IDENTITY RULES: Beschloss imagines assassinations!

FRIDAY, JULY 22, 2022

Joyce Vance pricks a balloon: It's fairly obvious that Michael Beschloss shares Identity Blue.

There's nothing automatically wrong with that; we're part of the blue tribe too! That said, Michael Beschloss, a good decent person, was caught last night on MSNBC scripting an especially lurid episode of the old TV show, 24.

By trade, Beschloss is a "presidential historian," not a Hollywood screenwriter. Biographically speaking, he holds every known advantage. 

After prepping at Phillips Andover, he graduated from Williams, then from Harvard Business School. Meanwhile, his Iranian-born wife is  a former treasurer and chief investment officer of a little ramshackle storefront  known as the World Bank.

Beschloss also has the advantage of his own intelligence—and of the fact that he's decent and good. That said, he was scripting a lurid episode last night, a lurid episode in which Michael Pence, and possibly others, had possibly been targets of Secret Service "assassination plots."

Beschloss was imagining hard and blabbing on network TV. We can't link to a transcript of what he said—had he said it on CNN, we could!—but before he started his cable meltdown, he had posted this rather strange tweet:

BESCHLOSS (7/21/22): If Pence was in danger of assassination on January 6, what could now be keeping him from testifying about his near-death experience that day—and about who he thinks was to blame?

Say what? Who on earth had ever said that Pence was "in danger of assassination" on January 6? And by the way:

"Assassination" by whom?

Before long, Beschloss would be offering a lurid speculation on "cable news" giant MSNBC. First, though, he appended this additional bit of weirdness to his original tweet:

BESCHLOSS: Does Pence now need to be offered a place in the federal witness protection program to get him to testify about who tried to kill him on January 6?

Say what? Was that tongue in cheek? It's hard to know when lifeforms like this are trying to be ironic.

Beschloss went to Andover, Williams and Harvard. In recent weeks, though, the stresses of blue tribe identity rites have had him saying and tweeting things which are possibly strange.

This morning, on Morning Joe, Beschloss kept pouring it on. Shortly before 6:20 A.M.,  he referred to the saga of the missing Secret Service texts.

Behaving in much the way that Donald Trump does, he referred to the (unfounded) "possibility that this involved intended assassinations" of such people as Pence and Nancy Pelosi. He seemed to say that the Secret Service might be involved with Donald J. Trump in these possible intended assassinations. 

For the text of his fuller statement, see below. So it goes when the posers of corporate news start coming wholly undone. 

Other stars of our failing blue tribe had been tossing kidnapping speculations around. The historian Beschloss took them one better. He was now plainly suggesting that [someone in] the Secret Service may have hatched a deliberate plan to assassinate these major figures.

He offered no basis for this claim. He was creating a 24 plot, but on a "cable news" channel.

Various people, Mark Twain included, have been quoted saying this:

"A lie can get halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on."

According to the New York Times, that saying actually dates to Jonathan Swift. But in the modern context, the saying should really go like this:

"A wholly unfounded speculation is easy to pimp nationwide."

Michael Beschlosss should know much better—but the elites of our failing blue tribe have failed us again and again. 

In truth, Beschloss, who ought to know better, was imagining a very bad TV script. That said, this is the way crazed rumors start—and no one in the Morning Joe gaggle spoke up about Beschloss' conduct.

Had people in the Secret Service been plotting to assassinate Pence? By way of contrast, had they merely been planning to kidnap Pence so Trump could stay in power?

If so, which people in the Secret Service were doing such things? When it comes time to embarrass ourselves, does it even matter?

During last night's hearing, we heard about the way Pence's Secret Service agents were making farewell phone calls home as Donald L. Trump's lunatic mob spread through the Capitol Building. It didn't sound like those agents knew that they were involved in assassination or kidnapping plots.

That said, so what? The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but our highest-ranking "journalists" are often amazingly unskilled, unwise, unhelpful, self-involved, instinctively uncomprehending.

Joe and Mika continued the bullshit today; their various guests joined in. With that in mind, we'll mention something we think Joyce Vance may have said.

