CHAOS: Thieves will steal your goods, Thoreau said!

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2024

Levin, Campos-Duffy are worse:  Way back when—last Saturday night!—The Man Who Screams was letting off steam concerning Candidate Harris.

On our meters, he was already shouting by 8:03 p.m., just three minutes into his Fox News Channel program. 

The program is called Life, Liberty and Levin. At 8:14 p.m., the agitated host said this:

LEVIN (10/19/24): I want to get to this! Look at the Harris-Biden war on pro-lifers. It's grotesque. You don't even have to be in support of the pro-life movement to see it.

Pro-life activist and mother of small daughter Beverly [sic] Beatty Williams announced this past Tuesday that her state of appeal request has been denied. 

What did she do? She protested in front of a Planned Parenthood Clinic. And so they used this FACE Act—Freedom of Access to Clinic Access Act—more aggressively than any administration since this law was passed to do what? To put these people—mothers! grandmothers! just people, activists, who are protesting!—in prison for years! 

For the record, the woman's name is actually Bevelyn Williams. You'll note that Levin is transforming the Biden Administration into the "Harris-Biden" Administration, the better to play you with.

At this point, Levin played tape of Bevelyn Williams' husband. Along the way, he said this:

Obama—(snorts)—has the audacity to speak to black men and tell black men they need to vote for Kamala Harris when the Kamala Harris Administration separated me from my wife, and my wife from her daughter at two years old, for unlawful assembly...I want people to know in this country—mothers, fathers, single mothers—that this cannot be tolerated, and you should not vote for Kamala because voting for Kamala would do things like this.

By now, viewers were being told that Bevelyn Williams had been sent to prison by something called "the Kamala Harris Administration." The Harris Administration had sent her to prison "for unlawful assembly," Fox News Channel viewers were told.

That's what was said on Saturday night. The very next morning, on Fox & Friends Weekend, we saw the egregious Rachel Campos-Duffy tell her channel's misused viewers this:

CAMPOS-DUFFY (10/20/24): She sent [Williams] to prison this week this week for three years...It's kind of her deplorable moment, really...She sentenced a pro-lifer who was standing in front of an abortion clinic praying to three years in prison.

(With the Internet Archive down, we're working from the notes we took in real time.)

The "she," of course, was Candidate Harris. According to this disordered chaos agent, Harris had sent William to prison for the act of "standing in front of an abortion clinic praying." 

Apparently, Harris had taken time from her presidential campaign to engage in this prosecution on a personal basis. Or at least, so Campos-Duffy now said.

As we've noted in the past, we're not sure we've ever been happy to hear that someone is going to prison. We feel the same way here.

That said, we felt that we should possibly fact-check the things we'd been told by these corporate tools on the Fox News Channel. The basic question was this:

Had Bevelyn (not Beverly) Williams really been sent to prison for the act of praying? Had she been sent to prison for the act of praying by the heinous Candidate Harris, who was demonized in the most ludicrous. soul-destroying ways all through the course of this Fox & Friends Weekend "news" program?

We decided to check it out! As it happened, a news report in the New York Times had reported this matter in July of this year. The news report started in the manner shown, principal headline included:

Woman Sentenced to 41 Months for Blocking Entrance to Planned Parenthood

A Tennessee anti-abortion activist was sentenced to over three years in prison on Tuesday after she tried to block patients from entering a Planned Parenthood clinic in Lower Manhattan in June 2020.

A New York jury found in February that the activist, Bevelyn Beatty Williams, had violated a federal law protecting access to reproductive health clinics when she threatened patients, and in some cases physically confronted them, as they tried to enter Planned Parenthood’s Manhattan Health Center. Ms. Beatty Williams, who is originally from Staten Island, cited her Catholic faith in defense of her actions, according to court documents.

On Tuesday, a judge sentenced Ms. Beatty Williams to 41 months in prison followed by two years of supervised release. The judge recommended that Ms. Beatty Williams be transferred to a prison in Tennessee with mental health facilities.

According to the news report, the judge felt that Williams should have access to "mental health facilities." But what exactly had Williams done? Had she simply engaged in prayer, as Campos-Duffy had been willing to tell the Fox News Channel's viewers?

So far, Harris hadn't been mentioned at all—but what had Williams done? Eventually, the news report offered more detail:

“Bevelyn Beatty Williams repeatedly intimidated and interfered with individuals seeking and providing critical reproductive health services,” Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said in a statement. “She did so by physically blocking access to clinics, threatening staff and by force.”

