BREAKING: We semi-agree with Abernathy...

WEDNESDAY, JULY 13, 2022

...concerning those rather brisk edits: A year or so back, the Washington Post added midwestern conservative Gary Abernathy to its roster of pundits.

We rarely agree with Abernathy. That said, here's his report card for Donald J. Trump, as seen in his latest column:

ABERNATHY (7/13/22): By insisting against all credible evidence that the 2020 presidential election was fraudulent, President Donald Trump incited the Capitol riot, dangerously directed his anger toward his own vice president and, most damning of all, refused to participate in the peaceful transfer of power on Jan. 20, 2021.

Credit where due! Abernathy charges Donald J. Trump with insisting on a ridiculous claim; with inciting the Capitol riot; with putting Mike Pence's safety in danger' and with refusing to participate in the peaceful transfer of power.

We're not sure why the last of the four offenses is rated as the worst. But Abernathy can't exactly be accused of going easy on Trump.

Abernathy offers this assessment as part of a larger claim, in which he says that the January 6 committee hasn't turned up anything much that's new. Most specifically, "the effort to connect Trump to some grand conspiracy involving a shadowy network of fanatical backyard warriors and armchair militants is a bridge too far."

Or so Abernathy says.

Abernathy is referring to groups like the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys. In our view, the committee hasn't exactly made the link between Trump and those violent groups, but we're waiting to see if stronger evidence of some such pre-planning might surface.

In truth, we were most struck by a comment Abernathy made in his column about one aspect of the committee's work. This paragraph features a fairly silly complaint, followed by an observation we ourselves have made:

ABERNATHY: Of all the Trump tweets and sound bites routinely rolled out by the committee, it’s revealing that this part of Trump’s address to the Ellipse crowd on Jan. 6, 2021, is never presented: “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” On Tuesday, Trump’s replayed remarks were abruptly clipped just before he delivered that line once again. Why? Because Trump’s call to march peacefully to the Capitol undermines the narrative. Likewise, the sloppily edited video testimony of others is suspiciously clipped, sometimes midsentence. Someday, it will be informative to watch it in toto.

Should the committee play the (one) part of Trump's speech where he told his acolytes that they should proceed "peacefully?" 

Not necessarily, no. But we've been struck, as Abernathy has, by the way some bits of videotape have been (perhaps) "suspiciously clipped, sometimes midsentence." Like Abernathy, we have occasionally wondered how the statements in question might seem if viewed in their wider context.

(It has seemed to us that Ivanka Trump has been "quick-edited" a couple of times. It's surprising to us that the committee hasn't released transcripts of the wider contexts.)

Years ago, this sort of abrupt, mid-sentence clip was known as "the Maddow edit." We were surprised to learn that Abernathy has reacted this way, as we have, to some of the committee's clips.


41 comments:


  1. "Credit where due! Abernathy charges Donald J. Trump with insisting on a ridiculous claim; with inciting the Capitol riot; with putting Mike Pence's safety in danger' and with refusing to participate in the peaceful transfer of power."

    Yeah. It's either that, dear Bob, or, seeing how the election is being stolen, The Commander encouraged his supporters to protest "the steal".

    Pick the side, dear Bob.

    ...oh, sorry, did you confess to being a liberal? Never mind, then. Keep parroting your tribe's talking points, by all means...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mao, take the challenge! Provide the single piece of evidence that most convincingly demonstrates the election was stolen. Then we can debate just like citizens of a democracy should.

      Delete
    2. Learn to use a search engine, dear dembot.

      ...yeah, and try to find one not censored by liberal scumbags.

      Delete
    3. So no evidence, huh? You get to pick! The strongest one! Should be a slam dunk for you!

      You were so definitive in using the word 'stolen'--hey wait, it just occurred to me: you're not full of it, are you Mao?

      Delete
    4. Mao? Evidence?

      Full of it?

      Delete
    5. Mao won't take the challenge? This leaves me feeling like there is no strong evidence for the election being stolen. Could it possibly be that it's all cheap innuendo or outright false info? I'm sure Mao doesn't want to leave us feeling that way!

      Delete
  2. "...and with refusing to participate in the peaceful transfer of power.

    We're not sure why the last of the four offenses is rated as the worst. But Abernathy can't exactly be accused of going easy on Trump."

