Tapioca from the Times!

MONDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2024

Eating cake all the way down: When JD Vance initially said it, we reported what he had said.

He said it at an Atlanta rally. As we noted in real time, this is what he said:

VANCE (8/3/24): Eight years ago, Donald Trump had everything—fame, fortune, family, friends. He gave up the easy life so we could get our country back.

He traded everything he had for unjust persecution—for slander and scorn from the fake news, all for this country, for you and me.

They couldn't beat him politically, so they tried to bankrupt him. They failed at that, so they tried to impeach him. 

They failed at that, so they tried to put him in prison. They even tried to kill him.

They even tried to kill him? It was such a remarkable statement that we quickly transcribed and posted it. We did so in real time. 

We posted the transcript on August 5, then again on August 7. The background, of course, was this:

On July 13, a 20-year-old man had tried to kill Candidate Trump. It still isn't clear why he did that. He had no known accomplices.

By August 3, Candidate Vance had come up with a better way of telling the story. "They" had tried to kill Trump, he now said. He seemed to be referring to the same people who had "tried to impeach him."

(For the record, Trump was impeached, two times. He was impeached by the House, but he was subsequently acquitted by the Senate.)

Back to August 3! In Vance's telling, it almost sounded like Democratic office holders had tried to kill Candidate Trump! In our view, it was an extremely reckless thing to say.

It was a remarkable thing to say. At news orgs like the New York Times, they let the comment go.

Over the weekend, comments like that were suddenly back in the flow.

As is and was his perfect right, Candidate Trump staged a rally at that same site in Butler, Pa. late Saturday afternoon. On this occasion, Candidate Vance was a bit more circumspect—a bit less suggestive—as he floated his charge again:

VANCE (10/5/24): Just look at everything they've done to President Trump. First they tried to silence him. When that didn't work, they tried to bankrupt him. 

When that didn't work, they tried to jail him.

And with all the hatred they have spewed at President Trump, it was only a matter of time before somebody tried to kill him.

Candidate Vance went back to the "they" just a few minutes later. But in this, his nugget statement, he only said that "somebody" had tried to kill Candidate Trump. 

To appearance, Vance was rolling his language back. For a link to his speech, see below.

Did "they" try to kill Candidate Trump that day, or was it a single young man? Others who spoke at Butler this weekend returned to the slippery word "they."

That included Eric Trump. As for the principal, Candidate Trump said this:

TRUMP (10/5/24): Four years ago, the entire world respected us. They respected us more than they've ever respected us, and now they laugh at us. We can't have them laugh at us, can we?

Above all, you deserve leadership in Washington that does not answer to the lobbyists, to the bureaucrats or to the corrupt special interests, but that only answers to you the hard-working citizens of America, which there are a lot of them. We have a lot of them.

We have a lot of them!

Over the past eight years, those who want to stop us from achieving this future have slandered me, impeached me, indicted me, tried to throw me off the ballot. And who knows? Maybe even tried to kill me! But I've never stopped fighting for you, and I never will.

Who killed Davey Jones? In this case, it may have been the people who impeached then-President Trump and who indicted him later!

So the messaging went, all over again, this time from Trump himself. 

To our own imperfect eye and ear, Candidate Vance seems to be a modern-day "Manchurian candidate." To our own eye and ear, Candidate Trump has long seemed to be disordered, in what is likely a clinical way.

That said, the messaging here is ancient and very powerful. At this point, we find it hard to believe that Candidates Harris and Walz will be able to overcome the power of this eternal messaging, though of course it may be that they will.

Candidate Vance floated this messaging back in early August. We transcribed and posted what he said, and the whole story died right there.

This morning, atop the front page of its print editions, the New York Times has begun to push back with a big bowl of warm tapioca.

In our view, the Times is taking the classic wet noodle to the classic knife fight. The tapioca-adjacent piece appears beneath this headline:

TRUMP REIGNITES QUESTION OF AGE WITH RAMBLINGS

In fairness, the report was surely written before this weekend's events. But in our view, the Times report is a great big bowl of highly self-protective tapioca. It's an imitation of human life, an imitation of journalism.

In our view, the Times has finally started to fiddle while Rome continues to burn. Putting it a different way, the finer people at the Times have decided to let their subscribers eat cake.

In our own post from earlier today, we started a series of reports which will appear under this heading:

TWO SILOS

All week, we'll be looking at what emerges from the silo housing the Fox News Channel. We'll also look inside the silo which houses the New York Times.

In our view, a classic "revolt of the masses" is being driven from the one location. Inside the other structure, a highly pampered royal court is letting us the people eat cake while "our democracy," limited though it always has been, rather plainly continues to burn.

In our view, people at Fox have had plenty to criticize, to complain about, in the past few years. That said, and borrowing from the early Dylan, we would ask you this:

But oh, what kind of revolt is this, which goes from bad to worse?

To watch the Manchurian speak: To watch Saturday's speech by Candidate Vance, you can just click here.

The candidate spoke for seventeen minutes. His remarks about the way "somebody" tried to kill Candidate Trump can be seen at the 8-minute mark.

At the 3-minute mark, you can also see the candidate saying this about the events of July 13:

VANCE (10/5/24): I believe as sure as I'm standing here today that what happened was a true miracle. And on that day, America felt the truth of scripture: Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me.

I truly believe that God saved President Trump's life that day. 

Do you believe that Vance believes that? For ourselves, we have no way of knowing if he does. We have no idea.

We have no idea! But primal impulses are being evoked as this ancient messaging is advanced—and on this morning's front page, it seems to us that Blue America's New York Times has taken its fiddles out.