We think we may have heard her say it on MSNBC last night. We think we heard her say something like this:

Secret Service agents are told that they shouldn't engage in texting because texting isn't secure.

We can't tell you if she actually said it because of the transcript thing. We also don't know if the several parts of that statement are accurate. 

Nor do we know if some such state of affairs will end up playing a role in Secret Service Messagegate, if the basic facts are ever made clear about the allegedly missing texts.

We can tell you this:

The multimillionaire stars of our self-impressed tribe act more like Trump every day. They go on the air and speculate wildly. Whatever shit comes into their heads, they stupidily blurt it out.

In the meantime, we offer a bit of wisdom. That wisdom goes like this:

It takes time—sometimes a lot of time—to assemble the actual facts of some given case. In the meantime, under modern Identity Rules, every circus clown on the planet will show up on cable TV tossing unfounded bullshit around.

Beschloss was scripting a lurid episode of 24. We know that he's secretly better than that—but as we close, we'll say this:

On the real 24, the episode would have involved his wife, who would have been linked to some mullahs. This game is amazingly easy to play. Beschloss should take a step back.

At any rate, this is the world we now inhabit, thanks to people like Beschloss. Thanks to people like Mika and Joe. Thanks to the constantly spouting Lawrence and his various unrestrained guests, Claire McCaskill included. 

Increasingly, there's no unfounded speculation too lurid for our own failing tribe. Regarding the matter of the Secret Service, we will tell you this:

It will take a while lo learn the facts. It may be that we'll never learn them.

In the meantime, you'll hear every kind of unfounded dream being spewed by Joe, and by Nicolle, and by their "favorite reporters and friends." There's nothing these people won't do and say. They're more like Trump every day.

According to world-renowned anthropologists, this is what the elites of our species are frequently like. They've scratched and clawed to get to the top, and they don't intend to turn back.

Concerning the aforementioned Beschloss: Have you ever seen him say a word about the way his fellow insiders spent all those years trashing Candidates Gore and Clinton, thereby electing Bush and Trump and reinventing the Supreme Court?

Dearest darlings, use your heads! It simply isn't done!

Fuller statement by Beschloss: Starting at 6:19 A.M., Beschloss offered these remarks on today's Morning Joe:
BESCHLOSS (7/22/22): Everything we’re finding out suggests that [Trump] was at the center of a blueprint for a coup d'├ętat. It involved even the Supreme Court, Ginni Thomas was calling back and forth to Donald Trump’s chief of staff. He was calling members of Congress. 

We certainly know that the Secret Service was involved. There's a possibility, as you both have been saying, Mika and Joe, this morning, that this involved intended assassinations—never thought I’d say this about an American president—intended assassinations of the vice president of the United States, we certainly have that quote from Trump saying Mike Pence deserves to be hanged. And also, do we think that he would have been unhappy if someone, God forbid, had gone after Nancy Pelosi or other congressional leaders? You look at authoritarians in history who try to overthrow governments, there’s usually an assassination component. That, I think, is one question we’ve got to ask about the Secret Service.
We've got to ask if [someone in] the Secret Service was involved in intended assassinations! In our view, those to whom much is given shouldn't be spouting like this.

Beschloss is a decent person. In our view, he should stop acting like Trump.


  1. Ha-ha, funny story. Thanks for laughs, dear Bob.

    Actually, we heard on good authority that one of those secret service guys went to kindergarten with someone who later visited Russia. Which makes all those allegations super-credible. Ha-ha. Wink-wink nudge-nudge.

    ...yeah, and how's your life in your liberal tribe anyway, dear Bob? Enjoying it? It's entertaining, for sure...

  2. Beschloss says “If Pence was in danger of assassination on January 6” and “There's a possibility… that this involved intended assassinations—“ and “That, I think, is one question we’ve got to ask about the Secret Service.

    Should we not ask the question?

    Why is the question relevant?: “When former President Donald Trump heard his supporters chanting "hang Mike Pence" during the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, White House aides said he told them the vice president "deserves" it, according to a former White House aide [Cassidy Hutchinson] who testified Tuesday to what she saw and heard during the weeks surrounding the attack.”

    Pence could have become the modern day Thomas Becket to Trump’s Henry II.