    The last is the worst because undermining our democracy is a crime against our nation, its government and its citizens, whereas the others are crimes against specific people (fraud, extortion, property damage, inciting riot, endangerment). By refusing to participate in the peaceful transfer of power, Trump committed sedition, plotted a coup and participated in an insurrection.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I was struck by that statement of Bob's too. Seemed like a real groaner.

      Delete
  3. "call to march peacefully to the Capitol"

    Marching peacefully to the Capitol is incompatible with breaking and entering the Capitol in order to stop the certification of the election. There is no "peaceful" way to do the latter, only to march down the street toward the Capitol. It is what happened AT the Capitol that consitutes violence and Trump did not urge peace at that point, especially when he might have defused the cries to hang Mike Pence but instead said that he deserved hanging.

    People are not quoting that part of Trump's speech because it is irrelevant to what happened, and because no one took it to mean protest peacefully on the steps or plaza in front of the Capitol -- and more importantly, because it was inconsistent with and incompatible with the many other parts of his speech where he told his supporters to fight and be strong. No one being peaceful and patriotic needs to be told to "fight". So who does Somerby think he is kidding with this crap? Who does Abernathy think he is fooling?

    Somerby says: "But we've been struck, as Abernathy has, by the way some bits of videotape have been (perhaps) "suspiciously clipped, sometimes midsentence."

    The committee is limited in time. Context is important, but they set the context before showing each clip. There is no reason to show irrelevant sentences that might confuse the message and give fuel to deniers of Trump's guilt (such as Somerby and Abernathy), when there is only 3 hours per session and focusing attention on the relevant and important pieces of evidence is more important than providing a specious defense of Trump's wrongdoing. Will anyone think that Trump is off the hook because he used the word peaceful ONCE in a speech with many other exhortations to engage in insurrection?

    How do we know he only said it once? Because the Republicans would tell us if he had said it even twice. It has been reported that Trump hid his plan to march to the Capitol from much of his staff and from those who would be concerned about safety issues. He added much of the stronger language, urging people to fight. I consider it highly likely that the word peacefully is a remnant of the original speech drafted by a staff deliberately kept in the dark about the planned march, words appropriate for a peaceful protest, not for an insurrection. There is no evidence supporting the idea that Trump cared even a tiny amount about the safety, potential for violence, well-being of police or legislators, or possibility that things might get out of hand. The evidence of Trump's lack of concern about the mayhem he unleashed will be presented in the next session, where they describe what Trump did while watching the insurrection unfold.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “A single scripted reference in the speech to Mike Pence became eight. A single scripted reference to rallygoers marching to the Capitol became four, with President Trump ad-libbing that he would be joining the protesters at the Capitol,” she added. “Added throughout his speech were references to fighting and ... courage and to be strong. The word ‘peacefully’ was in the staff-written script and used only once.”

      LOL, the only word that David in Cal clings to, and it wasn't even part of Trump's own words. Once again, David in Cal has things completely ass backwards.

      Trump speechwriter Stephen Miller said that White House lawyer Eric Herschmann told him that he wanted the lines singling out Mr Pence removed from the speech. But after it was removed, the speechwriters were ordered to “reinsert the Pence lines”.

      Yeah, don't leave out the good part!

      Delete
    2. The way David in Cal describes it, one would almost think Trump was delivering the Christmas midnight Mass that day when he unleashed his white supremacist troops on his own VP. LOL

      Delete
    3. The other thing to note about the "march peacefully" line is that Trump has been involved in about 3,500 lawsuits in his life. So it's reasonable to assume that this line, somewhat out of step with the tenor of the rest of the speech, was inserted with an eye towards indemnifying himself against potential prosecution/litigation down the road.

      Trump may be dumb but he's crafty.

      Delete

    4. Meh. We bet Dark Lord Putin advised Him to insert "march peacefully". And to wink. March peacefully - wink-wink.

      Nudge-nudge, wink-wink, say no more!

      Delete
    5. We bet Dark Lord Putin advised Him to insert 'march peacefully.

      Blackmail is a helluva drug.

      Delete
    6. I don't believe he's that crafty, Spock. And the part of the speech you were referring to, did you notice the bold text upthread at all?

      "The word ‘peacefully’ was in the staff-written script"

      Delete
    7. 11:46,

      When you go through a process 3,500 times, even a delusional dunce learns something about gaming it.