Can Candidate Harris overcome this ancient, primal messaging? In our view, the feckless tribunes of Blue America have arrived at the scene extremely late, and some are selling tapioca pretty much all the way down.


206 comments:

  1. Meh.
    That's what all the people who have sexual relations with furniture say.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is that eyeliner on the cushion?

      Delete
    2. Clarence? Is that you?

      Delete
  2. It is irresponsible to talk about "they" attempting to kill Trump without making it clear that the Democrats have not engaged in any attempted assassination of Trump. That means pointing out that the various threats to Trump have not come from anyone known to be a Democrat, connected with any Democrat or the Democratic Party, and that there have been no overt threats made by any Democrat either.

    Somerby's repeated quoting of Vance, with his "they," does not help cool down the violence that has accompanied this election, largely emanating from the right itself. That includes threats made by right wingers against Democrats, and these claims that the Democrats are somehow attacking the right -- which is not true and is unsupported by any evidence, including the backgrounds of the men who have attempted threats against Trump.

    I don't know what game Somerby thinks he is playing today, but repeating this violent talk coming from Vance and others (MTG comes to mind) is unhelpful and possibly dangerous, but entirely undeserved by Democrats.

    I think it would be a good idea for Somerby to take down this irresponsible post or at least explain himself more clearly. As it stands, it appears that Somerby is repeating Vance's craziness and engaging in amplification of the calls for more violence inherent in Vance's claim that the left has been attacking Trump, when there is no evidence of that at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At 1028, we should not let the problems with Bob’s positions drive us to paranoia. Bob isn’t trying to do anything tricky. He’s just sounding an alarm on right wing mendacity about 20 years too late. You can’t really argue that anything he is saying about Vance isn’t true. The problem is, why can’t Vance be let off the hook with the insanity defense, just as Bob has spent years doing with the top of the wretched ticket?

      Delete
    2. It seems more likely that it is the Bob defenders/fanboys that are racked with paranoia or similar such emotional distress.

      It is pretty plain that Bob is up to no good, selling snake oil, as well explained by 10:28.

      It is pretty plain that Bob is angling to seem like “you can’t really argue” with anything he is saying, employing well worn right wing rhetorical tactics not all that dissimilar in technique from the ramblings of Trump.

      Anything is possible!

      Vance’s crime is in lacking any charismatic appeal, so he is relegated to the category of corporate (Thiel) boy toy.

      Delete
    3. I can't argue that Vance is NOT a brainwashed automaton trained by communists to kill upon command? Somerby is calling Vance a Manchurian Candidate. In the film, the candidate was the person controlling the brainwashed soldier, the candidate favored by the Manchurians who did the brainwashing. If that is supposed to be Vance, then the target of the assassination plot is Harris, not Trump and not Vance.

      Should Somerby be suggesting that Vance is targeting Harris? Today's whole Manchurian Candidate analogy makes no sense mapped onto the current election.

      It is likey that Somerby has just grabbed this Manchurian nonsense because it had the word "Candidate" in the title and involved an attempted assassination in the film. Beyond that, the politics make no sense, especially not when applied to one of the candidates (Vance) and not to a bystander such as Raymond Shaw.

      This just makes no sense but because it is talking about political violence, it also seems like a very bad idea to be pursuing here, where Somerby has no idea what addled minds might be reading his call to action (confused as it is).

      Delete
  3. "Did "they" try to kill Candidate Trump that day, or was it a single young man? "

    Given the way pronouns are being used these days, the word "they" can be applied to a single young man. Not all young men are "he/him" these days.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. fuck off, troll boy

      Delete
    2. He makes a fair point. An unavoidable consequence of the acceptance of 'they/them' ideology is linguistic confusion.

      Delete
    3. Ok, Amelia Bedelia.

      Delete
    4. Context can be used to disambiguate meaning. Somerby is not asking an either/or question. "They" is intentionally vague so that a listener can fill in their own villains. The goal is linguistic confusion in service of conspiracy-mongering.

      Delete
    5. 12:36 Contextually, it is clear that “they” is not referring to a non binary person. Furthermore, pronouns are not an “ideology”, it’s just basic respect.

      Agree 12:52, it is for the purpose of fear mongering, but weakly so, since the culprits - both Republicans - are known, which makes the effort more amusing than scary.

      Interesting to note, Somerby today seems to disapprove of the slippery language, yet he himself often employs similar efforts, with similar goals.

      Delete
    6. How do we know who is binary or not? I believe Vance is non-binary, judging by his use of makeup and his ambivalent feelings about women, cats and dogs. Of course that is for him to decide, but how would Somerby know (enough to oppose the terms they and single young man)?

      As Hannibal Lecter has pointed out, single young men who are also serial killers are often sexually confused (not that non-binary people are -- they seem to have more clarity than rigidly binary people when it comes to gender issues). Vance seems very confused. It may be why he has changed his name four times -- searching for the "right" identity.

      Delete
    7. "Furthermore, pronouns are not an “ideology”, it’s just basic respect."

      Is it not an ideology that posits a 'gender identity' inside each of us, in virtue of which we must 'respect' certain people with the 'they/them' form of address?

      Delete
    8. Gender identity (purpose, formation, expression) is part of social and developmental psychology, which is based on research. The "respect" part is based on social norms that are part of our culture. That is covered by anthropology.

      Delete
    9. How about the ego, the id and the superego? Are they not also based on the science of psychology? Freud very much viewed himself as a scientist. How about the collective unconscious?

      Is 'gender identify' as real as these other products of psychological research?