On June 19 and June 20, 2020, prosecutors said, Ms. Beatty Williams “participated in an organized protest” outside the Manhattan Planned Parenthood. The clinic sees up to 100 patients each day and provides a variety of services, including abortion, birth control, pregnancy testing and cancer screening. Ms. Beatty Williams livestreamed and boasted about her actions on her Instagram page, according to court documents.

Ms. Beatty Williams stood in front of entrances to the facility and directed her fellow protesters to help her obstruct them, prosecutors said. She bragged on June 19 that “out of all the appointments today, only one couple came in,” according to prosecutors. She also threatened employees as they tried to enter the building, telling them that she was going to “terrorize this place” and “we’re going to terrorize you so good, your business is going to be over, mama,” according to court documents.

On the second day, Ms. Beatty Williams’s behavior turned physical, prosecutors said, as she shoved police officers and Planned Parenthood employees outside the clinic. At one point, Ms. Beatty Williams leaned on the front door of the facility to prevent a staff member from escorting a patient inside. The employee’s hand was injured after it became caught in the door, prosecutors said.

Ms. Beatty Williams similarly tried to block access to Planned Parenthood clinics in Florida, Tennessee, Georgia and Brooklyn between 2019 and 2022, prosecutors said. After her arrest outside a Planned Parenthood in Nashville in 2022, Ms. Beatty Williams was charged with criminal trespass and sentenced to 30 days in jail, according to court documents. Her lawyer, Calvin Scholar, did not respond to a request for comment.

Should the person in question be going to prison? That's a matter of judgment. With respect to the egregious behavior of Levin and Campos-Duffy, we'll offer two basic points:

First, we know of no reason to think that Candidate Harris had anything to do with this prosecution—anything whatsoever.  Presumably, the egregious pair of Fox News "journalists" had framed this matter in the way they did for the obvious reason. 

Also this:

Fox viewers were told that Williams had "protested" and "prayed" in front of an abortion clinic, full and complete total stop. According to the news report, her actual conduct had gone perhaps a bit beyond that. 

It's hard to know why an actual news organization would allow people like Levin and Campos-Duffy to ever appear on its air. Fuller disclosure:

Even by its own ludicrous standards, the Fox & Friends Weekend program was especially demented that day. Most absurdly, the three friends who were present that morning conducted a braindead interview with the two college students who had interrupted a Harris rally in Wisconsin a few days before, apparently with shouts of "Jesus is Lord" and "Christ is King."

This may have been the dumbest "interview" ever conducted on TV. Among other highlights, the pair of pro-life college juniors said no one had explained to them why they were made to leave the event which they'd been loudly disrupting. 

One of these fervent young men even complained to the trio of friends that he'd been "pushed by an elderly woman" as he was made to leave! He said that Candidate Harris "kind of gave me an evil smirk" as he was being led out.

Eventually, the coup de grace, stated several times:

The unbelievably dumb Charlie Hurt said that, because their parents had paid tuition to the college where the event had taken place (Wisconsin-LaCrosse), the pair of boys should have been allowed to "state their opinion." 

It would be hard to get much dumber than that, but Hurt will surely try.

Journalistic and intellectual chaos has long since swallowed our nation's discourse, such as it ever was. This process has been underway for decades, a point we'll be discussing next week.

We wish we could transcribe that Fox & Friends Weekend show in more detail, but with the Internet Archive still partially down, we aren't able to do so. Still and all, it's much as sacred Thoreau once said.

In this famous passage from Walden, Thoreau was speaking about the acquisition of material goods, not about the acquisition of reliable information. Still, a basic point remains:

Men [sic] labor under a mistake. The better part of the man is soon plowed into the soil for compost. By a seeming fate, commonly called necessity, they are employed, as it says in an old book, laying up treasures which moth and rust will corrupt and thieves break through and steal. It is a fool’s life, as they will find when they get to the end of it, if not before.

Thieves will break through and steal material treasures, Thoreau warned in that passage. In the modern setting, hackers will destroy the Internet Archive's ability to record the way other thieves—corporate thieves like Levin and Campos-Duffy—have stolen their viewers' access to a clear-eyed view of the world.

Under the stressors brought upon us by "the democratization of media," has our nation's project, imperfect though it always has been, begun to grind to a halt? Everything is possible, some other old book must have said.

In the current circumstance, one major "news org"—the Fox News Channel—is busy playing the ancient role of the thief. At another major org, the finer people have agreed to avert their gaze from this remarkable corporate misconduct.