    Unfortunately, given Trump’s psychosis, and the cult-like loyalty of his followers, including many in law enforcement, we do unfortunately at least need to ask Beschloss’ question.

    Perhaps we could look at those secret service text messages … oops.

    1. Well clowned, maybe there's a spot for you on CNN.

    2. Thanks for proving how unfit conservatives are at having a serious discussion, 4:15.

    3. you have to understand spreading rumors and innuendo is propaganda. Using words like the ones you highlight in italics are total red flags. That's how propagandists talk. This is propaganda. It's not interesting until he comes through with some actual evidence. I know you don't get that. It's psychological. It has to do with confirmation bias and ego.

    4. Speculation based on the gallows on the Capitol steps, the chants of "Hang Pence" and Trump's statement that Pence deserved hanging, is not really much of a reach, in my opinion. Those Trump-inspired insurrectionists were so out-of-control that 6 people died and hundreds were injured. Is the death of a VP, who the insurrectionists were actively searching for in the building, really that far-fetched? And don't forget that America has a history of extra-judicial violence via lynching, going back to our founding. The Federal anti-lynch law is very recent. Wouldn't the need to pass such a law suggest the possibility of that type of violence? It does to me.

      So I don't think Beschloss was out of line. I think actions have consequences and Beschloss was exploring the possibilities given Trump's actions, not writing fiction, as Somerby claims. This didn't come out of imagination, but out of Republican behavior at the insurrection, including the President's behavior.

      Somerby has consistently minimized the attempted coup. Today, he does it again by minimizes the potential consequences of Trump's actions as President during the rioting. But a president has never called for violence like this before -- why isn't there a possibility, much less a likelihood that Trump's supporters might kill someone in his name, on his implicit orders? These are the same folks who have been asking "Do we get to use our guns now?"

      A better question is why Somerby keeps defending these miscreants. He has yet to answer that one.

  3. Beschloss seems to be suffering from severe mental illness.

  4. "So it goes when the posers of corporate news start coming wholly undone."

    The rest of us who remain sane look upon these Democrat zombies with astonishment.

    1. Nope. Donald Trump’s corruption, narcissism, and psychosis, and the Republican Party that is complicit with him have dragged our discourse down to the point where it would be irresponsible not to worry that a powerful rogue federal law enforcement agency has dedicated itself to keeping Republicans (and specifically Trump) in power. Sad.

    2. It was just yesterday when sentiments like that toward the FBI meant you were aligned with Vladdy.

    3. Literally yesterday.

    4. Alas, last night the Russkies infiltrated previously wholesome federal law enforcement agencies...

    5. So, you agree 3:49 and 3:54 with wh? Good to know.

    6. ...may we suggest a permanent House committee on Un-American Activities? Led by the younger daughter of Dick Cheney. It seems to make sense...

    7. Bob, the Democrats on the committee would not allow Republicans to choose their own representatives on the panel.

      There’s no pushback against the testimony. The media credulously regurgitates every point. This morning I heard a remote play-by-play of yesterday’s committee events given to a local radio news team by an NBC News correspondent.

      Consider how you thought that Pres. Trump’s daily Covid updates were palace propaganda unwisely brought by a media that actually went to war on every Trump utterance.

      Have you ever seen any political theater as facilitated and abetted by power as this? The Watergate hearings don’t even come close.

    8. Hmmm, tough one. Benghazi?

      But yes, the clowning is reaching a crescendo and I think it's a valid question to ask how we ever come back to this to some kind of sane version of politics again. In recent times I think the idea of a productive national discourse has perhaps been destroyed permanently.

    9. Benghazi was not covered in any way comparable to this.

      I agree with your last statement. We no longer have the necessary moral and intellectual structure.

    10. Well, in my defense you wrote "political theater as facilitated and abetted by power" but you did also mention the media in the previous paragraph.

      But yeah, it's frustrating. I don't see a process in place to "reverse-clown" things, that's probably a big ask for humankind. I mean, how would it work?

    11. There never has been any "moral and intellectual structure", in our humble opinion.

      It's just that the western world is in crisis. Liberal elites are panicking. They are trying to defend their crumbling Liberal World Order, in an exceedingly totalitarian, progressively deranged manner.