      Delete
    10. No, Freud was prescientific, like sacred Homer. Some of his ideas have stood up under testing via scientific method, some not.

      What makes a science is use of scientific method, not what someone calls himself.

      Delete
    11. Agreed. So when someone says their gender identity is as a this or a that, I interpret their statement as 'I would prefer to be this or that', or 'think of myself as this or that.'

      Is there anything more to it?

      Delete
  4. Marjorie Taylor Greene has been saying that "they" control the weather and sent Hurricane Helene to GA and other red states.

    Is it a good idea for the MAGA right to encourage its followers to blame every one of their life problems on Democrats, immigrants, a global Jewish conspiracy, reptilians or whoever Q-Anon is targeting (pedophiles certainly) or Biden for major catastrophes like this. Not only is it not true, likely impossible to be caused by any single entity, but encouraging people to direct their negative emotions toward a scapegoat is dangerous to us all.

    Somerby should be condemning this, not repeating it, as he does today with Vance's message. Shame on Somerby for repeating this stuff today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MTG is a net positive…for Dems, it’s hard to believe she’s not a Dem plant, but hey, more power to the Repubs, if that’s the direction they want to go in their death spiral.

      Delete
    2. I agree that MTG is a net positive for Dems. That's only because the biased media give so much coverage to her nutty rantings. OTOH the intelligent comments and actions from Senator Cruz get little coverage.

      Delete
    3. That's because Cruz makes so few intelligent comments.

      Delete
    4. "OTOH the intelligent comments and actions from Senator Cruz get little coverage."

      Hypothetical events rarely receive much coverage.

      Delete
    5. It was intelligent on a personal comfort level for Cruz to run away to Cancun during a crippling winter storm, leaving behind his suffering constituents, but likely incredibly dumb in an electoral sense.

      It depends on your point of view, and what matters to you.

      Delete
    6. Thanks for making my point, 1:14 That trip is all you know you know about Cruz.

      Delete
    7. If knowing that Cruz endorsed Trump were all we knew about Cruz, it would be all we would need to know about him. It shows both a lack of intelligence and a lack of character, both disqualifying for the office he holds (and is in the process of losing to Colin Allred).

      Delete
    8. "That trip is all you know you know about Cruz."

      We know he has a mangy beard, too.

      Delete
    9. Most of us here know quite a bit about Ted Cruz, going back to before he ran against Trump in 2015 and was utterly humiliated (Trump said his dad helped shoot JFK) but then Cruz endorsed Trump and cravenly licked his boots.

      Delete
    10. And incidentally, Cruz only beat Trump in the Iowa primary in 2016 by cheating, the first in a long list of elections in which Trump's opponents have cheated him. (source: Donald Trump)

      Delete
    11. "That trip is all you know you know about Cruz."

      Oh no. We also know that Cruz endured Trump referring to him as "Lyin' Ted" for months. Then Trump claimed Cruz's father was involved in the JFK assassination and also called Cruz's wife ugly.

      Then Cruz took a knee.

      Delete
    12. "OTOH the intelligent comments and actions from Senator Cruz get little coverage."

      Here's your chance to educate a bunch of ignorant lefties. Point us to a few of those intelligent comments and actions.

      Delete
  5. Monday…Monday….can’t trust that day….

    ReplyDelete
  6. "The Manchurian Candidate is a political thriller about a U.S. soldier who is brainwashed by communists and becomes an unwitting assassin:
    Plot: During the Korean War, a U.S. Army platoon is captured by the Chinese Communists and brainwashed. After the war, Sergeant Raymond Shaw (Laurence Harvey) is returned home and lauded as a hero by his fellow soldiers. However, Captain Bennett Marco (Frank Sinatra) begins to have nightmares and suspects that Shaw is not the hero he remembers. Marco discovers that Shaw is a puppet of the Communists and is triggered to obey any instruction when he sees a Queen of Diamonds. The Communists plan to have Shaw assassinate the presidential nominee of an American political party, leading to the overthrow of the U.S. government."

    Somerby says:

    "To our own imperfect eye and ear, Candidate Vance seems to be a modern-day "Manchurian candidate."

    Later, Somerby says:

    "Do you believe that Vance believes that? For ourselves, we have no way of knowing if he does. We have no idea.

    We have no idea! But primal impulses are being evoked as this ancient messaging is advanced—and on this morning's front page, it seems to us that Blue America's New York Times has taken its fiddles out.

    Can Candidate Harris overcome this ancient, primal messaging? "

    In this Manchurian Candidate analogy, Vance is a brainwashed assassin being aimed at the other party's candidate, and that would be Harris, not Trump.

    Is this Somerby's disguised way of calling for Harris's assassination? That is a horrible thing to put into disturbed right wing minds, especially coupled with suggesting (via Vance's quote) that Trump is God's instrument. Or is Somerby calling Vance an assassin, by equating him with a movie character in which there is a plot to kill a leading candidate?

    On whose back is Somerby trying to paint a target today? Is this kind of camouflaged talk about killing candidates really what we need in the overheated atmosphere of this election?

    Frankly, I think Somerby has gone around the bend himself. Today's essay makes no sense and it is very difficult to untangle his references. Vance is a jerk but that doesn't mean he is brainwashed to react to a signal from controllers. Thinking in conspiratorial ways like this only encourages the crazies. Maybe Somerby is such a crazy, or maybe he wants them to crawl out and try again, or maybe he is trying to send them in a different direction -- who knows? Whatever is going on in Somerby's head strikes me as jumbled (to use his own word), unlikely to do anyone any good, and worse than whatever Somerby is complaining about in his confused brain.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somerby could make a distinction between Trump being purely self serving, and Vance desiring to have a broader dominance over society; Somerby can’t be bothered with such efforts, it would interfere with the amplification of Republican talking points.

