other) testimony that he had paid her off to suppress their liaison. She testified that he sent goons to threaten her when she wanted to describe her encounter in 2016, before the election. Michael Cohen supported her testimony and the jury convicted Trump of covering up by falsifying business records of his payoffs. Her subsequent description of their sexual liaison is consistent with other descriptions of what Trump is accused of doing to various of Epstein's victims, including underage girls 13 and 14 years old. These cases are also fully consistent with Trump's self-confession to Billy Bush (records via live mic) and the accusations of 27 other women (as of 2016).
In light of this, I do not think my statement was
pure and unadultered falsehood but merely made ambiguous by putting two men with different convictions in the same sentence. That is just careless, but given Trump's ongoing misbehavior far from falsehood.
The main crime is that men with a lot of money get to buy their way out of convictions that other men cannot escape (nor should they). Innocence is not what has protected Trump all these years.
Implying I’m a pedophile defender doesn’t bother me, but calling me right-wing really pisses me off. But mostly my reaction is this: Anybody who thinks I’m right-wing must be a completely ridiculous moron!
DeleteDG, you are welcome to go away if you want. Johnson (whoever she is) is a real person who was harmed by Trump and then threatened to make her drop her lawsuit. She exists and her story is corroborated by the stories of many others, from Epstein to the other victims.
DeleteHere we see an example, in your behavior, of the extreme lengths women must go to be taken seriously when accusing a man of wrongdoing that is so blatantly obvious that everyone knows they are guilty. Men should not cover for each other like you are doing for Trump. Women are entitled to justice too, without some bizarre standard of proof that cannot be satisfied because wealthy men can buy thugs to threaten their accusers. There should not be a bro mafia that protects the brotherhood when they have raped 12-13-14 year old girls because they are bored with their lives.
DG, you need to read Virginia Guiffre's book and then think about why she might have committed suicide at age 41, if neither Trump nor Epstein did anything wrong to hurt her. And I also find myself wondering why Maxwell is the only one in jail and why you are not writing a zillion comments to defend her as an innocent bystander too.
Actually, I think this habit of excluding people from the Blue tent for perceived strayings from Blue dogma is one of the behaviors that, in Somerby’s words, “earn our way out.”
DeleteThe reality is that even Blues can believe that unverified, anonymous accusations should be taken with a grain of salt.
DG, Johnson's account is not unverified. Manne describes the corroboration and Epstein himself refers to her and Trump suppressing her lawsuit, back in 2016. That you will not read or discuss the verification you claim is needed shows that you aren't actually interested in who is telling the truth, but just in defending Trump.
DeleteDG, this is silly. No one is prevented from voting Blue if they want to. People register for whichever party they want and then vote for whichever candidates they choose.
DeleteNote that Somerby has no shyness about calling out Gutfeld for his misogyny, so how does he get away with saying Blues shouldn't do the same thing to people being racist and sexist? No one disagrees with Somerby that Red America dislikes being called on their racism and sexism, but they ARE racist and sexist (see Trump's current behavior) and they merely want to be bigots without anyone pointing it out, not vote blue.
Your idea of a grain of salt is not a grain but a boulder so large that no one's claims would ever be investigated or tried if people followed your advice. Women spent a very long time getting police to investigate rape charges. Look how long Epstein conducted his trafficking ring without constraint before the govt started to investigate. Unverified, anonymous accusations should be investigated not ignored.
Note that Kate Johnson is not anonymous. She has a name that is well known to her attorneys. It was shielded from the public when filing her suit (and subsequently) to allow her to have a normal life. A person who is a plaintiff in such a suit cannot get a job, find friends or have a serious relationship if publicly identified, which is retraumatizing and stigmatizing to the point of compounding the harm done. That you would demand this shows an extreme lack of empathy. Courts conceal such info routinely and it doesn't imply that their testimony is suspicious that they are so protected. Johnson's accusations were made in her own name and she is in no way anonymous, using a pseudonym. When authors publish books under other names, their real names are on their contracts. Johnson is no different, but your accusation that she is making up falsehoods is exactly what a guilty person would say to deflect suspicion. How about that?
I have had a lot of experience representing women who were harassed or discriminated against at work. I have prosecuted their claims in civil court. I am exceedingly sympathetic to the difficulties they face in bringing these claims, and I admire the courage it takes for them to do so.
DeleteBut I am also devoted to the truth, and the truth is that there is absolutely no known evidence that could be admitted in any court that suggests that Trump raped “Katie Johnson.”