      Oh well...

    12. A few weeks ago Democrats unanimously approved history's largest war budget.

    13. “Benghazi.” We see the level of conservative discourse on full display.

      Should a possibly rogue federal law enforcement agency that may be working on behalf of partisan interests, which conveniently “loses” important text messages be questioned and investigated? That is the principle at stake here.

      Leave it to a conservative to whine about “but but Benghazi…”

    14. mh, who whined about Benghazi?

    15. mh, I didn’t whine about Benghazi or even bring it up. I disagreed with someone’s comparison in reference to it.

    16. You were whining about the media coverage of it. You know you were.

    17. The original proposal was to form a bipartisan commission with exactly equal representation, modeled on the 9-11 Commission. The fucking cowardly treasonous republican political leadership flat out said NO THANK YOU. Because Donald J. Chickenshit didn't want any part of it. So shut the fuck up with your whining crybaby bullshit, Cecelia. Donald J Chickenshit wanted this stonewalled. Sorry that Speaker Pelosi was more of a patriot.

      Former President Donald Trump has been another vocal critic and has attacked the effort to create the panel as a "Democrat trap."

    18. Previously wholesome!

    19. No, mh, YOU know I was really whining about Benghazi by disagreeing with what was actually another commenter’s acknowledged halfhearted comparison to it.

      That’s your version of “honest discussion” and mm chimes in order to contrast true nutso vehemence with Mao’s wry shtick.

    20. Does your renewed interest in "honest discussion" mean that you will acknowledge that your complaint about the lack of Republican representation on the 1/6 Committee was dishonest?

    21. @4:54 Much of the increase is going to Ukraine aid. If you are not in favor of resisting Russian aggression, you are most likely a paid conservative troll, introducing your talking point into a thread where it is irrelevant to ongoing discussion.


    22. Oh. Did 'em Russkies sap and impurify all of your precious body fluids, dear 8:47 PM dembot?

    23. You seem not to realize that the Russians have been killing people in Ukraine.

  5. Benghazi….the hearing where Hillary, the main supposed culprit, showed up and testified for hours and hours?

    She was accused of murder at the Republican National Convention. McCarthy admitted the hearings were meant to damage her credibility.

    That Benghazi?

    Meanwhile, I’m sure the committee would love to hear from Trump himself, under oath.

    Or has Hillary got more balls than he has?

    1. As for Benghazi, that's politics, of course.

      And yet, it serves a purpose. The Secretary of State is an important government post, and the president needs to assign a competent person.

      With tits or without tits, wife of a former president or not, but competent. Otherwise, you'll get Benghazi. And Libya -- what happened there -- in general.

      Unfortunately, liberals insist on filling their cabinet (and judicial) posts based on tits, concentration of melanin, and other (even worse) irrelevant attributes.

      Benghazi is a direct consequence of that. In our humble opinion.

    2. Benghazi is a direct consequence of Republican Senators pretending the United Sates of America, the richest country i the history of mankind was broke, so Barack Obama wouldn't be able to help the citizens of the United States during the worst economic meltdown in over 7 decades.
      Hey Mao, look at us being bipartisan, because we both know that.

  6. Well, it was clear from the time it took to
    assemble this BS that Bob was pretty thrown
    by the Hearing yesterday. It laid out
    what was pretty well understood beforehand:
    Trump’s plan depended on terrorizing
    Pence (who had already told him
    He wouldn’t do it) into making some weird
    claim (most of these idiots themselves
    didn’t really believe but thought they
    might tantrum their way into world
    domination) that would give him a
    second term.
    The erased secret service stuff looks
    mighty stinky. When Bob sites Vance in
    saying there might not be anything on
    the lost records, he’s speculating
    himself (to Trump’s advantage, of
    course). But I’ve seen worse at
    MSNBC. There treatment of Bill
    Clinton in the last ten years had often
    been grotesque; but by then Bob
    was pretty much out of the closet
    as a Republican so he never took
    These hearings have proven the
    hiding in plain site fact that Trump should
    go to jail. The speculation should be
    kept in check, least those that want
    Trump in 2024 (like Bob) are given
    wriggle room. So the Secret Service
    story, circumstantially awful as it
    appears, should not give credence
    to the suddenly fact oriented Right.