      Delete
    2. The difference between Trump and Vance is not too dissimilar to the meager difference between Fox News and The NY Times. Somerby pretends to not notice.

      Delete
  7. “They” live (lived)
    White male
    Republican gun enthusiasts
    Heralding Trump
    In the yard
    In the voting booth
    Tone deaf ear nicked by shrapnel
    Cheated of cheating at golf
    Feckless shooter of an
    Amorphous blob
    Absorbing our Life Force

    ReplyDelete
  8. Conservatives are also using the "Manchurian candidate" metaphor. They apply it to the Walz, the candidate who made dozens of trips to Communist China. He even chose to spend his honeymoon there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is a lot to like about China as a nation and as a people. Nixon loved it too. Was he brainwashed?

      Delete
    2. Trump loves Russia. In his case, perhaps he is being controlled in some way. It wouldn't be brainwashing because he doesn't have a brain to wash, but they may be blackmailing him and/or using money to control him. There has been some suggestion that Ivana introduced Trump to his first Russian handler, so his tie to Eastern Europe via women is there too.

      Why does none of that concern Republicans? It came up in 2015-2016 but they voted for him anyway. MAGAs do seem to like being exploited, just by white racist countries, not Asians.

      If Republicans to point to any decision made by Walz that has favored China, they might have a point. On the other hand, it is easy to find examples of Trump decisions that have benefitted Putin.

      Delete
    3. Communist China?
      No thanks.
      I hear they don't even love Hollywood or Disney.

      Delete
    4. 11;54,
      In Trump's defense, he's far too stupid to realize Putin was setting him up to blackmail. Similar to the Republican Congressional Caucus.

      Delete
    5. Good point David. Somerby most likely heard that Manchurian Candidate reference on Fox News and is repeating it here as a right wing talking point. It doesn't make sense because we are trying to interpret it as liberals would, not in the way it is being applied by the right.

      What would be the point of brainwashing Walz?

      Delete
    6. When I was a kid it was the Chinese that were eating the dogs (Koreans too), but now it’s Black immigrants, we’ve come a long way, baby.

      Delete
    7. Then it was the Vietnamese immigrants. In the film Cabrini, the Italian immigrants were accused of eating dogs. Then it was the Mexicans, accused of putting dog meat in street tacos. This is an old slur, which is why Vance/Trump's use of it is so obviously racist.

      Delete
  9. Did Democrats try to kill Trump? Never in our history were there two attempted assassinations within two months. This is not totally a coincidence.

    I think Dems and their allies committed something like manslaughter. Over and over and over they used provocative language that would inspire a crazy person to assassination. They even continued to use provocative language even after the first attempt. This was clear to many that this was happening. Long before the first attempt, some observers predicted an assassination.

    Then there was the failure to provide proper Secret Service protection in Butler. Although the second assassination was thwarted by a sharp-eyed secret service person, it was closer than it ought to have been. If the assassin hadn't poked his weapon out of the shrubbery, it wouldn't have been seen, and he would have succeed in shooting at Trump.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When you’re done sharing your fever dreams, let’s talk about your mother.

      Delete
    2. David, there are many ongoing threats against presidents and candidates and other officials that are foiled by the secret service. These are not made public, so you have no idea how many there were or who attempted them. The attack on Trump in Butler was notable because the secret service did not stop it in advance. The other guy who was arrested near the golf course didn't get anywhere near Trump, which makes it more like other foiled attempts. It was notable only because Trump publicized it.

      If you want to make it a contest about who uses the most inflammatory language against its political enemies, Republicans will win. Democrats haven't told religious nuts that their opponents are Satan, for example. Democrats didn't blame Republicans for the hurricane. Democrats don't own nearly as many guns. And Democrats do not use violent rhetoric to the same extent as Trump does, telling people that they need to literally fight to save our country. Democrats don't have young people asking "when do we get to use the guns" at their rallies, as occurred at the conservative Turning Point conference.

      The secret service messed up in Butler, obviously. The second assassination missed by a mile because the secret service did its job. There was nothing extraordinary in that incident. But you might ask yourself how that guy knew Trump would be there on that public golf course (not Mar a Lago), without inside knowledge about Trump's schedule.

      Both of these two attempts to attack Trump were committed by Republicans, not Democrats.

      Delete
    3. "Over and over and over they used provocative language that would inspire a crazy person to assassination."

      Trump is a vile, deranged, bullying, cowardly, lying wannabe dictator.

      Go get him, crazies!

      Delete
    4. Yes, the hypocrisy of David's complaint is striking. As you read through Jack Smith's recent filing about Trump's attempt to overturn the 2020 election, there are repeated examples of death threats against election officials and Republicans, trying to pressure them into doing Trump's bidding. The use of such threats against family of such officials is especially ugly. How can David complain about death threats when it is a tool used explicitly by Trump and his MAGA minions to manipulate people withint their own party?

      Delete
    5. @12:21 - the assassin at the golf course got within the range of his weapon. That's near enough.

      Delete
    6. If it was enough, then Trump wouldn't still be alive.

      Delete
    7. The Trump-voter-at-the-golf-course-with-a-gun story, is EXTREMELY fishy. Just saying.

      Delete
    8. "Never in our history were there two attempted assassinations within two months."

      Where'd you get this little nugget, David? It's wrong, of course. Gerald Ford faced two attempts in the space of just 17 days back in 1975.

