THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2024
As opposed to what you might hear: Actually yes, we know what we said.
Yesterday afternoon, we said we'd walk you thrown an appalling pseudo-conversation which took place on that morning's Fox & Friends.
During the event in question, Lawrence Jones, on the road in Wisconsin, was completely unable to see the two young women standing right there before him. He was completely unable to hear what the two young women were saying.
As he towered over the pair of impressive, well-intentioned young women, he simply churned his agitprop at them, then went on his angry, full-certitude way.
That's the best we're going to do with yesterday's "conversation." It's depressing to transcribe such imitations of life, especially so in full knowledge that every major Blue American org is determined to look away from these unhelpful manifestations.
That said, let us add this:
This morning, Jones and the other friends flipped their program's script. Early in the 6 o'clock hour, he was in a diner in Warminster, Pa., speaking to a roomful of Trump supporters.
Needless to say, those friends and neighbors have every right to support whichever candidate they choose. On balance, we don't agree with their choice of candidate—but they don't agree with ours!
The imitation of life begins when Fox arranges to fill such diners with people who support the Fox & Friends line, but also with nobody else. Jones then walks through the room, letting the customers recite the talking points he and the other friends would otherwise have to recite for themselves.
Just a thought:
If Fox viewers watch enough of these stage-managed performances, they may well have a hard time believing that Candidate Biden actually got more votes than Candidate Trump back in 2020. In fact, it might become hard to believe that Biden got any votes at all!
Such are the wages of radical "segregation by viewpoint." Concerning which, we've been wanting to review a basic question, one our own thought leaders in Blue America seem inclined to misstate at this point.
The question goes like this:
Why did Michael Cohen get sentenced to three years in prison?
This past Monday night, on MSNBC's primetime Trump On Trial program, one all-star panelist after another kept answering that question in a way which struck us as baldly misleading.
(These presentations alternated with references to the doorman's story about Donald Trump's love child, with the panelists generally forgetting to mention the fact that the doorman's story was false.)
Why was Cohen sentenced to prison? Was it because of the "hush money" payments?
That's what members of the all-star panel kept saying that night. It seemed to us that they too might be engaged in an imitation of life.
Why was Cohen sentenced to prison? Was it because of the "hush money" payments?
Tomorrow, in the afternoon, we'll offer a fuller discussion. The answer we give you won't be precise.
There isn't a single link in this essay that would allow us to understand what the hell Somerby is talking about now.
ReplyDeleteSo you don’t have to waste your time.
DeleteToo late.
DeleteFool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
DeleteIt is easier to misrepresent something when others cannot follow along.
DeleteAnon 4:20
DeleteCan't get fooled again.
I would look into the details of Michael Cohen’s legal issues, especially focusing on the "hush money" payments and other charges that led to his sentencing.
DeleteI posted a link to the justice.gov indictment information so that you could do that.
DeleteHe's talking about the impact of performances by Fox News on their viewers' beliefs and discusses the misleading statements made about Michael Cohen's prison sentence.
DeleteCohen plead guilty to charges of tax evasion, making false statements to a federally insured bank, and campaign contribution violations.
ReplyDeleteOnly the last of these (two counts) are relevant to the charges against Trump.
And, yes, the campaign violations involved the Trump campaign's agreement with the Enquirer.
DeleteSo, Cohen only went to jail for doing two things for Trump. Glad you cleared that up. If only he was “disordered” we could have forgotten about the whole thing.
DeleteHere is the description of charges to which Cohen pled guilty, provided by the Justice Department itself:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/michael-cohen-pleads-guilty-manhattan-federal-court-eight-counts-including-criminal-tax
Somerby says:
"Why was Cohen sentenced to prison? Was it because of the "hush money" payments?
That's what members of the all-star panel kept saying that night. It seemed to us that they too might be engaged in an imitation of life."
The odd reference to "imitation of life" refers to falsity and implies the panel are lying. But here is what the Justice Department document says:
"Second, on October 8, 2016, an agent for an adult film actress (“Woman-2”) informed Editor-1 that Woman-2 was willing to make public statements and confirm on the record her alleged past affair with Individual-1. Chairman-1 and Editor-1 then contacted COHEN and put him in touch with Attorney-1, who was also representing Woman-2. Over the course of the next few days, COHEN negotiated a $130,000 agreement with Attorney-1 to himself purchase Woman-2’s silence, and received a signed confidential settlement agreement and a separate side letter agreement from Attorney-1.