Under the corporate direction of Suzanne Scott, the Fox News Channel behaves this way all through the course of the week. The New Yok Times won't report or discuss this fact. 

A type of thievery is involved there too as our nation's discourse fails.

Final question: Did Candidate Harris have anything to do with that prosecution? Did she even know about it?

We're going to guess that the answer is obvious. Levin struck like a thief in the night. Campos-Duffy also struck, early the next morning.

91 comments:

  1. There’s a reason 40 out of 44 Trump officials have endorsed the Harris/Cheney ticket. They know he's a conman, rapist, felon, narcissist, grifter, liar who relies on fear mongering.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 40 out of 44 of which 'Trump officials'?

      Delete
    2. 40 out of 44 of Cheesedick McRapey's handpicked former cabinet members realize he is a fascist and are supporting Harris/Cheney.

      Delete
  2. Religion is a mental illness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "With God, everything is possible" Matthew 19:26

      Delete
    2. Somerby has stated that he is not religious, but anything is possible, including that Somerby is lying whenever he opens his mouth. I find that possibility the most likely of anything said here.

      Delete
    3. Good comment. You gained a lot of converts.

      Delete
  3. "We wish we could transcribe that Fox & Friends Weekend show in more detail"

    Why? Is there any value to repeating lies verbatim instead of saying that someone lied?

    When Somerby dutifully types that "Harris gave an evil smirk" is that better than simply saying that a protester mischaracterized her behavior? Is calling Harris a drunk better than saying that Gutfeld maligned her? If a slur is a lie, should it be repeated so that it does double damage to the victim of that lie?

    I see no value whatsoever in what Somerby has written here today. We all know that Fox will say whatever it wants to attack Harris. We know that most of what they say is incorrect (despite Somerby's claim that Fox has better facts than MSNBC). We know that extremists are saying and doing bizarre things, including this woman who a judge considered mentally ill but also criminal in her behavior. Why does Somerby transcribe this and in such detail that it repeats the original crime?

    There are victims in this story, but they are not this woman who should be in jail for hurting other people in various ways.

    No one would think to blame Harris for any of this, except that Somerby makes sure we hear the accusations on Fox, and get to hear that pro-choice people are persecuting those who object. Amplifying Fox is what Somerby considers the most important effort in these few days before the election, making very sure that Harris has her name front and center, in case liberals at this blog didn't watch Fox. Because why does this matter to any of us, to the point that Somerby chose this out of all the news he might have talked about, to write a lengthy essay that sheds no light on anything. Fox told a few more lies...and?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're criticizing someone for calling out the lies of a supposed news channel that's watched by millions? Do you realize how stupid and absurd that is?

      Delete
    2. "Do you realize how stupid and absurd that is?"

      No, obviously they don't. These Anons come and litter this comment section with such stupid absurdities every single day.

      Delete
    3. The excessively literal calling others stupid…the irony.

      Delete
    4. The more I read this blog, the more I think it's just one anon. Over and over and over again.

      Delete
    5. Indeed. Somerby debunks Fox's lies. Why? One possibility is for the simple reason that he wants to debunk Fox's lies. Another possibility is that he wants to amplify those lies to convince gullible liberals to vote for Trump so can cash checks from Putin.

      I leave for you the choice of which possibility is more likely.

      Delete
    6. The consensus seems to be that Somerby is playing a nefarious game, and that it is his defender trolls/fanboys that are the gullible ones.

      To each his own, if you don’t mind getting conned by Somerby, more power to you.

      The trolls/fanboys do seem to get easily triggered here, and there are definitely commenters here that seem to enjoy triggering this sad lot, laughing at their obtuseness, finding amusement from their squawking, but idk it seems like these trolls/fanboys are suffering and we shouldn’t mock them so mercilessly.

      Delete
    7. Three paragraphs. Nothing substantive. So very typical.

      Delete
    8. "The more I read this blog, the more I think it's just one anon. Over and over and over again."

      Agreed. A lonely, attention-seeking troll with a knack for gaslighting. On those terms, they do an impressive job. I have to give them credit for doing a good job even if it's a bit of a pathetic pursuit.

      Delete
    9. Easily triggered indeed.

      Sorry 1:56 but 2:08, who is the same author as most of the other comments defending Bob, is funny as fuck. I do enjoy laughing at their consternation, it is amusing.

      Delete
    10. I love when Anons argue about whether Anons are one commenter or several. Come out of the closet, Anons, you'll feel so much better!

      Delete
    11. Fair enough, you have the last word.