    1. How can someone be thrown by something that was well understood beforehand?

  7. Cecelia: “There’s no pushback against the testimony.”

    You mean, pushback against the testimony of Republicans and former Trump staffers given under oath?

    That testimony? What’s the pushback supposed to be? Deranged Trump lying his ass off as he usually does?

    1. Did you stop beating your wife, dear mh? Answer Yes or No.

    2. Bob Somerby worries that our democracy may be at an end, and you, like a typical conservative troll, just make jokes and insult people. My advice: keep doing it, just to provide a picture perfect example of the typical conservative.

    3. We didn't make any jokes here, dear mh. That was a retort to your question "You mean, pushback against the testimony of Republicans and former Trump staffers given under oath?"

      If you aren't capable of understanding it, ...well... it's sad.

    4. Yes, mh, that’s what I mean. They should be challenged and questioned.

      They aren’t Liz Cheney. They have nothing to loose by their testimony and everything to gain with the right people in a way that was not their status before now.

      I’m not impugning their motives in saying that, I’m merely referencing what has always been a consideration that sprang from a consideration of human behavior.

    5. mh, right. Bob exhibits his partisanship by being worried about the state of our democracy no matter the party in office.

    6. “They should be challenged and questioned.” Then it’s too bad that Kevin McCarthy is such a clown that when pelosi refused to seat two of his five people, but agreed on 3, he took his ball and went home. This is a standard conservative move: clowning so that now you and others can whine in bad faith about a biased committee. Whiiiiinnnne.

    7. “ Bob exhibits…”? I’m talking about conservative inability to have an honest discussion. Look at your pal Mao…

    8. And before that the Republicans threw out the idea of the 9-11 type commission with nearly equal members questioning. As Hillary Clinton testified before all day, as opposed to the cowardly men of the right.
      The chickenshits have come home to roost, if you will. To a large extent this appears to have backfired, and few Americans join Cecilia in yearning
      too see America’s perv gym teacher
      screeching at Cassidy Hutchinson.
      Nor do they join Bob in wishing the
      strange goings on at the Secret
      Service would just be ignored so
      as to go away.

    9. Mao is what Cecelia aspires to be.

  8. Looking forward to watching the look on Clarence and Ginni Thomas' faces, when Republicans castrate him, and hang her for being a ni**a lover.
    Here's hoping the cabe channels will run it on a loop.

    1. You are obviously trying to make liberals look bad, but unlike most righties at least you show some imagination. An interview with crackpot Ginny will do fine, thanks.

    2. Anonymouse 6:53pm, I never considered that the flying monkey sort of anonymices could well be strawmen sock puppets trying to make regular anonymices look worse.

      Excellent point.

    3. If you worried more about what the anonymous commenters are saying, instead of who they are, you might actually learn something.

      There are a wide range of people here commenting anonymously, from different perspectives. Cecelia tries hard to lump them all together, but these are different people making different points in different ways, from complete trolls, to right wingers trying to convince us that Hispanics are becoming Republican, to thoughtful comments by both regular and occasional commenters, to the daily comments of Somerby nemeses. None of these comments are written by mice, Cecelia's annoying way of disparaging those she disagrees with.

    4. There is a great, great deal Cecilia has never considered.

    5. It is laughably egotistical for people called “Anonymous “ to insist they are distinguishable from other commenters with the same non-nym.

      The only thing that makes Flying Monkey anonymices identifiable from other anonymices is the Flying Monkey troll quip/posts, and I’m sure there are regular commenter anonymices who do both sorts of comments.

      Anonymouse means never having to say you’re sorry for anything you write. That’s why you’re anonymous.

      You made your choice.

    6. Anonymouse means never having to say you’re sorry for anything you write.

      Bwahahaha!!! When have you ever apologized for being completely catestrophically wrong about everything?

    7. No one is “completely categorically wrong about everything”.

      Not even anonymices.

      That is anonymouse thinking in a nutshell (and “nut” is certainly the operative word with you, mm).

