Fani Willis disappears!


Our blue tribe's sad "advice universe:" Starting yesterday afternoon, it was one of the hottest topics in blue tribe cable news.

Down in Georgia, Fani Willis had seemed to say that there were going to be indictments in her probe of TrumpWorld's attempted interventions in that state's 2020 White House race.

During a court session, Willis spoke of "future defendants" and said "decisions are imminent." This was treated as major news—by CNN, to cite one example:

‘Decisions are imminent’ on charges in Trump’s effort to overturn 2020 election in Georgia, Fulton County DA says

But also by Politico, and also even by Forbes:

‘Decisions are imminent’: Georgia prosecutor nears charging decisions in Trump probe

Will Trump Be Indicted In Georgia? Fulton County DA Suggests ‘Multiple’ People Could ‘Imminently’ Face Charges In 2020 Election Probe

Nicolle and her very favorite friends puzzled about what "imminent" might be taken to mean in this context. Other discussions followed last night.

Because we don't completely trust our favorite friends, we were eager to see how the daily newspapers might cover this topic today. Our answer:

The New York Times reported on the court hearing in question, but it didn't mention Willis' statement that charging decisions are imminent. Having said that, good God!

Willis' statements haven't been reported at all by the Washington Post. Our print edition of today's Post contains no report on yesterday's court hearing. In the devolving online Washington Post, Willis' name doesn't even appear in the paper's search engine over the past week.

As we type, if you scan the online Washington Post, you don't even know that a hearing was held at all, or that Willis has made any statements! What you get instead its lots and lots of advice:

You get advice columns up the yinyang. Increasingly, the online Post is selling dumbnified advice columns and increasingly little else.

The Washington Post is going this way in the total absence of commentary from any blue tribe observers. Meanwhile, the situation over at Slate is possibly even more instructive—instructive but pitiful, sad.

At the rapidly devolving Slate, the children are currently celebrating an occasion they're calling Advice Week—"Slate's celebration of all things advice." 

The site's trademark stupidity is on full display. The gong show started with this:

It’s Advice Week! We Have Big Plans for You.
That’s right! Even more advice.

In that kick-off report, Paola de Varona shared the news about all the extras we'll be getting during this special week. That includes even more advice!

A few days later, the addled editor of the failing site dumbspoke her way through this interview with de Varona, headlines included:

The Editor Behind Slate’s Many, Many Advice Columns
An interview with Paola de Varona.

Long before I was the editor in chief of Slate, I was a devoted reader, and Dear Prudence was at the top of my list of Slate favorites, along with departed features.... So when I got here last year, I was so excited to understand how Dear Prudence—and Slate’s entire wonderful advice universe—is still so damn good and useful.

The person with the answers is our own Paola de Varona...

The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but our species' capacity for cosseted dumbness comes close to knowing no limit. Briefly, let's be candid:

The various "departed features" the editor cites no longer exist at Slate because they weren't sufficiently stupid. They've left behind a rapidly growing "advice universe"—the kind of piddle you apparently have to publish to get blue tribe readers to click.

The Washington Post is becoming an "advice universe" too—and as this happens, no one is making a sound. As of noon today, Willis' statements couldn't be found anywhere at all within the devolving Post. 

Increasingly, Tucker Carlson is out of his mind in the red tribe's tents. As our nation slides toward the sea, our own astoundingly self-impressed tribe is dumbly responding with this.


  1. We sympathize with your concerns, dear Bob, but what did you expect? Brain-dead liberals get exactly what they deserve; moreover: they get what they crave.

    ...and thank God for incomparable Tucker Carlson, the least worst establishment talking head... ...though of course there are much better political commentators; y'know, of the non-establishment variety...

    1. Do they all show up for the creepy fat slob support group?

    2. Yes, good demonstration here. The key to maintaining our integrity as liberals ("leftists" in the modern parlance) is to sink to their level and abandon our moral values. It's the only way to defend those values!