And I say that even though Trump, in my view, is an abomination.
Moreover, I doubt there is any lawyer, of any persuasion, who would contradict what I say.
DeleteDG, you keep saying Katie Johnson has no evidence but that is not true. You need to read and hear what the evidence is, instead of repeating that there is none.
DeleteKatie Johnson was being represented by Lisa Bloom, Gloria Allred's daughter. Together, they have considerable experience in what it takes to prove the kind of allegations Johnson was making. More than you do. They were willing to bring her case to court. Johnson's statement contains details about Trump and Epstein that she could not have known (were not publicly available) until much later. These are corroborated by details in the statements of other victims, which Johnson did not have access to. As I said earlier, Epstein himself corroborates the threats that caused Johnson to drop her suit, as he was warned about the suit by a journalist and they asked Trump to fix it (Trump "waved" away her lawsuit). Aside from Johnson, there was another young girl present when Johnson was raped by Trump, age 12. Witnesses can provide evidence. In the Epstein emails recently supplied to Congress, there are other incidents where Trump was present in Epstein's apartment or his own office with very young teens.
DG, read Johnson's full statement (provided by Kate Manne in transcript of her interview video) and see whether the things she says are consistent with other info about Trump/Epstein that are evidence supporting Johnson's account.
Ghislaine Maxwell is still alive and she could testify about whether she put Katie Johnson in a blonde wig so Trump could fantasize about his daughter during sex. She was there too. She has obviously been bribed to suppress what she witnessed and participated in.
Katie Johnson dropped her suit. This is not court but it is permissible for all of us to consider the evidence against Trump in his various conflicts and decide whether he is telling the truth or not. Trump never tells the truth about anything but you think he is now? After his major efforts to suppress the Epstein files! You clearly don't want to call Trump guilty but you sound like a fool when you defend him on the grounds that there was no Elf on the Shelf monitoring the rape and thus anything is possible. It could be that 13 year old girl concocted a suit against a major figure like Trump out of her imagination on a rainy afternoon when she had nothing else to do. Johnson had a lot to lose and nothing to gain by suing Trump. Look at E.Jean Carroll's difficulty getting her court-ordered damages. You have to be the world's biggest moron to keep thinking Trump is not guilty.
All this child rape stuff is alarming, but this asshole led an insurrection against American Democracy. Hang the repeat rapist (after a short trial) and he can't rape no more.
Delete"We did this too, that president said—and then he took things a great deal farther. In our own estimation, we Blues would do well to remember that astonishing judgment as we try to assess the devastating war of the worlds into which our two Americas, Red and Blue, have been so unhelpfully thrown, out in Coles County and everywhere else, over the past many years."
ReplyDeleteSomerby is trying to share the blame for Trump's disasters with Blue America, but we didn't have anything to do with it. We didn't vote for Trump. We tried our best to present a better alternative, which Red America rejected. Our country is now suffering financially because of Trump's tariffs. Our government in in tatters because of DOGE followed by the appointment of complete incompetents who have no idea what they are doing, other than grifting and grandstanding. The honor of our military is being besmirched by Hegseth and Trump's random attacks on another country's nationals in international waters, and they even invaded Mexico (by mistake they claim). The CDC is no longer protecting our nation's children from disease and nearly all medical and scientific research has been cancelled, while Trump reinstates bigotry and sends ICE troopers to harrass both citizens and immigrants who obtained their paperwork to live here by following the rules.
We Blues do not own any of that. We did not contribute to putting Trump in office -- Russia did that. We are not responsible for Trump's excesses. We didn't knock down the East Wing. We have organized the resistance and protested in the largest marches in our country's history. When history judges Trump and the Republicans, we will not be named as collaboraters as Somerby claims.
Somerby has distorted the meaning of Lincoln's address to pretend that Lincoln blamed both North and South for the war. He clearly said that the North fought to preserve the union, to save the nation, whereas the South fought to maintain slavery. Those motives are far from equal morally. Somerby's attempt to bothsides Trump's excesses doesn't work, just as Lincoln did NOT consider both sides responsible in the Civil War, no matter how he speaks of God visiting the effects of the war on North and South alike.
Somerby's habit of grabbing other people's words out of context and bending them to fit (and implicitly support) his own beliefs would earn him an F in any class teaching students to interpret texts, fiction or nonfiction like Lincoln's speech. You cannot rip words out of context and then reuse them to claim Lincoln's approval for Somerby's blathering. It is either dishonest or mentally ill to do that, or both. Certainly Trump's actions are not only insane but also criminal.
