WAR AND TOWN: When McConnell offered a gift to Our Town...


...seven stars rushed to reject it: He didn't say it on the Senate floor, then just leave it at that.

He didn't leave it at that! After he gave his speech in the Senate, a certain silver-tongued orator picked up his fountain pen. 

He delivered his speech all over again in a guest opinion column—in the Wall Street Journal, no less! Tough-talking headline included, this is the way he began:

Acquittal Vindicated the Constitution, Not Trump

Jan. 6 was a shameful day. A mob bloodied law enforcement and besieged the first branch of government. American citizens tried to use terrorism to stop a democratic proceeding they disliked.

There is no question former President Trump bears moral responsibility. His supporters stormed the Capitol because of the unhinged falsehoods he shouted into the world’s largest megaphone. His behavior during and after the chaos was also unconscionable, from attacking Vice President Mike Pence during the riot to praising the criminals after it ended.

The silver-tongued solon to whom we refer is none other than Mitch McConnell. Let's get clear on what he said in his Wall Street Journal column:

The headline said the "acquittal" in Trump's Senate "trial" wasn't a vindication of the former commander. McConnell may not have written that headline, but he surely wrote the text of his column. 

We'll guess that he wrote it in longhand. At any rate, what he wrote could almost be seen as "stunning." 

At the very start of his column, the federal government's highest-ranking Republican said the former commander-in-chief bears moral responsibility for the "shameful" (and deadly) riot at the Capitol Building.

He said there's no question about that! As he continued, he said Trump had earned that responsibility, at least in part, due to the "unhinged falsehoods" he'd been spewing concerning November's election.

(Being an experienced grownup, McConnell may have known that a phrase like that is more effective, as a persuasive device, than a fighting word like "lies." We're just taking a guess this choice of language.)

Briefly, let's review:

In his column, McConnell repeated what he'd already said on the Senate floor. The top-ranking Republican in the federal government said that Donald J. Trump was morally responsible for the deadly lunacy which took place on January 6.

Beyond that, he said the former commander's claims about November's election had been pure bunk. He explicitly said that Trump's endless claims had been falsehoods—unhinged falsehoods at that.

Coming from the top-ranking Republican, such statements might almost seem stunning. On Monday evening, we learned that one (1) cable star had reacted that way in real time.

On Monday evening, Lawrence O'Donnell went on at length, playing tape of what McConnell had said in his Senate address. Eleven minute into his paean, O'Donnell reported how he himself had felt, in real time, when he watched McConnell speak.

By now, O'Donnell was speaking with David Cicilline (D-RI), one of the House impeachment managers. This is what he said:

O'DONNELL (2/15/21): I want to start with Mitch McConnell's statement on the Senate floor.

I stayed glued to the Senate floor after you [impeachment managers] left—I expected some speeches. Chuck Schumer delivered what may be the best speech I've ever seen him deliver, and he's delivered plenty of good ones, about your work. And then, to my shock and amazement, Mitch McConnell stood up, and by the time he was three or four sentences into it, I was absolutely stunned by what I was seeing. 

He said that Schumer gave a great speech. But he said he wanted to talk about McConnell's statement.

Lawrence said he'd been shocked and amazed by what McConnell said. He said that, as he watched McConnell speak, he was "absolutely stunned" by what he saw unfolding.

He asked Cicilline if the House managers had also been "stunned" by McConnell's address. 

"Yes," Cicilline said. "It was obviously an acknowledgement, from the Republican leader in the Senate, that the House managers had done their job, that we'd established the former president's guilt of a constitutional crime" (our emphasis). 

O'Donnell had been absolutely stunned by what he saw. Taking a few interpretive liberties, we'll characterize his reaction as follows:

Lawrence O'Donnell was prepared to accept McConnell's gift. He was prepared to take yes for an answer—to drink from a glass half full.

McConnell hadn't voted for conviction, but he had offered a gift. As he spoke on Monday night, O'Donnell specifically said that McConnell's suggestion that Trump should possibly be prosecuted had made it impossible for Lindsey Graham to conduct guerrilla war during Merrick Garland's confirmation hearing next week. 

O'Donnell said that McConnell had taken a "weapon" out of Graham's hands. We'll move past that as we imagine why O'Donnell was "stunned" by what he saw.