    3. Agree with the Right, instead. It messes with their skulls, because they agree with liberals about something they don't actually believe in. Obviously, this doesn't work with bigotry and white supremacy (the two, and only two, things they believe in).

    4. Or. We liberals can remain silent in the face of Klan types and eventually get called wimps who won’t stand up for anything.

    5. Those are good illustrations of sinking to their level, once your moral values are completely abandonded you'll all be ready for phase two. I still detect a slight sense of decency among the commenters here from time to time, so keep working at it.


    6. Don't worry, dear dembot: your courageous sanctimony and virtue-signaling is not going unnoticed. We are all mighty impressed.

    7. "virtue signaling"
      Who, here, mentioned playing the National Anthem at league games?

  2. Remember when the last desperate indictment Bart’s team brought trying to tie Hillary Clinton to something are other was laughed out of Court in a couple of hours? Remember how Bob crowed when it came out and his total silence when it tanked?
    Whatever. Bob has never had anything to say about Trump talking to the Gov of Georgia and telling him how many votes he wanted Him to find. Except that maybe he thinks it’s OK because Trump thought it was OK.
    Have they decided not to charge yet?
    That WOULD be a story, but for now it
    just looks like Bob wants to put a young
    black woman in her place.

    1. I agree that he is a racist misogynist. I never would have thought of that but it makes total sense.

  3. The Washington Post decided that a statement which essentially said "we're still working on it" was not news, since it reported nothing substantive. That doesn't mean that the Washington Post has given up reporting political or other hard news, nor that it is given over to advice. Somerby stubbornly refuses to acknowledge that there are links at the top of the page that allow readers to go directly to Politics and World news, bypassing all of the other topics.

    Somerby also appears entirely ignorant that the larger part of the content of print newspapers has always been advice and non-news: how to remove stains from clothing, how to make lighter pie crusts, astrology, crosswords, comics, how to help your child succeed in school, financial advice. As mh once pointed out, you can find papers from the 1920s online and see how much of the content (besides ads) was helpful to readers and not reporting at all. A lot of such articles are syndicated to help small papers fill their pages and sell more ads. And to sell ads you need to attract readers -- there are not enough hard news enthusiasts to support a paper.

    Blue tribe members apparently understand this stuff, because no one on the left thinks the Washington Post is going to hell for providing online links to the news favored by the hard-core minority, while putting the more popular stuff up front.

    1. Here are the top stories on my Washington Post today:

      U.S. agrees to supply Abrams tanks to Ukraine, a major policy reversal

      ‘I felt like we were in “Goodfellas’’’: How George Santos wooed investors for alleged Ponzi scheme

      Va. school downplayed warnings boy had gun before he shot teacher, attorney says

      They found joy on the dance floor: Monterey Park shooting victims

      I don't consider any of these to be advice or soft news, although Somerby might find it a bit squishy to hear that actual human beings, people with lives, were shot in CA while celebrating the Chinese New Year.

    2. Hell with that stuff, I want more attacks on Santos! Tell me again how he wore drag and stuff. That's journalism at it's finest!

    3. Oh and of course they're not "going to hell." This is standard business practice these days... keep your readers happy. No need to rock the boat and try to do any investigative journalism or provocative opinion pieces that challenge the status quo or anything silly like that! It's the norm baby.

    4. @3:15, your complaint might be valid if there were no Politics and other hard news in the Washington Post, but there are sections for that kind of news -- Somerby doesn't want to have to click a link to read those stories.

      Willis is not news because the word "imminent" is vague and she said nothing specific. Investigative journalism isn't going to get more of a statement from her than she wishes to give out, and major newspapers are not in the business of reporting rumors. Further, why waste space speculating about something that will be reported soon (imminent means soon)?

      Somerby is using editorial discretion as an excuse to bash a paper he dislikes lately. I don't know whether that is to support Trump's vendetta against Bezos, or whether Somerby is just irked because his subscription price increased. There is no substance to his complaint.