I find Somerby's essay today offensive. His entire ongoing attempt to blame Blue America for Trump's crimes stinks. It is beyond outrageous given that we too are suffering Trump's incompetence, just as the North suffered the war despite opposing the South's abuse of humanity in order to make money off slavery. Is Trump's behavior as bad as slavery was? You bet it is. For all their flaws, only a few Confederates were rapists.
“[Somerby’s] entire ongoing attempt to blame Blue America for Trump’s crimes”
DeleteCan you provide a single example where Somerby blames Blues for any of Trump’s crimes? If not, you might consider whether you may be misreading him.
What Somerby says (as I read him) is that the behaviors of Blues may have influenced persuadable voters to vote for Trump.
DeleteOne of those behaviors being the nasty habit of calling people racist, sexist, Nazi pedophiles.
DeleteI am a racist sexist Nazi, but I’m not a pedophile.
DeleteSomerby has repeatedly claimed that but never proven it, much less even supplying evidence of it. In the last election it seems pretty obvious that the swing of black and Hispanic voters toward Trump was due to unwillingness to vote for a female candidate, given that they have now swung right back to the Democrats again in polling. Yet Somerby has never acknowledged that possibility. Trump's bro campaign worked and that is sexual politics, yet he has nothing to say on that topic.
DeleteSomerby instead claimed that Harris didn't do and didn't talk about things that she plainly did. In other words, he repeated right wing talking points against Harris, ignoring rebuttals of them because he supposedly doesn't read his comments, which allows him to repeat the same mistaken claims over and over. If you want to consider Somerby "blue" and also admit that he argued against Harris, then at least one blue person was responsible for Trump's election. I don't think Somerby is blue, and he hasn't presented any convincing argument that we blues did anything to put Trump in office. Russia did far more.
Somerby might also have made a convincing argument that the last minute ditching of Biden by Democrats (Pelosi, George Clooney, several blue pundits like Taegan Goddard, Jon Favreau, colluding with right wing) torpedoed Harris and the Democrats' chances, putting Trump into office. But Somerby didn't say that. He said Biden was actually too old, echoing the right wing and mainstream media campaign against Biden based on his age. But, to my knowledge, that is not what Somerby was saying. His arguments against blues tend to boil down to being too woke, attacking red voters for racism and sexist and bigotry, and advancing the traditional Democratic party platform, which includes supporting diversity and women's rights, raising corporate taxes etc. But here Somerby never really attacked the Democratic platform but repeated right wing nonsense about wokeness and culture wars. Somerby never got specific about any of that, either.
DG, Somerby blames Blues for ALL of Trump's wrongdoing whenever he claims that we blues helped put Trump in office, something we did not do.
DG, you should be aware that Nazis who support Trump are quite open about their Nazi affiliation and love for Hitler and other fascists. Nick Fuentes, for example. When blues talk about the Nazis over in red America, it isn't us who are labeling them, but they themselves. You must have seen photos of them marching in the Unite the Right rally (what do you suppose that phrase means) at which Trump called some of them good people, and then an anti-Nazi protester was run over on a sidewalk and killed by a rally-goer in a truck. But we in Blue America are offending red America by referring to Nazis among them? So the left is supposed to tiptoe around Nazi snowflake feelings while the right calls us all socialists and communists and wears "Fuck Your Feelings" t-shirts? Can't you see how ridiculous this proposition is?
DeleteThe latest atrocity was their attempt to declare the swastika no longer a symbol of hate (because of its affiliation with Nazis) allowing the Coast Guard to recruit people with such tattoos. Similarly, the noose was declared no longer a symbol of lynching aimed at minorities. Then they reversed themselves due to the public outcry.
There are historical accounts suggesting that Hitler was a pedophile who assaulted a young girl living in his family home.
DeleteRacist and sexist is as racist and sexist does. The way to fight racism and sexism is to call it out and discuss why it is wrong, in support of our country's civil rights legislation and policy changes. This strategy has worked because measured racism and sexism (and all "isms" except fatphobia) have declined substantially since our society started doing that back in the 1960s.