      If Trump disliked the word 'peacefully' he would have struck it out or not read it.

      Delete
    8. Fair enough. I made my comment because of the way you stated it "...was inserted with an eye towards indemnifying himself."

      Delete
  4. "Years ago, this sort of abrupt, mid-sentence clip was known as "the Maddow edit."

    I did a Google search and found that the only person who has ever used this term online, even "years ago" is Somerby himself.

    Somerby's statement isn't exactly a lie, but it isn't the truth either. It demonstrates a kind of slipperiness and disregard for honest discussion that makes him a wannabe propagandist, not a serious blogger. Most importantly, it shows that Somerby cannot be trusted. Needless to say, he has participated in some of those brief, misleading, dishonest edits himself when quoting others here, especially those he dislikes. He is not above trying to mislead by omission.

    If you have to be a crap writer and a person lacking integrity to make a case for Trump, he isn't worth the effort.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maddow knows how to break down complex issues and report on them in a new and exciting way.

      Delete
    2. I believe the show is on weeknights. She delivers news in a way that is illuminating and dynamic.

      Delete
    3. It's exciting and dynamic all right. Maybe not as illuminating though, if quotes are cherry-picked and videos edited to be out of context. But I guess she's good at simplifying/explaining things.

      Delete
    4. She connects all of the dots and provides context and clarity to issues.

      Delete
    5. I don't want to hear any crap about Maddow and her partner being arrested for shoplifting sandwiches. It was a one time, isolated incident.

      Delete
    6. I'm all for criticizing Maddow or any other news talking heads but that's just dumb. Go back to the schoolyard...

      Delete
    7. Her and her partner stole a neighbor's lambs. I guess you just want to sweep it under the rug. I get it now.

      Delete
    8. If I was your dad, I would advise you not to be so afraid of girls. They really are delightful when you get to know them. Might even help clear up your acne.

      Delete
    9. Don't pretend like it's not all been documented. The lambs, the nitrous oxide, the leather ponies

      Delete
    10. "I guess you just want to sweep it under the rug."

      Nope, I don't like Maddow. But this isn't the way to criticize her, and I'm fine with you stating it because you self-identify as a dumb-ass which is helpful to others.

      Delete
    11. So you're saying Maddow and her partner we're not arrested after being pulled over drunk in a motorcycle with a sidecar splattered and lamb's blood in upstate New York fall of 2018?

      Delete
  5. Just FYI:

    "Republican members of Congress at Dec. 21 WH meeting to talk about VP role, per Jan. 6 Cmte:

    Babin
    Biggs
    Gaetz
    Gohmert
    Gosar
    Harris
    Hice
    Jordan
    Perry
    +Rep-elect Greene"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why was Greene there? She wasn't sworn in yet and had no role in proceedings.

      Delete
  6. I would concede the point that the editing and left spin on Ivanka Trump's statement was used dubiously so far. She was just one more person telling Trump he lost. Her assessment of Barr's credibility is not central to much of
    anything.
    If She was indeed another person asking The
    President to stop the rape of the Capital, and was of
    course ignored, then what She says is more
    important.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think the most damning thing Trump said was "find me 11 thousand votes" and if you don't do that it's "risky." That's some dictator stuff. He's making a veiled threat.

    Likewise, although whoever wrote trump's speech was prescient enough to include the word peaceful in repeated speeches before he has made a different threat over and over, thst "my people will go crazy." Etc. So he didn't invite the violence like turning on a switch. First he laid the kindling, then when the time to throw the match came he lit riot off with a cute speech where he can cover and pretend he's a victim just like every other dictator who gets exiled and learns to get attention being a national crybaby to get power after some war or provocative terror acts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How did we ever get to this point where he actually flirted with having a strongman / dictator in charge. The nation needs to wake TF up.

      Delete
  8. https://www.rawstory.com/more-than-one-coup-jan-6-committee-draws-a-direct-line-to-donald-trump/

    ReplyDelete
  9. "We semi-agree with Abernathy..."

    Because Somerby never wholly agrees with anything.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Empty, misleading and useless comment - hit the trifecta!

      Delete
    2. You win a product that helps suppress farts.

      Delete
  10. Interesting post. I Have Been wondering about this issue. so thanks for posting. Pretty cool post.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Excellent site you’v? oot here.. It’s difficult to find quality writing like yours nowadays.

    ReplyDelete