      You can read about it right here.

      Delete
    9. D in C, you've gone off completely off the rails. We've never seen anyone running for office spew hate, and spew venomous propaganda like Trump. He claims the dems want to destroy the country. He's vile. Sure, Trump stirs up hostility, some of it also off the rails. but to suggest that the dems and their "allies committed something like manslaughter" (aside from the fact that manslaughter entails someone actually being killed) is ludicrous. You've completely lost it.

      Delete
    10. Anonymouse 12:21pm, not according to this report.

      https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2024/09/17/ryan-wesley-routh-not-registered-republican-fact-check/75254525007/

      Delete
    11. Anonymouse 12:21pm, you don’t know about Crooks with any surety either. Democrats encouraged people to register as Republicans so that they could vote in a primary for Republicans running against Trump.

      Delete
    12. Good point Cecelia. In 1968 I first registered Republican in order to vote against Reagan in the primary, in the foolish belief that he would be the weaker candidate

      Delete
    13. Crooks was cancel cultured, by the Right, for having a poor opinion of Trump.

      Delete
    14. Anonymouse 1:54pm, who’s canceling a 20-year-old nursing home aide?

      Delete
    15. Like Kyle Rittenhouse, who dropped out of his nursing program the moment he was acquitted of killing two men and shooting a third?

      Delete
    16. Anonymouse 2:30pm, like how? Crooks is dead. He dropped out of the health care field the hard way.

      Delete
    17. I'm asking you. What does being a nursing home aide have to do with trying to kill the president?

      Delete
    18. Anonymouse 2:26pm, nothing. You brought up Kyle and his job.

      Delete
    19. AC/MA - One of your corrections is noted. IMO the Dems committed something like attempted manslaughter.

      However, IMO the Dems ought to have known that their demonizing was dangerous. I and many others knew it long before it happened. Dems certainly should have known the effect of their overheated rhetoric after the first assassination attempt.

      Quaker -- thanks for your correction. I was wrong.

      Delete
    20. “Trump is a vile, deranged, bullying, cowardly, lying wannabe dictator.

      Go get him, crazies!”

      There you have it.

      Delete
    21. "Dems certainly should have known the effect of their overheated rhetoric after the first assassination attempt."

      Dems should have known that their criticisms would lead Republican voters to try to shoot the Republican candidate? No one predicted that.

      Also, it's funny that Trump's language regarding FEMA is a "criticism" in your telling, but Dem remarks about Trump and his campaign are dangerous incitements.

      Delete
    22. "Go get him, crazies!”
      A direct appeal to Republican voters, who have guns, no less.

      Delete

    23. The point of this post is that the New York Times should scrutinize this extreme political rhetoric directly and forcefully, or Harris may lose.

      Delete
    24. QiB, you cannot be certain that the potential assassins are Republicans. Crooks may have registered that way to vote against Trump in the primary. However, if you were absolutely certain that they are Repubs, just as much as you are certain of your own Democratic beliefs, how would it be irrational to claim that left-wing doomsday rhetoric may have provoked these guys?

      Delete
    25. If you cannot be sure they are Republicans, you cannot be sure they are Democrats either.

      Delete
    26. Anonymouse 5:51pm, you cannot. We can know who is saying what as to Trump.

      Delete
    27. BYW- I personally get the willies when people start blaming their opponents’ political rhetoric for the actions of crazies and morons.

      Delete
    28. Enough with the silly speculation about Dem rhetoric.

      Crooks’ google searches included “major depressive disorder."

      He also had searched FBI Director Christopher Wray, Attorney General Merrick Garland and a member of the British royal family.

      Crooks lived 53 miles from Butler, where Trump was shot.

      "an official...suggested Crooks wanted to carry out a mass shooting and the location and timing of the Trump rally was the best opportunity."

      Makes a lot more sense than blaming it on Chris Hayes' monologue.

      "https://fox59.com/news/national-world/trump-shooters-search-history-what-we-know/

      Delete
    29. D in C - that's a really weak response. You completely ignore my accusation that there's never been anyone like Trump as far as spewing venomous propaganda. You just sidestep evidence that doesn't jibe with your bs spiel. You don't have any evidence as to what motivated the 2 unsuccessful would-be assassins. I hear dems claim that both were registered republicans (extreme never-trumpers?) - I don't know if that's true. (Though apparently God and/or Jesus stepped in to foil the first one, and, as Trump suggested, to save the country, and probably the world). It's random, there's no such thing attempted manslaughter, you're being silly. it
      's like blaming the MAGA's for the guy who viciously assaulted Pelosi's husband - if Pelosi hade been home, what do you think would have happened to her? Try not to get so deep into hypocrisy is my suggestion.

      Delete
    30. Cecilia, unfortunately, most of those accusations have some truth. You don't seem to be bothered by the tidal wave of venom from Trump - and then blame people who react to it as inciting crazies. As you may have noticed, I think the dems have gone off the rails. (There's a couple here who showcase that). That doesn't mean I am going to be an apologist for that nasty bastid. There was that Boston lawyer, in the famous scene in the senate, in a bygone era, who asked Joe McCarthy - 'have you no sense of decency?" That's a question for Trump.

      Delete
    31. AC/MA, so your gist is that I’m an apologist for any incendiary rhetoric via that “nasty bastard”?

      Delete
    32. Cecilia, No my gist was that no one running for office spewed hate and venomous propaganda the way trump does, particularly running for president. That more likely is the cause of a couple of random crackpots trying to assassinate him, not whatever over the top criticism by his multitudinous haters. also the irony on steroids about trump supporters complaining about blue tribe rhetoric. Personally, I like you and most of your comments.