    8. However, you are completely discernible as being mm though currently undercover.

      That says a lot.

    9. haha, you can't even quote me accurately from a comment right under your nose. you ditz

    10. "No one is “completely categorically wrong about everything”."

      Why won't you take Bob's advice and listen to "the Others"?

    11. Do we know this with absolute certainty?

  9. Think of how long Bob must have tried to square up things by using Trump’s “peaceful” moment. Before we learned his daughter talked him into it under protest. You were right Bob, it was a bridge too far.

  10. Somerby would be reluctant to talk about identity issues in this news item too, I'll bet

    1. A Washington State man threatened twice this week to unleash racist violence on a Buffalo supermarket, officials said on Friday. The threats came two months after a gunman allegedly driven by white supremacist hatred killed 10 Black people at another store in the city.

      The Washington man, Joey David George, made the threats in phone calls to a Tops supermarket on Buffalo’s Elmwood Avenue, saying he planned to use assault rifles and other weapons he had to kill Black people at the store, according to a federal criminal complaint.

      Mr. George, 37, of Lynwood, Wash., also said in the calls that if he did not find people to kill at the Elmwood Avenue store, he would go to a second Tops supermarket — the one that was the site of the racist massacre in May — and kill people there, the complaint says. He ranted about a “race war” during his second call to the store, according to the complaint.

    2. That's "future Republican Senator, Joey David George", to you.

  11. Are there any sane or moral Democrats left?

    1. Hey don’t mess with Bob’s fan base.

    2. Democrats don't have any values. Unless state power and endless war are values.

    3. 5:12,
      So, you're not sure if that first sentence is true? Please go away, and don't come back until you can make a definitive statement.
      You don't see me hedging that Republicans care about something other than bigotry and white supremacy, do you?
      That's because, before I post something, I take the time to do the research to make sure it' s true. You should do the same.

    4. Why don't you list some Democratic values? Make a list and we will go through it one by one

    5. 1. Voting rights

    6. 2. Abortions for men

    7. 3. Free sterilization for children

    8. Is the Democratic Party "anti-rape", or does it just seem like it in comparison to the GOP?

    9. Even Jeffrey Epstein seems "anti-rape" when you compare him to Republicans (on the Supreme Court).

    10. "An inmate at Illinois’ largest women’s [sic] prison says she was raped by a transgender inmate who was transferred into her housing unit last year, and claims Illinois Department of Corrections officials conducted a “sham investigation” to help cover up the incident."

    11. 11:02 -- what is wrong with supporting voting rights?

    12. "A trans-identified male who used his own 7-year-old daughter to make sadistic child sexual abuse material has quietly been transferred to the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women [sic] in New Jersey."

    13. "A transgender Rikers inmate raped a female prisoner while in the women’s [sic] section of the jail and has been sentenced to seven years, officials said Monday.

      Ramel Blount, 33, who goes by Diamond Blount, pleaded guilty to attempted rape April 7 in an apparent plea deal.

      Investigators said Blount — who was housed in the female section of the facility — approached a 33-year-old female inmate in the bathroom at the Rose M. Singer center Feb. 8, 2021, after the victim had just finished showering."

    14. OK, so you are admitting that you misrepresented the situation with what you posted here.

      Are you aware that most of those who are found to have raped female inmates are guards? Has anyone demanded that only female guards be hired?

      When an inmate stabs another inmate in prison, does anyone demand that no criminals be housed with inmates?

      I think prisons should be safer places, but I disagree that refusing to house transgender prisoners with their identified gender is going to achieve that. These are criminals we are talking about, regardless of gender identity.

    15. Democrats defending rapists now.

    16. Not just defending. Actively assisting and facilitating.

    17. John F. Kennedy drugged and raped his intern.

    18. 1:45, nothing is wrong with voting rights. I support it. That's why I am a Democratic voter.
      You need to ask republicans who work night and day to suppress votes. Donald J Chickenshit is still trying to toss hundreds of thousands of certified legal votes from the 2020 election.

    19. Democrats are OK with the violent rape of women if the rapist says he’s a woman. When will the sickness end?

    20. Democrats never talk about class issues or how powerful big business interests take advantage of common people and workers. They can't because they participate in it with powerful big business interests.