As noted, McConnell is the highest ranking elected official in the others' town! When such a person agrees with the claims being made in Our Town, we've been given a very large tool to use in the act of persuasion.

It's no longer the corporate-paid loudmouths in Our Town who are saying that the commander engaged in "unhinged falsehoods." It's now the loudmouths here in Our Town—joined by the leading official in Theirs!

Do we self-impressed losers here in Our Town want to persuade The Others? Do we want to peel one percent of the public away from Trump, then perhaps another percent, then perhaps four or five more?

Do we want to peel such people away? Or is it perhaps beneath our dignity to speak to such obvious lessers?

Alas! Many millions of people believed the former commander-in-chief when he said, and said and said, that the election had been stolen. Many millions of people still believe that crazy claim.

(Who knows? Trump may believe it himself!)

Do we want to persuade a chunk of those people that Trump's claims have been crazy and false? If we do, might it help that the highest official in Their Town has said the same darn thing?

If we want to peel voters away from Trump, McConnell offered a gift. O'Donnell seemed to understand that fact. Very few others did.

Tomorrow, we'll show you what we saw after McConnell spoke, as we continued to watch the leading "cable news" channel here in Our Town. As a spoiler, we'll state an anthropological point:

According to leading experts, our brains aren't wired in such a way as to make us want to persuade The Others. Dating back into prehistory, we've always been wired to march off to war, disconsolate scholars all tell us.

Tomorrow: Watching the less-than-magnificent seven, followed by Senator Tester


  1. "The headline said the "acquittal" in Trump's Senate "trial" wasn't a vindication of the former commander."

    The Commander doesn't need any vindication, dear Bob.

    The liberal establishment, on the other hand, the cult, that is so scared of the people that it feels it has to protect its managers in DC by military force, is not likely to hold on to power by Orange Man Bad hate-mongering.

    It might for a while, but not indefinitely, dear Bob. And Orange Man Bad hate-mongering is all they have. Tsk.

  2. Where to begin?

    “Being an experienced grownup, McConnell may have known that a phrase like that is more effective, as a persuasive device, than a fighting word like "lies."”

    What dumbassery. McConnell said this in his speech:

    “The mob was fed lies. They were provoked by the president and other powerful people, and they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like.”

    Is it now ok for us dumb liberals to use the word “lie” because McConnell has deigned to make it acceptable? If not, why not?

    And it was just recently when Somerby even objected to journalists using the term “falsehood”.

    This still remains a bogus assertion: “McConnell's suggestion that Trump should possibly be prosecuted had made it impossible for Lindsey Graham to conduct guerrilla war during Merrick Garland's confirmation hearing next week.” Graham is in Trump’s camp at this point, not McConnell’s.

    “When such a person agrees with the claims being made in Our Town, we've been given a very large tool to use in the act of persuasion.”

    Sure. It had to be McConnell. Ok.

    “Do we self-impressed losers here in Our Town want to persuade The Others?”

    Why in the hell does Somerby think everybody was making such a big deal about those 7 Republicans who voted to convict? It was precisely for this reason. Dems and journalists were going out of their way to praise the courage of those senators. And at least they didn’t hide behind procedural bullshit. It was McConnell who made sure the trial occurred after Trump’s departure, so he and 42 others could vote to acquit.

    McConnell is trying to prevent Republican voters and donors from leaving the party in the aftermath of a hideous assault on our government. It seems appropriate to point out his two-faced approach and hang the criminal Trump around his neck. He did as much to enable Trump as anyone. And he has been censured by his own state GOP, so I guess the mainstream McConnell critics are just making common cause with the Others.

    And if Biden’s DOJ does decide to go after Trump, who Somerby assures us is the most popular figure on the right, what do you think Somerby would say? “Libs just love to punish the Others. It’s all we know”.

    And in the spirit of unity with The Others, I’d like to say that McConnell is a dour, unsmiling political hack, courtesy of Donald Trump.

  3. “McConnell's suggestion that Trump should possibly be prosecuted had made it impossible for Lindsey Graham to conduct guerrilla war during Merrick Garland's confirmation hearing next week.”

    Why would McConnell try to subdue Graham? Has he ever done that? Why would Graham feel any need to rein in his attacks? Why does McConnell’s speech render a graham attack “impossible?” TDH readers have been assured that anything is possible, and on the scale of things that are highly possible, Graham being an asshole is pretty high up there.