      Delete
    33. AC/MA, you’re minimizing the point that David and others have made about rhetoric. If you’re going to characterize Trump as being a Nazi/Putin- puppet (?) traitor to the country, who will jail his critics and opponents, and end democracy in the U.S. of A don’t be surprised if kooks and crooks believe you and act upon that sentiment.

      Don’t do lectures on the dangers of inflammatory rhetoric and then say that Trump will end our republic.Trump had four years to do that and it didn’t happen. In fact, his supporters were demonetized on social media outlets. Prominent media members threatened to leave Twitter because of their exposure to conservative criticism and taunts about the downsizing of the industry. Dan Bongino, a conservative who was then working for FNC, was prevented from starting a Twitteresque program because Google would not give him a platform. So much for the vast power of Trump’s presidency.

      I like you too, AC/MA, but get some perspective as to this particular stuff.


      Delete
    34. Great advice about getting some perspective Cecelia. Except that Trump has actually said he wants to jail his opponents and has now been declared essentially immune from prosecution by the Supreme Court. In fact, they said that any communication between the president and the justice department is completely off-limits as far as prosecution. That gives Trump far more power than he had in his first term. Do you not understand that?

      Delete
    35. Anonymouse 9:37am, do you foresee local prosecutors in various states bringing some sort of charges against Biden or against Harris if she is not elected? Do you see the records from various parts of parts of the Biden-Harris Admin being leaked? Do you predict fines of thousands of dollars per day against Biden? Do you see their friends and allies being charged? Do you think all the other branches of government will be on their heels? Will there be a daily media frenzy over possible charges against Biden Admin officials and a steady drumbeat of outraged rhetoric and new “news” as to their perfidy? Will they be cast as wanting to bring down the country and turn it over to China or Iran?

      nah. You’ll be just fine.

      Delete
    36. Trump was kidding when he said he would jail his opponents. Like when he said won the 2020 Presidential election, and that Democrats cheat in elections.
      What next? Pretending Trump was being serious, when he said he'd make a great President?

      Delete
    37. Let's face it.
      Donald Trump's outright contempt for republican voters is, by far, the best thing about him. As a country, we'd be in a much better place if the media would emulate Trump's contempt, instead of propping up Republican voters by pretending they know anything about economics.

      Delete
    38. Anonymouse 10:23am, no, I think there is a cadre of people in federal government, in politics, in the judicial system, and in the media who think just as you think.However, they’re far more wily and sophisticated and smarter than anonymices.The only exception there being the media. You’ll be fine.

      Delete
  10. CNN is doing something both useful and admirable, as it contests the lies being told by Trump about the FEMA response:

    "CNN host Dana Bash claimed former President Donald Trump was "hurting" his own MAGA voters by spreading conspiracy theories about FEMA support in western North Carolina in the aftermath of flooding caused by Hurricane Helene.

    "The Biden administration is blasting Donald Trump's barrage of lies in the wake of Hurricane Helene," Bash said during a CNN panel discussion on Monday. "The former president is falsely accusing federal relief agencies of maliciously withholding and misusing aid."

    "They're rumors, and they're lies, and they are hurting the very people," the CNN host said. "The thousands of FEMA emergency responders are trying to help as we speak."

    FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell has said that Trump's remarks made it challenging to get people to apply for aid.

    "If I can't get them to apply, I can't give them the money and the resources that they're eligible for," Criswell explained.

    CNN correspondent Priscilla Alvarez said that Trump surrogates like RNC co-chair Lara Trump were conflating funds for migrant shelters with disaster relief aid.

    "The money has not been and never has been transferred over," Alvarez insisted. "All of this to say that when I have been talking to my sources about what the former president is saying, the ultimate concern is that people will not apply for assistance." [Rawstory]

    It is heartening to me to see the media doing its job of informing people and helping them during the aftermath of this disaster. It is more than Somerby is doing. And I have to wonder how Trump could use lies to promote his campaign that are so damaging to the people affected by the storm.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dana Bash's correction is just a quibble. It is a fact that FEMA spent a fortune for the benefit of migrants.

      But, her claim that criticizing FEMA makes it harder to do their job is shameless. Try it at work. When your boss starts to criticize some foulup, tell her/him that s/he's the one making things worse, because criticism hurts your job performance.

      Delete
    2. "her claim that criticizing FEMA makes it harder to do their job is shameless."

      Falsely claiming that FEMA is withholding aid isn't a "criticism." It's a lie. It's a lie that might prompt some who need assistance not to ask for it.

      Delete
    3. BTW FEMA was embarrassingly slow to fully respond to Helene. They finally started to make use of military resources that were available all along. "Historic U.S. Military Aircraft Join Hurricane Helene Relief Operation." It took FEMA a week and a half to finally take this obvious step. How many deaths would have been avoided if FEMA had acted promptly?

      Delete
    4. Quaker -- that's a pretty weak, hypothetical argument, especially because non-government organs have been rescuing people from the beginning

      We can only guess at the effect of the criticism on FEMA. My guess is that the criticism is motivating them to get off their asses and put more effort into doing their job. Isn't that the usual result when someone gets chewed out?

      Delete
    5. It took FEMA so long, you could hear poor, suffering Libertarians crying out for Daddy Government to save them.

      Delete
    6. More lies about FEMA from David. Lies are not motivating because they are not true. FEMA has been doing its job despite criticism, not because of it. Politicizing the response to this hurricane is despicable. Communities need to be working together to help those in need.