DeleteIt should be obvious from Trump's actions, that the complaints are not about being called names like racist and sexist but about having to treat people better, according to our countries laws and norms. Trump didn't just attack left wing speech but he has rolled back the measures intended to achieve justice and equality for all people in our society, eliminating affirmative action, defining anti-racism as reverse racism against whites, defining this as a country by and for whites only, stopping immigration of non-white people and targeting those with black or brown skin for assault by ICE goons, kicking women and minorities out of top military jobs, making CEOS eliminate opportunities for women and minorities, getting rid of diversity programs and the teaching of history of diversity in universities, schools and libraries, and so on. That goes far beyond telling people to stop calling other people names like racist. Trump is making our country a haven for bigotry, and yes, that is what the right actually wants, not just a stop to the name-calling (which they still do freely against groups they dislike).
Gosh, the right wing never called Democrats a bunch of pedophiles, did they? Oh, wait. That's exactly what they did -- with absolutely no evidence. Perhaps that's why you are suspicious of the Epstein victims -- except they are not Republicans or Democrats but wounded birds trying to get justice for the wrongs against them, by Epstein and Trump.
DeleteBoth Epstein and Trump were Democrats back in the day when they were molesting young girls and blackmailing men videoed having sex with their victims. When Trump decided to go into politics in 2012 (some say inspired by hatred of Obama, others say encouraged by his Russian oligarch sugar daddys), he switched parties and became a Republican. Epstein switched too and became a Trump supporter, never ending his relationship with Trump (over real estate, as claimed) but continuing to be Trump's buddy and confidante, through his election (having Thanksgiving dinner with Trump after his election victory in 2016) and continuing to collaborate with Trump until just before his death (based on emails from Epstein's estate). Epstein called himself a Trumpie and said he believed in Trump's policies and was no longer a Democrat. That is in his own words in his emails.
DG's reasoning: Katie Johnson is a fake name so everything else she said must be fake too.
DeleteThat's the same attitude he brings to this website, where if you don't have a nym, you can't have anything to say. This is crazy. Cecelia has a nym and has never said anything worth reading here, ever. But Cecelia's nym is no different than Katie Johnson's pseudonym on her lawsuit. Both protect privacy. But Cecelia gets a bye whereas Katie is telling lies. That makes no sense to me.
I agree that people don't like female candidates. As a liberal Democrat, I hope that we stop letting them run for office for a little while.
DeleteHarris came so close that it is hard to argue that voters didn't want a female candidate. It seems more likely that vote suppression and the late start caused her defeat.
DeleteNo, *enough* female voters didn't want her. As you accurately pointed out above, blacks and Hispanics were not willing to vote for a woman.
DeleteWomen are in danger of having their right to vote taken away from them.
DeleteAnonymouse 3:18pm: I don't tell lies; I simply express opinions you disagree with. The only way you can use me as a some example is because I have a history of posts under my nym. I realize this is a very difficult concept for you to understand. Additionally, you will also find it challenging to accept that your comparison of me with Katie is stupid, because I am not making an assault accusation under the anonymity of a pseudonym.
Delete“DG’s reasoning: Katie Johnson is a fake name so everything else she said must be fake too.”
DeleteAre you congenitally incapable of writing a sentence that is true? I don’t know whether her accusations are true or not. And neither do you. The fact that there is no verification and that we can’t investigate because we do not even know her name cautions against jumping to conclusions.
Harris lost, in part, due to sticky sexism (and racism to a lesser degree) among Dems.
DeleteSexism and racism is foundational to the modern Republican Party, but their sexism and racism is irrelevant to Harris losing.
Why?
Because "swing voters" are a myth.
The Black and Hispanic men that supported Trump in somewhat larger numbers than previously did not switch their vote; Trump was able to motivate low propensity right wing Black and Hispanic voters while successfully running a campaign to suppress Harris voters.
So those Black and Hispanic men that voted for Trump are not the ones now motivated to voted for Dems, they are different cohorts.
Black voters and Hispanic voters are less likely to vote for a woman. And pan-Asian voters to some extent. Cecilia, do you vote?
DeleteAnonymouse 4:28pm, I have voted far more often than I have failed to vote, I don’t believe what you’re hanging on blacks, Hispanics, and Asians.
DeleteI guess it could be true that there is intersectionality in that, in the main, all races and nationalities are less likely to vote for women.
DeleteNot a popular idea but let's not assume it's not true.
I would never vote for Cecelia, even though I love her. But it’s not her gender. I wouldn’t vote for David, either, even though I love him, too.
DeleteAnonymouse 5:37pm, it would be easier to believe it if Comma-La had been a better candidate.
DeleteWho are you going to vote for in 2026?
DeleteAnonymouse 6:32pm, VP Vance.