  4. McConnell is two-faced. He engages in sophistry to advance his agenda.

    Perhaps a little skepticism is in order here. Is he trying to lay a trap for Democrats? If Dems take the bait, will he just ramp up the gaslighting? Did he actually call for the prosecution of Trump? Would he really support it? Why did he pronounce Trump guilty in a post-trial speech after engineering his acquittal? Will he treat Biden any differently than he treated Obama? Will he call out Senators Cruz and Hawley by name as being some of the “powerful people” provoking election lies? Anything is possible.

    There’s a saying: “ don’t look a gift horse in the mouth.” I always found that counterintuitive.

    Perhaps a better saying: “Beware Greeks bearing gifts.”

    And perhaps one should add “beware of self-proclaimed liberal-hating liberals urging liberals not to look a gift horse in the mouth.”

  5. Unfortunately, no amount of facts, logic or reason will ever convince Trump supporters. Look at the reaction that Adam Kinzinger received from his own family! They are disowning him.

  6. With the exception of Mayorkas’ Senate confirmation vote (56-43), the other Biden nominees have gotten massive bipartisan approval:

    Merrick Garland isn’t terribly controversial, or radical, so it’s unclear how any potential antics by Graham could derail his nomination.

  7. It doesn't help the Dems to paint Trump as unhinged or insane, because he won't be a candidate again. It's time for Dems to start demonizing potential 2024 candidates, like Cruz and DeSantis and Cotton.

    1. Hmm. Why would he not run again? Interesting.

      As far as “demonization”, Democrats don’t need to take a page from the Republican playbook, but the following seem appropriate:

      “Crazy Donald” or “Crooked Donald” (if he runs again);
      “Lyin Ted” has a ring to it.

      For Cotton, maybe “Low Energy Tom”; DeSantis: “Radical Fascist?”

    2. Demented Don is better -- everything with alliteration is better. Then you have Tramping Ted, who goes travelling during an apocalyptic disaster in his state; Demented DeSantis; Cretinous Cotton.
      Dems don't have to demonize Trump; he does that all on his own.
      We are witnessing a significant bifurcation in the GOP. Some are still vying for the Trump cultists; while others decided that they could do better by separating themselves from the unhinged cult.

    3. Or just demonize the policies they support like deregulation and trickle down economics which both never worked and obviously only exist and only ever existed to further enrich their richest donors at the expense of the common good.

    4. It does help the Dems to paint Trump as unhinged or insane though. Are you fucking crazy? Painting Trump as unhinged or insane, which is clearly the case from his actions and words, is the gift that will keep on giving to the Democrats for at least the next half century.

      The Republican Party is finished thanks to their insane greed and Trump. Dems will hammer Trump's insanity and the slavish allegiance of Republicans to him for far, far longer than the rest of your life.

      The rest of your life will be dominated by Republican defeats and Dems painting Trump (accurately) as insane.

  8. Packers and Movers Bangalore - Reliable and Verified Household Shifting Service Providers Give Reasonable ###Packers and Movers Charges. Cheap and Best Office Relocation Compare Quotation for Assurance for Local and Domestic House Shifting and Get estimates today to save upto 20%, ***Read Customer Reviews - @ Packers And Movers Bangalore

  9. My husband and I have been having lots of problems living together, he never gives me attention or makes me happy because he has fallen in love with another woman outside our marriage. I tried my best to make sure that my husband leaves this woman but the more I talk to him about it the more he makes me feel sad and unhappy, My marriage started leading to divorce because he no longer gives me attention. I wanted to forget him but i love him and didn't want to lose him. We have been married for years and he is all I could call a true best friend and best in all, the man that handles my problems perfectly, the man that makes sacrifices for ,my happiness. I wanted him back in my life badly and I was so confused. My Friends told me to buy books about relationships, so I went online for relationship books while I came across a spell caster called Dr Emu. I read testimonies and reviews about him so I contacted him immediately, explained my problems to him. Same day , he casted a spell for me and assured me for 2 days that my husband will return to me and to my greatest surprise the third day my husband came knocking on my door and begged for forgiveness. I am so happy that my love is back again and not only that, we are about to get married again, he proposed. I wouldn't stop talking about him. Contact him today if you need his help via email: emutemple@gmail.com and you will see that your problem will be solved without any delay. Website: https://emutemple.wordpress.com/