      Delete
    7. David doesn't seem to understand that the lies are not criticism but are deterring people from applying for aid that they are entitled to, and that is available now to them. He obviously didn't see the link from the woman who explained that clearly. If people don't think there is any FEMA money, they won't ask for it and they cannot receive the aid without applying for it. THAT is hurting the people in need. Telling people in red states that Biden gave all the FEMA money away to migrants is just a cruel hoax.

      Delete
    8. @3:36 - I'm afraid you have it backwards. Bad performance by a government agency is an argument in favor of advocates of smaller government.

      Delete
    9. Dickhead, you are shameless.

      Delete
    10. "that's a pretty weak, hypothetical argument, especially because non-government organs have been rescuing people from the beginning"

      So no one is influenced by the things Trump says? Good to know.

      Delete
    11. "We can only guess at the effect of the criticism on FEMA"

      And yet we can know with certainty the effect of criticism of Donald Trump by Democrats. Do I understand you correctly?

      Delete
    12. "FEMA was embarrassingly slow to fully respond to Helene"

      Not just wrong. Proveably wrong.

      Delete
    13. 3:29 hey, clown, what do you think FEMA is doing? The have been in NC since before the hurricane hit. I trust the governors and mayors in the affected areas before listening to some armchair idiot in California’s version of what is going on, based upon his chosen right wing media outlets.

      Delete
    14. "Provably wrong" Quaker? How can you say that? There was indeed a big delay before FEMA brought in military resources. That's one way in which FEMA was slow to fully respond. (BTW I hope you didn't misread my comment as if I had said FEMA was slow to respond in any way at all.)

      Delete
    15. If the governors and mayors in the affected areas have not complained about the FEMA response, we will rely on DIC to pick up the slack.

      Delete
    16. 'FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell has said that Trump's remarks made it challenging to get people to apply for aid.

      "If I can't get them to apply, I can't give them the money and the resources that they're eligible for," Criswell explained.'

      Sounds somethig like manslaughter to me.

      Delete
    17. "(BTW I hope you didn't misread my comment as if I had said FEMA was slow to respond in any way at all.)"

      Well, yeah. You wrote:

      "BTW FEMA was embarrassingly slow to fully respond to Helene."

      Go ahead a split a hair for us.

      Delete
    18. "They finally started to make use of military resources that were available all along. "Historic U.S. Military Aircraft Join Hurricane Helene Relief Operation." It took FEMA a week and a half to finally take this obvious step."

      So badly wrong.

      The headline you quoted appears on just one article returned in a Google search. It describes a volunteer effort by a couple of foundations that own museum-piece aircraft. Not "military resources," but antiques. The foundations that own the aircraft stepped up and offered to run a couple of loads of supplies to North Carolina.

      This is what you're hanging your "embarrassingly slow" criticism on?

      Delete
    19. "Bad performance by a government agency is an argument in favor of advocates of smaller government."

      What if the bad performance is caused by too little funding to carry out their mission?

      Delete
    20. So many Republican lies, so little time to debunk all of them.

      Delete
  11. "Nobody knows the system better than me, which is why I alone can fix it." - Donald Trump, 2016

    "...her (Kamal Harris) arrogant claim that she alone can fix our nation’s problems" - Sarah Huckabee Sanders, 2024

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hey, this is kind of a rando question. But whatever happened to the whistleblower with the affadavit (signed!) about the secret agreement between ABC and the Harris campaign before the debate?

    Any updates on that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They have filed a complaint with the SEC.

      Delete
    2. LOL, thanks for the update

      Delete
    3. It's Cecelia. She meant the Big Ten.

      Delete
    4. https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/us-news-live-updates-today-september-21-2024-laura-loomer-gets-her-hands-on-abc-whistleblowers-complaint-alleging-network-colluded-with-harris-for-sept-10-debate/ar-AA1qVT1t

      Delete
    5. The SEC is the Securities and Exchange Commission:

      "The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is a US federal agency that regulates the securities markets and protects investors. The SEC was established in 1934 in response to the stock market crash of 1929."

      What Cecelia insists she is saying makes no sense.

      Delete
    6. Anonymouse 5:49pm, tell that to MSN. On X, you can also find pictures of the SEC’s initial “thank you for your report” letter.

      Delete
    7. https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/whistleblower-program

      Delete
    8. From Cecelia's link:
      "The SEC's whistleblower program was established by Congress to incentivize whistleblowers to report specific, timely and credible information about possible federal securities laws violations."

      I'm at a loss to imagine what securities laws were implicated.

      Delete
    9. QiB, I don’t know either, but thats a different argument as to whether I mistook the SEC for the FEC.

      Delete
    10. Oh, now I see. This is the affidavit promoted by Laura Loomer. Back to the original question: Has anything new happened?

      Delete

    11. “CeceliaOctober 7, 2024 at 3:34 PM
      They have filed a complaint with the SEC.”

      Nice we got that important SEC thing cleared up. Huh?

      Delete
  13. I'll say this directly. Republicans should not be politicizing disaster relief, because it hurts the people needing aid. Here is another example of Republicans playing politics with the latest hurricane:

    "Vice President Kamala Harris has been reaching out to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis as yet another hurricane is barreling toward his state.

    However, NBC News reports that DeSantis has been blowing off her calls.

    One DeSantis aide who spoke with NBC said that they did not want to take Harris's calls because they "seemed political."

    "Kamala was trying to reach out, and we didn't answer," the aide added.

    The aide also said they had no knowledge of DeSantis talking with President Joe Biden, who reached out to the Florida governor last week without success.