      Delete
    12. BTW, I think there are two Anons trashing Somerby every day. One, whom I'll call "2015," says that Somerby was a true liberal from the inception of this blog (1998) until 2015, when Putin started paying Somerby to promote right-wing talking points in order to convince gullible liberals to vote for Trump. This Anon, "2015," is here every day to warn us of Somerby's duplicity.

      The second, whom I'll call "Progressive Scold," is quick to find racism, sexism, homophobia, or transphobia in every single thing that Somerby writes, no matter how innocuous. Yesterday, for example, Progressive Scold found racism and homophobia because Somerby AGREED with a black gay guy. Go figure.

      Delete
    13. PP, the 2015 date is complete nonsense. Anonymices were trolling here way before Trump made his entrance into the political scene.

      Delete
    14. Anonymouse 1:32pm, the anonymouse marauders league is composed of all Bob’s former girlfriends. He’s probably been clearing sacrificial birds and chipmunks off his stoop for years.

      Delete
    15. Did Our Host run over your dog? Reveal your clandestine affair? Mow his lawn before 9 am on a Saturday?

      Dude, no one is relying on you to explain What Bob Really Means. We can read for ourselves.

      Delete
    16. Cecelia, Somerby has no ex girlfriends. There is no evidence he likes women much. In this blog, he only gushes over 14 year old girls, such as Malala or Anne Frank (whose cover picture was worth the price of the book, Somerby insensitively said). But a man with 12-14 year old daughters, who genuinely liked women, would never have stood up for Roy Moore.

      Delete
    17. Anonymouse 6:58pm, Bob didn’t stand up for Roy Moore’s political beliefs, he critiqued the media stampede for dirt that that conveniently left out details. You know, the media focus thing that makes you crazy because it superfluous to your political jihad.

      Anonhmouse 6:58pm, you’re a creep.

      Delete
  4. There is a giant bronze turd placed on the Capitol Mall as an expression of free speech. It commemorates the efforts to overthrow the 2020 election, characterizing the insurrectionists as brave and noble. There is a guard watching the turd to make sure no one messes with it.

    That is more peaceful free speech, but in a way it resembles what Bevelyn Beatty Williams did. She slammed a worker's hand in the door, crushing it, while trying to prevent entry to a clinic, just as protesters slammed a police officer's hand in the Capitol building door, pressing against it while protesters surged to get into the building. Both sets of violent protesters consider themselves to have been exercizing their rights, but both harmed others in the effort.

    If there is a lesson in what Somerby has posted today, it is that hurting others in the name of whatever cause you are advancing is against the law for everyone, including right wing digbats, and yes, including Trump.

    But Somerby didn't say any of that. I wonder why not? Somerby barely considers that the right may believe these actions were all justified because their cause is righteous. Instead he blames Fox, Levin, and his newest target Suzanne Scott, who likely had as little involvement in the content details of those broadcasts as Harris had in prosecuting Bevelyn Beatty Williams.

    Fox seems to believe that anything goes in their election campaigning. Trump believes that certainly. So does Vance and the many others running these crazy campaigns in downballot races, the whole lot of corrupt lying right wingers. These is no worse and no different than the rest of them. But Somerby singles out Suzanne Scott, his newest scapegoat.

    Instead of targeting people, and mentioning Harris's name over and over in today's pile of lies (like the steaming turd on display on the mall), why doesn't Somerby deplore the lies themselves, instead of callously repeating them. A lie told once hurts once. A lie told twice hurts again. A lie that is repeated several times without being debunked is even worse -- and that is what Somerby has been doing here, over and over.

    There is no excuse for this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "the right may believe these actions were all justified because their cause is righteous."

      G. Gordon Liddy and Ollie North both believed that.

      Delete
    2. Reporting that a lie was said is quite different from repeating the lie as if one believed it. Duh.

      Delete
    3. We don't know what Somerby "believes". In the absence of any statement about the lie itself (such as rebuttal or dismay that such a lie was told), the lie stands on its own. So, no, Somerby is not doing anything different than Fox when he repeats these lies verbatim without any explanation.

      Yes, Somerby did explain that Harris is not president and not responsible for Biden's choices, but that is not the lie. The lie is that SHE is responsible for punishing Bevelyn.

      Delete
    4. Self-evidently, Bob's post today focused on how wide the gap was between Levin's version of the events in question and what actually happened.

      Your comment are breathtakingly stupid.