DeleteGod willin’ and the creek don’t rise.
Oh, you said 2026. Sorry. I haven’t thought about it.
DeleteThere is verification of Katie Johnson's statement. If you read the link to Kate Manne you would find a rundown on the support for it. I have mentioned it here several times. That DG is still unwilling to consider her statement verified or corroborated, shows his motivation to discredit it. But beyond that, why is the default to assume she is not telling the truth? That makes Trump and Epstein's deceit automatically accepted without verification, even while Trump is a known prolific liar about everything and a convicted sex abuser and fraud. Those guys get the benefit of the doubt but Katie Johnson does not, despite being a teenage girl with no benefit by coming forward with her statement.
DeleteDemocrats need some kind of exciting new message. Something that people can relate to. Unverified statements just aren't cutting it.
DeleteI never thought I would see the day when it became controversial to say that 13 year olds shouldn't be raped by sweaty old men fantasizing about incest with their own daughters.
DeleteRuskie agent in Miami write proposal give Ukraine to Pooti poo. This is Trump diplomacy. One week or else. This why Trump keep losing all investor monies.He is a fucking idiot.
Delete"Somerby's habit of grabbing other people's words" pales in comparison to Trump's habit of grabbing women by the pussy.
DeleteDG is correct.
DeleteThe Right-wing saying is "Fuck your feelings", not "Fuck our feelings".
"One of those behaviors being the nasty habit of calling people racist, sexist, Nazi pedophiles."
DeleteAnother was the nasty habit of posting Charlie Kirk's words on social media.
Cecelia believes in Vance who believes Trump is America's Hitler, then he agreed to be his VP. Nazi bitch that she is.
DeleteAnonymouse 12:01pm, I like Vance and I like the fact that Trump went “damn the torpedoes” and selected him.
DeleteWhat are we blues supposed to do to get reds to stop doing stupid things and change their ways? Look at DG. All the evidence in the world wouldn't convince him of anything. Multiply that level of resistance by all of the MAGAs in red hats and there are no votes to pick off because these guys have to change their own minds. That isn't a good way to be, but it is why they are ruining the country. And there isn't a damned thing we blues can do about it.
ReplyDeleteWe can lead a communist revolution.
DeleteThis is a straw man argument.
DeleteSomerby has never made suggestions about how the left might better appeal to the right. Just complaints about what we have done.
DeleteSomerby didn't argue that we blues are supposed to do to "get reds to stop doing stupid things and change their ways".
Delete“Look at DG. All the evidence in the world wouldn’t convince him of anything.”
DeleteOn the contrary, there is ample evidence convincing me that you’re a dolt.
You’re the dolt. I’m a megavolt bolt.
DeleteSomerby is correct.
DeleteRemember, it was a kid raised by Republicans, not "us blues", who finally rid this great nation of that piece of shit Right-wing troll, Charlie Kirk.
We blues just need to keep on keeping on, Maga-tardation is killing their brand all on its own idiocracy. Haha. Fucking Morans.
Delete"One of the six Democratic lawmakers accused by President Donald Trump of “treason” has received a bomb threat on her home.
ReplyDeleteSen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) issued a statement on social media, saying, “Michigan State Police responded to Senator Slotkin’s home in response to a bomb threat. The Senator wasn’t home at the time. MSP searched the property and confirmed no one was in danger.”
MTG supported the release of the Epstein files and has broken with Trump on other issues, so Trump issued a Fatwah against her. She has been receiving death threats and has now announced her resignation from Congress effective Jan 5 (the end of her term). Is she the type of person who would back down without some serious threat to her safety?
But DG cannot imagine that Trump accusers might have been threatened into withdrawing a lawsuit against Trump, even one with merit? Trump has networks and businesses kowtowing to him, Apple CEO brought him a gold brick. Why would someone like Katie Johnson think she could stand up to him if he made serious threats against her life or her family? MTG isn't the only Republican to leave office after being threatened by Trump.
Given that such threats are illegal, why hasn't the DOJ initiated an investigation against the leverage being applied to members of congress (left and right)? Pam Bondi. And what might she be threatened with if she proceeded with an investigation? But DG thinks that the fact that Katie Johnson pulled her lawsuit under pressure means she was a big fat liar.
“But DG thinks . . . she was a big fat liar.”
DeleteAgain: See if you can understand the nuance. I’m not calling “Johnson“ a liar. I’m saying I don’t know, one way or the other, whether she is or isn’t. I’m also saying that those who pretend they do know are not telling the truth, because they don’t.