COHEN did not immediately execute the agreement, nor did he pay Woman-2. On the evening of October 25, 2016, with no deal with Woman-2 finalized, Attorney-1 told Editor-1 that Woman-2 was close to completing a deal with another outlet to make her story public. Editor-1, in turn, texted COHEN that “[w]e have to coordinate something on the matter [Attorney-1 is] calling you about or it could look awfully bad for everyone.” Chairman-1 and Editor-1 then called COHEN through an encrypted telephone application. COHEN agreed to make the payment, and then called Attorney-1 to finalize the deal.
The next day, on October 26, 2016, COHEN emailed an incorporating service to obtain the corporate formation documents for another shell corporation, Essential Consultants LLC, which COHEN had incorporated a few days prior. Later that afternoon, COHEN drew down $131,000 from the fraudulently obtained HELOC and requested that it be deposited into a bank account COHEN had just opened in the name of Essential Consultants. The next morning, on October 27, 2016, COHEN went to Bank-3 and wired approximately $130,000 from Essential Consultants to Attorney-1. On the bank form to complete the wire, COHEN falsely indicated that the “purpose of wire being sent” was “retainer.” On November 1, 2016, COHEN received from Attorney-1 copies of the final, signed confidential settlement agreement and side letter agreement.
COHEN caused and made the payments described herein in order to influence the 2016 presidential election. In so doing, he coordinated with one or more members of the campaign, including through meetings and phone calls, about the fact, nature, and timing of the payments. As a result of the payments solicited and made by COHEN, neither Woman-1 nor Woman-2 spoke to the press prior to the election."
The statement goes on to describe the falsification of business records and Trump's reimbursement of Cohen in 2017.
This statement is clearly stating that the charges to which Cohen pled guilty include the hush money payments to cover up the affairs with McDougal and Daniels. Cohen was sentenced to prison because he pled guilty to these charges.
So, on what basis can Somerby possibly claim that Cohen did not go to jail because of the hush money payments and their cover up during the 2016 election? To imply otherwise, as Somerby seems to be doing, is a baldfaced lie in the face of the government's own documents, freely available for anyone to read at Justice.gov.
Somerby says:
"Tomorrow, in the afternoon, we'll offer a fuller discussion. The answer we give you won't be precise. "
Not precise. Is that another euphemism for lie?
Somerby is a huge sleaze this afternoon. He should be ashamed to have posted this crap.
Somerby occasionally complains about mind-reading but he is not above doing it himself. For example, he says:
ReplyDelete"During the event in question, Lawrence Jones, on the road in Wisconsin, was completely unable to see the two young women standing right there before him. He was completely unable to hear what the two young women were saying."
How does Somerby know what Jones was able to hear or see? He doesn't. Neither do we. Yet Somerby confidently says that he could not hear or see what two women were saying.
Somerby's choice of words to describe Jones is odd. It may be obvious that he is ignoring those off-script women in order to talk over them. But Somerby instead gives Jones the benefit of the doubt by saying that he just can't hear them. And thereby Jones is given a bye and excused from responsibility for his actions by virtue of sensory disability, not bad intentions.
And then Somerby takes that a step further by blaming the blue tribe for what Jones did on his show:
"It's depressing to transcribe such imitations of life, especially so in full knowledge that every major Blue American org is determined to look away from these unhelpful manifestations."
Jones didn't do anything bad. We did, says Somerby. We are the cause of his depression, not Jones. Yes, clearly we should all be riding more trains, so that when Jones misbehaves, we can do what? Haul him back and force him to listen, complain that he isn't giving the left a fair chance on his show. Yes, that will clearly solve everything wrong with right-wing cable news.
Maybe not, but the incident seems to have given Somerby more valuable ammo to aim at the left. We are the reason Jones cannot see or hear, because it is obviously not the fault of anyone on the right that they don't listen to our arguments.
Blaming the victim is a common trait among right wingers.
DeleteTomorrow: Trump steals candy from children but the left made him do it.
ReplyDeleteOh that's OK Bob! you are plenty used to a lack of
ReplyDeleteprecision in your Republican defense BS. I hope you
don't have to go all the way to your response to the
question of why you blame Biden for not acting on
immigration when his bill was killed on Trump's
orders.
Bob's response: EVERY single liberal will always
go and bring that up!!!
Oh, glad you cleared that up.
Anyone can access trial transcripts. Just click here:
ReplyDeletehttps://ww2.nycourts.gov/press/index.shtml
Thank you. It's rare around here for someone to provide a source of actual information.
DeleteIncluding Somerby. If he is interested in the actual case and the actual charges, he could read the transcripts and find out precisely what the price decision is saying. Instead, he calls it all into question by quoting the news media.
DeleteTypo: …what the prosecution is saying.