      Delete
    5. Anonymouse 11:51am, Harris is, indeed, answerable for Biden’s policies. When asked about them, she can either detail why she supported such-and-such or explain how she would have done something differently., along with saying whether or not she directly went to bat for her opinions.

      You might as well argue that she did her nails during meetings as to keep harping on this ridiculous take.

      No wonder the Washington Post won’t endorse Comma La after endorsing Democrats since 1976, with the exception of sitting out Bush vs Dukakis in ‘88. We don’t know who has been in charge of the country since 2020 and we are vehemently assured that Comma La had nuthin to do with nuthin.

      Delete
    6. Anonymouse 1:38pm, and Levin goes between being loud and irate to extremely measured and soft in tone. Nothing in between. I like him, but he and Fox have been derelict in this story.

      Delete
    7. The Washington Post, which has a long history of NOT endorsing presidential candidates, breaking that tradition in ‘76 in the wake of driving the Watergate scandal, has decided, not to not endorse Harris, but to halt presidential endorsements altogether, forever in the future.

      The Post’s decision to stop all future presidential endorsements was made in the wake of the LA Times’ Trump supporting owner refusing to let the paper endorse Harris, prompting the editorial editor to resign.

      The Post and the LA Times are taking a corporate stance over a principled one; they are corporations.

      For those that are not American, presidents here are not kings; there are both legal precedents as well as norms and traditions that keep the DOJ relatively non partisan and separate from the personal inclinations of the president.

      Delete
    8. Anonymouse 2:23pm, the staff at the WP isn't taking a “principled stand”, they’re taking the only position that they can in the face of losing what had been their hallowed condition of utter uniformity. So now they are “returning to their roots” by not endorsing a candidate? Come on with resignations, folks. Is Harris the ground you’ll die on?

      Delete
    9. Agree, the Washington Post staff does not seem to have the principled strength of the LA Times.

      To be fair, LA is the center of CA, which is the 5th largest economy in the world (2nd by per capita), plus the weather’s not bad. I reckon it’s a bit easier to have a principled stance in relative paradise, than in the dog eat dog hyper competitive DC world.

      Corporate is as corporate does, though.

      All of corporate media has been sane washing Trump and yet it seems like Harris will win nonetheless. A blow to both right wing lunacy and corporate media’s dominance.

      Delete
    10. I don't suppose WaPo's Bezos hiring a Murdoch goon to run the joint had anything to do with the non-endorsement you goobers.

      Delete
    11. Merman, that rings true. I suppose the paper “going back to the old way” of not endorsing anyone is enough cover for liberal paragons to stay at the joint.

      Delete
  5. Bob's criticism is technically correct, but he's missing the point. Voters don't want to reward or punish candidates for past deeds. What we want to know is what they'll do in the future if elected. IMO a Harris Administration would indeed tend to punish anti-abortion folks harshly.

    BTW even though I'm pro-choice, I consider the sentence shockingly harsh.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And Trump will use corrupt means to try to steal an election and launch his thugs in an insurrection against the United States. Any Harris AG must and will follow appropriate federal law and procedures. Trump’s AG? He says he wants to prosecute his political enemies, and the Supreme Court basically said that was ok.

      Delete
    2. 30 days is a "shockingly harsh" sentence?

      Delete
    3. A Harris administration would punish anti-abortion folks according to the law. If they do not break laws, there is no reason to punish them -- the left does not punish people for their beliefs or their peaceful expression of them.

      How can David consider the sentence harsh without knowing what she did? That is Somerby's point.

      Delete
    4. @11:40 You have every right to believe that Trump prosecutors would behave badly if elected, and Harris's would behave well. But, I disagree that federal law and procedures can be relied on protect the public from a biased AG. Prosecutorial discretion is enormous, at every level -- federal, state and local. A Prosecutor can choose not to prosecute all or s/he can define a single act to be a series of crimes and charge the defendant with all of them.

      Delete
    5. David, Trump has a track record you can examine relating to his use and his desire to use DOJ. He also says explicitly that he wants to prosecute his enemies. Harris has said no such thing.

      Delete
    6. Trump also wants to use the military to go after political opponents. Trump is a fascist. John Kelly, the “degenerate”,(Trump’s word for Kelly), was right. But you go ahead and excuse and explain all of that away in order to vote for an abomination like Trump. It’s disgusting.

      Delete
    7. Federal law, Dickhead? Fuck you. Justice Roberts and the corrupt SC 6 have rewritten the Constitution. Doanld J Chickenshit has been given the green light by the highest court in our land to order the AG to do any fucking thing he wants.