I despair of making it any more clear than that.
If you were a member of a jury, you would not be permitted to say "I don't know, one way or the other" but you would be asked to reach a verdict based on the preponderance of the evidence, including circumstantial evidence that may not be as conclusive as you might like. That is because we never have perfect certainty about judgments. Despite that lack of certainty, you are required as a member of a jury to reach your best conclusion.
DeleteAllow someone like Epstein or Trump to walk around as innocent because you cannot reach a perfect judgment is a travesty of what it means to deliberate under our laws. This is not an all or nothing situation in which the slightest possibility that some aspect of Epstein and Trump's behavior might have been innocent means you must say you cannot know anything because you do not have omniscience.
As I said earlier, this gives aid and comfort that wrongdoers and denies justice to their victims. Given the things we do know, the abundance of evidence, waiting for perfection is inappropriate and commits its own wrong against those who depend on our system to convict the guilty.
People are adjudged guilty by a jury doing the best it can under the circumstances. There is no requirement for perfect knowledge of truth, but we do owe it to all concerned to form an opinion and make a decision about guilt.
I cannot know whether this is a personality flaw or a misunderstanding of how thinking works, or just a way to whitewash Trump and Epstein, but it has nothing to do with how our justice system works or how humans make judgments under uncertainty (something that is well-studied and for which Kahneman won a Nobel Prize). Your insistence on perfect knowledge is sophistry.
Oh no, 7:14, you are so wrong. Jurors can decide that they don’t know. They then acquit the defendant.
DeleteThe burden of proof is on the prosecution. They must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
You keep ignoring that this is not a trial and Trump is obviously guilty of many things beyond the rapes and other misdeeds we already know about. The mysteries today concern who was being blackmailed by Epstein and who visited the island among the major scientists, academics, and famous authors who Epstein likes to invite as cover for his sex ring itself. There seems to have been a circle of men at Harvard who hobnobbed with Epstein -- what did they do besides talk about science? How corrupt was the head of JP Morgan Chase?
DeleteTrump is so obviously guilty of so much misbehavior with women that it is no wonder his wife and daughter want nothing to do with him. I trust their judgment and their front row seat on this drama. Trump is going to go senile or die before anyone takes him to court over Epstein. That doesn't make him innocent any more than your refusal to see what is plain before you. You perhaps are still saying that OJ was innocent too because a farce of a trial didn't convict him largely due to jury nullification. But black people today joke about OJ being innocent.
If you cannot stand up for young teens against rape by billionaires, what use are you as an attorney? Any of us is entitled to an opinion, and we don't need to wait for a court trial that will never happen to decide that Trump and the others surrounding Epstein are scum.
Just because the media, Somerby, TDH, the Republican Party, and even trolls like DiC, can't identify one single Republican voter who isn't a bigot---despite over a decade of trying---doesn't prove within a shadow of a doubt that there might be one.
DeleteI am a Republican voter, and I am a bigot.
DeleteMamdani wants to force school kids to learn Arabic numerals.
ReplyDeleteSharia law is around the corner.
Yet Trump glazed Mamdani at the White House.
What is going on? Why are we being replaced?
That's an attempt at humor?
DeleteDG is a troll who pretends to not know what "left" and "right" means, and supposedly is unaware that electoral politics is about motivation, not persuasion.
ReplyDeleteSince DG is a troll, he will claim to cling to these misguided and wrongheaded notions, regardless of credible evidence and arguments that challenge his ridiculous ideas.
You say DG clings to "misguided and wronghead notions, regardless of credible evidence and arguments", and that his ideas are 'ridiculous'.
DeleteWhy go to the trouble of compiling this string of free-floating adjectives? Are we supposed to be convinced of something, other than your own incoherence?
I understand 4:00 perfectly. 4:23 you just seem a bit butt hurt, maybe go pop a perc.
DeleteGreat. Which of DG's statements/arguments does any of 4:23 refer to? What counter-arguments do they advance?
DeleteSince you have no answers to those questions, in what sense do you 'understand' her 'perfectly'?
4:00 lays it out plainly, I can't help your reading comprehension issue.
DeletePlainly, yes. But with such generality that there is no way for a reader to evaluate the criticisms being made and so one way is left only with the impression that 4:00 dislikes DG's arguments and reasoning without knowing why.
DeleteBTW, Kate Manne says Ronan Farrow tried to investigate “Johnson’s” story but couldn’t locate her. Manne says Farrow is “agnostic” about her story or — get this — even her very existence!