      You can find the opinion pieces in the Section entitled "Opinion." On my front page it appears right below the four main hard news stories (unless you think a mass shooting is not hard enough news for you).

    5. No, it's not hard enough news when there is the possibility that there could have been further mockery of republicans. There should be a more concerted effort to ramp up the language against them, being sure to compromise our values at the same time.

      And if that isn't sufficiently titillating, perhaps return to that vaunted media tradition of making fun of young, famous attractive women that lead reckless lifestyles. You know, the good stuff.

    6. Look, media shill. Let's make it simple. The media is corporate owned and a business. Their priorities are in this order:

      1. Make a profit
      2. Do not in any way criticize anything related to their corporate sponsors and the larger corporate network including its political connections
      3. Pat themselves on the back and have cocktail parties
      4. Report on issues that improve and protect our democracy

      Some of us want #4 to move up in the priority order. You either don't want that, or have a vested interests that prevents you from wanting it.

      So we are not on the same "page."

    7. None of this has anything to do with Somerby's criticism, which is that he cannot find the link to hard news at the top of the page, so he thinks he has to scroll down through everything.

    8. 5. Address whatever the Right-wing grievance du jour is, while assuring the airing of Right-wing talking points.

    9. You've just commented that the MSM (specifically the NYT from the context of the discussion) airs right-wing talking points. Just so you know.

  4. Why do liberals need so much online advice?

    Don’t they spouses, partners, protest buddies that they can turn to? Surely they have a few family members that they still speak to.

    Can’t their therapists, yoga instructors, shamans, and TikTok personalities offer up some sort of relatively sound counsel?

    Any of these sources have to be better than the made-up creepy scenarios at Slate and inanely serious dissertations on brunch etiquette from the WP and NYT.

    1. Shouldn't you be preventing CRT from not being taught in kindergarten?

  5. If you never need advice on anything, good for you. Just skip it. Newspapers are not just for liberals. Real classy mocking people who have therapists. Kind of like kicking cripples or laughing at people with facial disfigurements. Talk about smug! I’ll bet you don’t really know how to arrange flowers or paper train a puppy.

    1. Anonymouse 5:43pm, you had to go the NYT for that info?

    2. Helping people is a good thing. Only Republicans would argue otherwise.

    3. 6:15,
      I don't have Christopher Rufo on speed-dial, if that's what you mean.

    4. Anonymouse 6:25pm, a professional commentator jumped to your mind as an advisor?

      I rest my case.

    5. @6:45PM - is that a promise and will it be permanent?

    6. Anonymouse 7:52pm, ask Abby.

    7. Yes, we should all turn to the NYT for tips on brunch etiquette. If we do, the editors won't feel any additional pressure to report on topics that could impact us as a nation. They really would rather not get into that stuff. It takes away from their time planning cocktail parties...

    8. There is unlimited space online. Reporting on etiquette doesn't preclude reporting on anything else, plus it makes society more civil, which is a good thing.

  6. There is plenty of content in any newspaper that is not worth reading, the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal being a perfect example.

    1. Honey, check it out, you got me mesmerized
      With your black hair and your fat-ass thighs
      Street poetry is my everyday
      But yo, I gotta stop when you trot my way
      If I was workin' at the club, you would not pay
      A-yo, my man Phife Diggy, he got somethin' to say

  7. Original rude boy, never am I coy
    You can be a shorty in my ill convoy
    Not to come across as a thug or a hood
    But hun, you got the goods, like Madelyne Woods
    By the way, my name's Malik, the Five-Foot Freak
    Let's say we get together by the end of the week?
    She simply said, "No", labelled me a hoe
    I said, "How you figure?", "My friends told me so"
    I hate when silly groupies wanna run they yap
    Word to God, hun, I don't get down like that

    1. I believe in this, and it's been proven by research, that he who fucks nuns, will later join the church.

  8. "Fani Willis disappears!"

    She didn't disappear. She said no comment.