      Delete
    8. Uh 11:57 the President already has that power. He is the AG’s boss.

      Delete
    9. No, Fuckface, that was new law written by Roberts and the corrupt SC6. Riddle me this, you fucking fascist treasonous Dickhead, how did AG John Mitchell wind up going to jail, asshole? Donald J Chickenshit had to run to Robert's lap to beg for total criminal immunity. A new age, but fascists like you cheered.

      Delete
    10. The way right wingers are so smug when pushing their misinformation is….interesting.

      Delete
    11. My understanding is that the President can say to the AG, "Do such and such, or I will fire you." If you don't think this is the case, can you please supply a link or some evidence? Thanks.

      Delete
    12. Sure, Dickhead in Cal, that is why Nixon had to resign in disgrace. Now, according to Roberts and the corrupt SC 6, Donald J Chickenshit can order his AG to commit a crime, like fucking inciting a coup, and there can never be any check or judicial review, fuckface. Fascists like you are ok with that.

      Delete
    13. David in Cal,
      My understanding is that President Biden can declare Harris (whether she wins more votes/ electoral college or not) to protect the country from having a fascist be the nest President.
      Or is there an out for the Roberts Court if the President happens to be a Democrat?

      Delete
    14. "I disagree that federal law and procedures can be relied on (to) protect the public from a biased AG."

      Right. Which is why we want people in those positions who will avoid, as much as possible, the unjustified prosecution of their political enemies.

      But as 11:52 points out, Trump's been very explicit in saying he wants to prosecute Biden, Pelosi, Obama, etc. for their never-specified, non-existent 'crimes.'

      Should we believe him? He could be blowin' it out his ass, as he so frequently does.

      But we're being told there's much more vetting going on now regarding who could serve in a second Trump admin.

      Only the true toadies will be allowed in the door. There will be no normies around to stop Trump from being Trump, as frequently happened the first time around.



      Delete
    15. Hector, if Trump is elected, I am certain his people will be combing the books for anything out of order. They’ve been going after Trump since 2015, so yes, there will be that sort of thing going on.

      Be assured or reassured… that Washington is a company town and the unelected players seem to set the rules. They’ll be watching out for your boys. In fact, if Trump wins, look for an offensive against he and his in a matter of days. They’ve already war-gamed it.

      Delete
    16. They could find some really bad stuff on Biden that relates to his son making millions from shady players in the same countries he was dealing with diplomatically. We all know that was influence peddling.

      Hector, remember, business record falsification is the standard. Not super easy to prove but with enough time and enough money Trump could probably make felons out of all of them.

      Delete
    17. They investigated Biden for years and couldn’t come up with anything other than an indictment of their own star witness who turned out to be a Russia/Putin plant.

      Poor Reagan, turning over in his grave, with Republicans openly being stooges for Russia/Putin.

      As president, Harris is unlikely to interfere with the ongoing prosecution of Trump’s many crimes. Trump’s sentencings will be interesting, I doubt he will get actual prison time, some arrangement involving home detention is more likely. But which home? Trump’s properties are all financially underwater.

      Delete
    18. Anonymouse 2:37pm, by “investigating for years”, you mean the Republican congress, Tucker Carlson, and the New Post?

      Delete
    19. Do the crime, pay the time.

      These supposed law and order folks crying a river over having to face personal responsibility is a sight!

      Delete
    20. Cecelia, the investigation into Hunter Biden by the US Attorney (later named as a special prosecutor) for Deleware, David Weiss, began under President Trump. For seven fucking years.

      You will note for the fucking record, that President Biden never attempted in any way to interfere with the investigation. And to date he has vowed not to pardon his own son.

      Now go fuck yourself.

      Delete
    21. "They could find some really bad stuff on Biden that relates to his son making millions from shady players in the same countries he was dealing with diplomatically. We all know that was influence peddling."

      Here's a news flash: the GOP has spent the last 4 years trying to do exactly that. No luck.

      "remember, business record falsification is the standard."

      Wrong here, too. New York state has stringent business record falsification laws. I don't believe anything comparable applies at the federal level.

      Delete
    22. Anonymouse 3:38pm, you’re a doll, but the government in the Ukraine has a vested interest in protecting little Hunter and his dad.

      Delete
    23. Harris will cage the anti abortion activists with the illegals in a garbage can at the border Dickhead.

      Delete
    24. Cecelia, sure. Now go find a witness who isn't working for Vlad, ok sweetheart.