DeleteI guess Farrow must be another right-wing pedophile defender, right?
Not any more. She says this past tense about Farrow. Things have changed with the release of more info.
DeleteManne says:
"The real conspiracy theory around Trump and Epstein is that multiple apparently unconnected women lied, and continue to lie, about Trump’s behavior. This with nothing to gain, and much to lose, by speaking out about his misdeeds."
“Farrow, for his own part, REMAINS agnostic . . . . “. Manne 11/21/25.
DeleteCan’t you write a true statement about anything? Your credibility is shot to hell with me.
I’d suggest you practice writing true sentences, such as this one: “After investigating, Ronan Farrow remains agnostic about whether ‘Katie Johnson’ is a figment of a charlatan’s imagination.”
DeleteBTW, you’d agree that Farrow is the foremost investigative reporter on sexual harassment claims of, well, all time, right?
DeleteNo
DeleteI don’t trust Ronan Farrow at all.
DeleteNo one is making the claim that David in Cal wouldn't excuse any blatant law-breaking, if it supports the bigotry he and the rest of the Right crave like a child craves sweets.
DeleteAny fool who would try to, would be laughed out of polite society for being a clueless rube.
Understatement of the Year Clinched
ReplyDeleteAn anonymous Republican Senator said, "we count on the Justice Department to be solid, and it just doesn’t seem to be solid right now.”
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5617816-senate-republicans-criticize-bondi-justice-department/
Bondi will likely face disbarment and charges in the end.
Deletewomp womp
Bondi made inconsistent statements about the alleged Epstein client list. This was remarkably foolish and embarrassing, but it's not grounds for disbarment.
DeleteBondi will face disbarment for weaponizing lawsuits against her/Trump's enemies.
DeleteThe Trump admin has a guy that heads what they call the "Department of Weaponization".
Ro Khanna was texting Epstein during hearings. Epstein would text Khanna instructions on what to say and how to act.
DeleteWhat's the source for that unlikely claim?
DeleteEpstein and Khanna are still working together today.
DeleteThe spirit of Epstein is eternal.
DeletePer usual, Somerby is misappropriating Lincoln to push his own right wing agenda: Dems should capitulate to Repubs.
ReplyDeleteBut in fact it was the weakness of American leaders, their unwillingness to stand up to right wing forces in the aftermath of the Civil War that then led to the failure of Reconstruction, that then permitted the racism and elite rule we still struggle with today.
"Per usual, Somerby is misappropriating Lincoln to push his own right wing agenda: Dems should capitulate to Repubs."
DeleteTotally false. But other than that, spot on!
4:48 gets it right, with a qualifier.
DeleteIn reality, Lincoln was moral in sentiment but moderate in application.
Lincoln did operate under a false binary: vengeance vs capitulation, thereby ignoring constructive justice and nation-building.
Lincoln misunderstood the psychology of right wingers, as does Somerby today. But today Somerby could educate himself, unlike Lincoln (there was little access to such knowledge back then), but he chooses not to, preferring the comfort of his right wing stances.
Lincoln started the Civil War by resupplying Fort Sumter, a US Army base on Confederate territory. Prove me wrong.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if the South made a strategic blunder by attacking Ft. Sumpter. What would have happened if the South had refrained from attacking Ft. Sumpter? The Confederacy was becoming more and more a fait accompli. Some foreign governments were dealing with the Confederacy. The North would have had to directly provoke a war. Would they have done so?
DeleteSome say the North DID provoke the war by resupplying the fort.
DeleteStrategic blunder. You think, Dave? They attacked the United States of America! They then endured the consequences. So yes, it was a strategic blunder. Like Japan’s strategic blunder eighty years later, which also brought catastrophic consequences.
DeleteSomebody needs to tell me how to have a Fort without supplies? The fucking stupid with these people.
DeleteFor those of you who require extreme evidence to be sure the sun came up this morning, Jason Crow has posted some of the actual death threats he has received since Trump called for his execution:
ReplyDeletehttps://digbysblog.net/2025/11/22/lets-talk-about-civility/
The morning after Trump had sex with Stormy Daniels he went down to his golf tournament and bragged to anyone who would listen, all about how he had sex with a porn star and what a stud he was. This, after he didn't buy her the promised dinner, refused to use a condom, made her engage in self-aggrandizing behaviors and then never put her up for an appearance on his show (her stated reason for being there -- to talk to him about TV collaboration). In short, he used her like a kleenex, then bragged to his friends, then never returned her calls about his show and had nothing more to do with her. In other words, he behaved like an asshole and treated her badly. She was maneuvered into the bedroom, she shrugged and gave him the sex he was demanding and then he didn't pick up the check. What an asshole.