DeleteThe Fox & Friends segment in question is here:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.foxnews.com/video/6351578734112
It's hideous.
thx
DeleteI watched it and didn’t think it was anything like what Somerby described. After Jones asked a question or made a statement, he gave the mic back to the girls and listened while they spoke, not talking over them. I thought they churned their agitprop (Somerby’s word) at him as much as he did at them. Somerby is pro-Palestinian and his bias shows in his description. I hadn’t realized that Jones is black but it does explain Somerby’s personal animosity toward him. Jones isn’t towering over them on purpose to intimidate them. He is tall. This is a ludicrous set of complaints by Somerby.
DeleteFrom Somerny’s description of the girls, I yhought they were bucking the current by bravely saying controversial things, but they were interviewed at a proPalestinian rally and the only one disagreeing was Jones. Perhaps this is why Somerby provided no link and no clear description.
"Somerby is pro-Palestinian..."
DeleteWhut now?
He stated his pro-Palestinian support when the first uproar over student protests at Harvard appeared in the media. He supported their protests over the administration’s response and complaints of Jewish students and expressed an affinity for the Palestinian side, without expressing concern over the 10/7 attack by Hamas. It surprised me too because Somerby usually backs off of stating definite opinions. But look at his praise for the two pro-Palestinian girls today.
DeletePalestinians deserve international solidarity.
DeleteBoth 10/7 and the genocide in Gaza are horrible.
DeleteHowever, there is a clear difference, an asymmetry.
There were about 1.2k innocent Israelis killed on 10/7, and there have been about 34k innocent Palestinians killed so far - half of whom are children.
Off topic -- Some here think these college demonstrations are anti-Israel, but not anti-Semitic. They are both. Here are some actual examples.
ReplyDeleteThat’s what we saw at Cooper Union, where a braying mob of what we’ve been assured are only anti-Israel protesters threw themselves at the doors of a library in which a handful of Jewish students took refuge. Chanting “globalize the intifada,” in reference to the outbreaks of violence that targeted Israeli civilians with murder, the demonstrators terrorized their Jewish colleagues and compelled them to evacuate their refuge under guard. The Jewish students are suing their school for “being locked in a campus library to shield them from an unruly mob of students that was calling for the destruction of Israel and worldwide violence against Jews.”
Similar language could be used to describe the successful effort to scare Jews away from campus facilities at Cornell University. Following an outbreak of threats to “shoot up,” rape, and slash the throats of Jewish students on campus by pseudonymous harassers calling themselves “hamas,” “jew evil,” “jew jenocide,” “hamas warrior,” and “kill jews,” the school threw up its hands. Cornell advised its Jewish matriculants to avoid the campus’s Kosher dining hall lest they risk bodily harm. Of course, those students heeded their school’s warning.
We have to be careful to not to assert that all criticisms of Israeli government policies are inherently anti-Semitic. This risks shutting down necessary and valid debates about those policies. Jewish people are among those participating in the college demonstrations just as many Israeli citizens are disgusted by the decision making of their current government.
DeleteInstapundit, yeah?
DeleteQiB -- Am I interpreting your comment correctly to mean that you consider instapundit unreliable? I find almost no errors. The vey rare errors are openly corrected.
DeletePlease provide evidence for instapundit's unreliability or take back your accusation.
BTW I apologize for not having a link. Congrats to QiB for finding it. I had a second comment with two more examples and including the link, but it got lost somehow.
In an effort to educate myself about the trustworthyness of a website that I do not frequent, I dialed up Instapundit and immediately encountered this April 26th headline: "All the climate BS is fraud and corruption, all the way down. Everywhere." A "story" linking to a hit piece about Germany phasing out nuclear reactors that says nothing about the legitimacy of climate policy elsewhere, nor the legitimacy of climate science itself. Nice try, DIC. You consume this garbage regularly. Explains a lot.
DeleteDavid allowed Zionism to destroy his brain.
DeleteWhy didn’t Dave bother to tell us where the reporting was coming from? Does he assume we are as gullible as he is?
DeleteInteresting, that story from DIC is all hearsay.
DeleteFurthermore, "intifada" is not a call for violence, nor is the call to end apartheid in Israel.
It turns out Instapundit is completely unreliable.
David only buys into the best sourced misinformation.
DeleteDiC: You're reading a lot that wasn't in my two word question.
DeleteKelly Richards is a regular mom who lost her job last year, and after an unsuccessful job hunt, she started working online. I interviewed her about her amazing story and she revealed her steps for success.
ReplyDeleteWorking online has been a big break for Kelly, who struggled for months going from one dead end job to another. "I lost my job shortly after the recession hit, I needed reliable income, I was not interested in the "get rich quick" scams you see all over the internet.
DeleteThe "Originalists" on the Supreme Court, deciding whether the President of the United States is immune from the laws of the land, are asking us to pull their other finger.
ReplyDelete