      Delete
    25. Anonymouse 5:59pm, wouldn’t they all be dead?

      Delete
  6. What is wrong with Somerby?

    It is easy for Thoreau to diss the "corrupting" work of those who must labor for their daily bread and a roof over their heads. How nice to be a man of leisure who can afford to live pure by a pond and do nothing but philosophize. Sort of like Somerby, minus the pond.

    Liberals understand that others must make choices dictated by necessity. The right moralizes from the safety of material comfort, casting the working class as bad people instead of needy people.

    Attitudes like Thoreau's are why people who work for a living tend to be less enamored of men like Musk and Trump and their billionaire friends, who despise those who work. Trump doesn't understand that it is easier for him to grift because he is already rich.

    Somerby admires the wrong people, but that is true of all Republicans.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Notice how Somerby makes a big deal about getting Bevelyn's name right. Why does he do that? Is he mocking her name or is he emphasizing that she is likely black? Is he being sarcastic about the importance of respecting names by exaggerating his care in spelling? We don't know because Somerby doesn't say, but his emphasis is odd and it comes across as disrespectful. It would be fine if he had simply gotten her name right, without the fanfare.

    Or is he showing that once again Fox gets a black woman's name wrong? Does he intend that to excuse the repeated mispronunciations aimed at Harris, or is he saying that black women's names are hard. Again, he doesn't say, so any interpretation is valid. Names do matter, but in this case, this woman's name has nothing at all to do with her crimes or her punishment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Most likely he's havin a go at Levin for getting it wrong. Duh.

      Delete
    2. Anonymouse 11:246pm. talk about “moralizing from the safety of material comfort”, why don’t you head out into the woods of New England and fend for yourself with the tools of that era and live off the land in the manner of Thoreau.

      Your level speciousness is disordered, even though it has been bought and paid for.

      Delete
    3. So angry, the trolls today!

      Smells like desperation.

      Delete
    4. Actually Cecelia seems to be making a valid point about the perniciousness of wage slavery, although it’s not a counterpoint to 11:54’s apt criticism of Thoreau’s obnoxious elitism.

      Delete
    5. Anonymouse 3:03pm, Homer and Thoreau don’t make the grade, huh. Nothing we can learn from those guys.

      Thoreau made the observation that there is no difference in the appearance of expensive furniture from very crude riggings when seen knocking down the road in the back of a cart.



      Delete
    6. Certainly nothing to learn from Cecelisms.

      Delete
    7. Anonymouse 5:57pm, I’m in good company.

      Delete
    8. Cecelia, Thoreau did not live off the land. He wasn't even a farmer. He got groceries delivered and he went next door to eat dinner and hang ot with his "friend" Emerson, who lived nearby. Thoreau wasn't camping out either. He lived in a cottage, which is a small house. Yes, there were trees and a pond nearby. That added to the value of his home, not to his hardship.

      Thoreau was able to romanticize nature because he didn't experience its harshness.

      Delete
    9. Anonymouse 7:09pm, Thoreau periodically headed to town to buy things he needed and couldn’t supply for himself. That doesn’t detract from his goal to be as self sufficient as possible.

      You’ve dunked on some pretty estimable figures on behalf of dissing Bob and the irony is that you’d have been just as successful in changing hearts and minds if you’d simply employed a voodoo doll.

      Delete
  8. Somerby curiously blames the democratization of media, yet to the degree his post has any substance, Somerby is, ostensibly, attacking corporate media (as he amplifies their right wing nonsense, delighting in exploiting all the details).

    Somerby is attacking the very thing that diminishes the power of corporate media, turning his argument into an incoherent mush.

    Worse, Somerby’s most efficient route to debunking Fox News’ nonsense is via the democratization of media, through which anyone and everyone can learn that Bevelyn Williams has a history of criminality related to her “activism”, that the FACE Act was passed in 1994 due to a long history of violence, including many murders and violent assaults, perpetrated by anti abortion “activists” attacking health clinics, that many have been prosecuted through the FACE Act, the majority of them all White, except for Williams who Fox News is now cynically highlighting in a desperate ploy to negatively impact the tsunami of Black voters coming out for Harris.

    Somerby analysis is weak, and his avoidance of discussing relevant and pertinent issues related to this subject, mirrors his reliance on corporate media while avoiding democratized media, even though this very blog is part of the democratization of media.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Nothing fascist about this:

    "The chair of the conservative House Freedom Caucus says the North Carolina Legislature should consider allocating the state’s presidential electors to Donald Trump even before votes are counted in the swing state.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/25/trump-freedom-caucus-north-carolina-electors-00185520

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or this:

      "Harris’ comments were in response to a keynote speech by Ivan Raiklin, a pro-Trump activist who has long embraced a radical strategy of state legislatures guaranteeing Trump’s reelection if they deem the 2024 election tainted by fraud and corruption."