And this is how Trump treats people in general. He stiffed his East Wing demolition contractor until they took the story to the press. Those air traffic controllers are not getting their promised $10K bonuses. Trump abuses everyone he can get away with abusing.
Why wouldn't he abuse Katie Johnson?
I hate the felon as much as the next guy, but that is a weak story man.
Delete1:28,
DeleteStep aside, and let's hear from the next guy.
It saddens me that so many men cannot find empathy for Epstein’s victims.
ReplyDeleteI feel sorry for Ghislaine, it's a start.
DeleteI don’t feel sorry for Ghislaine at all. I want her to be punished. And I want to watch.
DeleteBut Ghislaine is helping Trump to drain the swamp.
DeleteTreason, in the eyes of MAGA:
ReplyDelete"... telling servicemembers they can “refuse illegal orders,” and “No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our constitution.”
If these cowards have a problem with a particular policy, they should say so. Then we could debate and discuss the matter leading to rational understandings. Activists have advocated for all kinds of things, good and bad, e.g., racial integration, getting out of Vietnam, allowing illegal immigrants to remain here, ending DEI, etc. But these cowards are not identifying any Trump policy they disagree with or that they believe to be illegal.
DeleteIt is hilarious to see the number one Trump Lickspittle fan of Donald J CHICKENSHIT call anyone else a coward. I have witnessed on more than one occasion KING ORANGE CHICKENSHIT addressing uniformed military telling them he will be needing them to occupy American cities, so go fuck yourself Dickhead in Cal. Are you sure your parents came to this country legally? Any thoughts yet on why King Orange Chickenshit had Epstein assassinated or why he sent his lawyer to move a convicted child sex trafficker to a summer camp, fuckface? This is where you run, you fucking fascist COWARD.
DeleteThey have said blowing up tiny boats in international waters is illegal an illegal order David. What the fuck is wrong with you?
DeleteSince that video doesn't identify any specific problem, what does it mean? What should military people make of it?
DeleteOne interpretation is that it's a generalized call for the military to disobey orders, to rebel against authority. That is, the video appears to call for military personnel commit treason.
DiC, if you want to know what the video means, why not pay attention to the words it uses?
DeleteIt's crystal clear in urging servicemen not to obey unlawful orders. It says nothing of orders that are legal, hence contains no generalized call for treason.
Do you feel better now?
Liar.
Delete12:51 was directed at David, who lies as much as the felon. If David wasn't hiding under his desk at the University of Chicago, he would of been in Vietnam killing hundreds of civilians following his orders from William Calley. POS.
DeleteThat video sure got DiC's knickers all in a knot. Talk of 'cowardice' and 'treason'. It's almost as if he had a guilty conscience.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYes, Hector. The video merely calls for people to obey the law. But, obviously people should obey the law. So, why make the video? What's the point? AFter all, one could make a video like that asserting that anyone should obey the law. One could publicly urge Barack Obama or Chuck Schumer or Nancy Pelosi to obey the law.
DeleteIMO that video is implying is that the Trump and Hegseth are violating the law and giving illegal orders. But, the cowards didn't have the courage to identify any wrong-doing by Trump. Maybe they were afraid that Trump would sue them. YMMV
The idiocracy is building speed.
ReplyDelete"Mark Chadbourn
@chadbourn.bsky.social
The plan was leaked by the Russians and no one in America’s historically inept administration knew what anyone else was doing so people started getting behind it because they thought it was official policy.
Putin totally played the US, knowing full well he was up against incompetents and idiots."
Jesus these mooks are gonna get us all killed.
DeleteIf ending wars kills you Soros-monkeys, then die. Now.
The no deal does not end Putin's wars, just green lights him to replace the 11,000 lost tanks and 1.1M lost soldiers and continue to retake the former Socialist States. You either ignorant or stupid, or both.
DeleteTriggered, 11:42? Or should I say Hillary?
DeleteWhat does this Trump peace proposal have to do with ending wars?
DeleteYes I am triggered by the treasonous asshole and his demented agenda. Because I am not a deluded moran.
Delete"What does this Trump peace proposal have to do with ending wars?"
DeleteWell, what you're saying here is that you're an idiot.
Shrug. Okay, noted.