    21. "Democrats":
      I think you mean "men.

  12. Most striking is that Bob today abandoned his (absurd Republican) premise that if Trump believed what he was doing was correct he is excusable. Pretty hard to sell that with the timeline at the White House. We”ll see if he try’s again…

  13. "A Pennsylvania woman who entered the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot and later recorded herself saying she wanted to shoot House Speaker Nancy Pelosi “in the frigging brain” has been sentenced to 60 days behind bars, the Washington Post reports."

    But Somerby thinks that hypothesizing an assassination of a political figure during the riot is beyond imagining, not a possibility.

    1. The Democrat who attempted to murder Lee Zeldin was released the same day in accordance with the sick policies of mentally deranged Democrat officials.

    2. 12:48,
      My heart bleeds for you.
      Post your address, and I'll send you a "Trump: Fuck Your Feelings" t-shirt to cheer you up.

    3. "Mr. Zeldin has long made public safety a centerpiece of his campaign against Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat. But he and his allies argued on Friday that the episode viscerally drove home the need to increase policing and tighten New York’s bail laws to make it easier for judges to hold people charged with certain crimes.

      “Only in Kathy Hochul’s New York could a maniac violently attack a candidate for Governor and then be released without bail,” Nick Langworthy, the New York Republican Party chairman, wrote on Twitter. “This is what happens when you destroy the criminal justice system.”

      This is also what happens when you pay a shill to fake an attack on you at a campaign stop, in order to emphasize your law-and-order campaign issue.

      They don't exactly say what the pointy weapon was. If it were a knife, the report would say so. It could have been a cucumber -- a deadly, deadly cucumber.

      But this is how Republicans would analyze the news, if places were reversed. Recall how they first claimed no 10 year old had been raped, that the whole story was made up? This story seems fishy enough to be a Republican stunt.

    4. @12:48 calls this a murder attempt:

      "An attempted assault on Representative Lee Zeldin, the Republican candidate for governor of New York, inflamed a fierce debate over the state’s public safety laws on Friday, hours after a man accused of charging the candidate with a pointed weapon was released without bail."

      An attack isn't a murder attempt if there is no possibility of hurting someone. For example, when the anti-fur people threw paint on those wearing fur coats, it was not a "murder attempt" because the paint has no ability to physically injure the people in those coats. This incident was not described as a "murder attempt" in the news reports, most likely because the pointy object in question was perhaps a toy or a TV remote or some object without the capacity to inflict serious injury.

      Note that this is called an "attempted assault," implying that the candidate was not even assaulted. It may be that the person who wanted to assault him was prevented from completing that act, perhaps by campaign staff. If he had assaulted the candidate, this would be described as an "alleged assault". I am beginning to think that the assaulter was a process server and the "pointy object" was a subpoena, or some similar legitimate thing he was attempting to deliver. So what does that say about the term "maniac"? Actual maniacs aren't released onto the street, bail or no bail. They are hospitalized for observation until it is clear they are not a threat to themselves or others.

      So something is very flakey about this story. Maybe Somerby will discuss it? (Don't hold your breath.)

    5. "The Democrat who attempted to murder Lee Zeldin..."

      How do they know this guy was a Democrat? Did they find a "manifesto" on his computer, that said "black people are human"?

    6. ""NY GOP Rep. Lee Zeldin is blaming the release of the man who allegedly attacked him on bail reform. The man was released because the DA very strangely charged him with a non-bail eligible offense. That DA - Sandra Doorley - is co-chair of Zeldin's campaign," New York attorney Rebecca Kavanagh wrote."

      I knew there was something fishy about this situation.

  14. Donald Trump had 4 years to teach every man, woman, and child how to file for bankruptcy, but he frittered away his time giving corporations and the rich a HUGE tax break, and trying to gaslight a viral pandemic as if it was some common NY Times political reporter.
    Sorry. No do-overs.

  15. What's with all the Negative Nancys on TDH?
    The parties aren't that far apart. For instance, both sides know Republican voters only care about bigotry and white supremacy. That "bi-partisanship" just needs to be emphasized more so we can build on it.