      Delete
    2. Interestingly, many, perhaps most, of the analyses judging Trump as a fascist are coming from Republicans, most of them having personal and direct experience in dealing with Trump.

      Delete
    3. The article from Politico is propaganda. The headline is itself is designed to frame Harris as endorsing this extreme position and distorts his support for the idea. He was reacting to a speech, he never directly endorsed the strategy and specifically showed reservations about applying the approach universally. It's presented, using subtle techniques, to manufacture partisan outrage and strengthen a "Democracy at Risk" narrative.

      Hector, it's clear you didn’t read the article closely—if at all. Why not?

      Delete
    4. This would be an objective headline, free of propaganda:

      "GOP Congressman Responds to Proposal of Awarding NC Electors Amid Concerns for Hurricane-Impacted Voters"

      Delete
    5. I read the article, Harris is plainly endorsing a lunatic notion.

      Even his fellow Republican NC rep was disturbed, as the article notes:

      Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) told reporters on Friday he hadn’t heard about any plans for the state Legislature to take the steps discussed by Raiklin and Harris. Asked about Harris’ comments, McHenry said, “It makes no sense whatsoever to prejudge the election outcome. And that is a misinformed view of what is happening on the ground in North Carolina, bless his heart.”

      Delete
    6. You didn't read it closely. That quote is some of the most direct propaganda, playing up an emotionally charged reaction to get you to view it as an extreme remark - not mentioning the context where Harris calls for "every single vote" to be counted, using condescending language and not making clear that he didn't directly endorse the idea.

      McHenry says he hasn't heard of any plans to act on the proposal, no? He doesn't say he believes the idea is being taken seriously by North Carolina lawmakers, does he? And it's not, because it's an invented, propagandistic story.

      Delete
    7. "Hector, it's clear you didn’t read the article closely—if at all. Why not?"

      Here's the money quote from Harris:

      'You statistically can go and say, ‘Look, you got disenfranchised in 25 counties. You know what that vote probably would have been,’” Harris said during an exchange with a speaker at the dinner. “Which would be — if I were in the Legislature — enough to go, ‘Yeah, we have to convene the Legislature. We can’t disenfranchise the voters.’”

      This isn't an endorsement? Then you'll have to provide the context that shows me that.

      And "he showed reservations about applying the approach universally"? Oh, I'm doing cartwheels now because he only wants to hand a single state to Trump in a razor close election. Why was I getting so upset?

      Delete
    8. "He doesn't say he believes the idea is being taken seriously by North Carolina lawmakers, does he?"

      An idea's popularity is unrelated to whether or not it is fascist.

      And if Trump were to lose North Carolina, I guarantee this idea would gain a lot of popularity in certain circles.

      "it's an invented, propagandistic story."

      So Harris wasn't misquoted, but it's an 'invented' story?

      Delete
    9. No, it's not an endorsement. His remarks are framed as a hypothetical rather than a firm proposal. He is using conditional language ("if I were in the Legislature,”). He didn't claim current conditions in North Carolina justify this action. He's exploring an idea as a response to hypothetical voter disenfranchisement, not advocating that North Carolina’s actually do it. He didn't propose plans to act on the idea.

      But - the article is designed to make you think he endorsed the idea. Even putting that word in the headline. It's goal is to upset you and make you think he wants to hand his state to Trump in a razor close election.

      Delete
    10. Yes, it's invented to make you think he endorsed the idea for the reasons I've described.

      Delete
    11. I wish our conversations were more engaging. You don’t have any interesting ideas or insights.

      Delete
    12. It's not quite 'just a hypothetical', is it? It's not like he's saying, 'if the moon was made of blue cheese, we should convene the Legislature and assign votes to Trump.'

      It's a lot more concrete than that. He's saying 'if I were in the Legislature, here's what I would do.' And guess what? There are people in the Legislature listening to him. Are they hypothetical?

      Maybe you don't understand how the game is played. The first step in evading democratic procedures is to float the idea of evading those procedures.

      Delete
    13. The felon is clearly not the fascist who just posted on Ruth Social that he is going to hunt down and punish all liberals. Assume just one of his top fascist advisors made him do it.

      Delete