    DeSantis has, however, been talking directly with Federal Emergency Management Director Deanne Criswell.

    DeSantis' apparent reluctance to speak with Harris comes at a time when former President Donald Trump has been lobbing multiple false claims at the Biden administration for its handling of Hurricane Helene, which caused widespread devastation throughout the Southeastern United States more than a week ago.

    Among other things, Trump falsely claimed that Biden had refused to talk with Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp despite the fact that Kemp confirmed that he had personally spoken with Biden." [Rawstory]

    This report comes from NBC News, which is doing its job.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @2:25 -- IMO it's Harris who's acting politically. Harris isn't personally involved in disaster relief. DeSantis is. It makes sense for FEMA to talk to Florida authorities, but Harris adds nothing. For her to talk to DeSantis is a way to pretend that she's doing something about Hurricane Milton.

      Delete
    2. It's also inconvenient for right-wing pols who want to complain that Harris is sitting on the sidelines while Americans suffer. She is the vice-president after all and apparently responsible for all of the operations of the federal government, if Republicans are to be believed.

      Meanwhile the Republican candidate made promises to the people of North Carolina about his own efforts to provide relief, including facilitating the delivery of Starlink internet infrastructure.

      Delete
    3. Quaker, Trump and Musk are fulfilling that promise - now that the FCC is allowing them to do so..

      "FCC lets Starlink provide service to cell phones in areas hit by hurricane
      Temporary authority comes after Musk slammed FCC for not giving money to SpaceX."
      https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/10/fcc-lets-starlink-provide-service-to-cell-phones-in-areas-hit-by-hurricane/

      Delete
    4. Quaker -- I think you just agreed with me that for Harris to talk to DeSantis has no purpose except to help her politically.

      Delete
    5. The mere existence of Harris is justifiable reason for right wing trolls like DIC to complain. Either she is doing nothing and therefore showing no leadership or she is doing something that is completely politically motivated. When Tampa and the west coast of Florida are pummelled in a couple of days by a hurricane that went from category 2 to 5 in the blink of an eye there is one thing that the residents may wish to consider: who it is that says global warming is a hoax.

      Delete
    6. David, Harris talking to DeSantis serves the purpose of coordinating hurricane aid for FL residents. The Gov is supposed to do that as part of his job, just as Harris is doing it as part of her job as VP. Biden may have reasoned that if DeSantis wouldn't talk to him (for who knows what reason), perhaps he might talk to Harris. DeSantis declined to do his job by talking to Harris too. The criticism belongs with DeSantis, who is failing his people when he plays political games with their well-being.

      Delete
    7. Biden/Harris talking with a state's governor serves the purpose of allowing that top state official to request and otherwise coordinate aid as needed to meet the needs of the people. It is how the president decides to allocate resources that may be above and beyond the pre-planned and anticipated needs of that state's people.

      Delete
    8. Y'all can't blame DeSantis. Have you forgotten the treatment Chris Christie got for cooperating with Obama after Hurrican Sandy?

      Meatball Ron doesn't want any of that.

      Delete
    9. "I think you just agreed with me that for Harris to talk to DeSantis has no purpose except to help her politically."

      Is being catastrophically wrong a hobby of yours?

      No, of course I don't agree. My point is that Harris will be criticized for "politicizing" the disaster if she does something or if she does nothing. The policitical motive belongs to those who stand around and tell stories about folks doing their jobs.

      Delete
    10. From the story you linked, David:

      "SpaceX CEO Elon Musk thanked the FCC for expediting approval of the emergency authority, but has been warring with the commission in recent days. Musk's criticism of the FCC relates to the agency's decision to reject Starlink's final application for $885.51 million in broadband-deployment funding, which is for home Internet service and not related to the satellite-to-cellular capability."

      Musk is just woofing again, like he did when he (publicly and wrongly, again) claimed that the FAA was blocking traffic into the disaster zone.

      Delete
    11. Senators, governors, mayors and newspapers in the disaster areas are all lauding FEMA. The Charlotte Observer specifically stated that Trump’s rhetoric is harmful to recovery efforts. The individuals are uniformly Republican.

      Delete
  14. This is the actual tapioca from the NY Times:

    https://www.jefftiedrich.com/p/the-new-york-times-finally-notices

    This is what an actual media critic might discuss.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This is the anniversary of 10/7 when Hamas launched a brutal sneak attack on innocent Israelis. Somerby's topic is the martyrdom of Trump as told by Vance. This is beyond crass and insensitive.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe Bob isn't on the Thought Police newsletter subscription list.

      Delete
    2. Today Trump expressed eugenicist views by saying that immigrants have bad genes that cause them to commit more murders. That should be beyond the pale for any decent person and Somerby should say so and call out whatever newspapers do not report these despicable sentiments (like those that led to the Holocaust and every other mistreatment of ethnic or racial minorities in any nation's history). This is especially unacceptable speech for a national candidate for president!

      Delete
    3. When someone runs a blog, they are subject to other people's criticism for what they do and do not say. That has nothing to do with "thought police."

      Delete
    4. Trump has connected the dots for anyone who wasn't already aware of his racial attitudes. Now that they are explicit, people need to express their own positions in relation to what Trump said.

      When JD Vance said Trump was "America's Hitler," he was correct. So, why then is Vance running on the same ticket with such a person? He needs to make a statement about that.

      Delete
    5. Actually Trump said that immigrants who commit murder have bad genes. I do not agree with this statement, but we should be accurate about what he said.

      Delete
    6. "Donald Trump is falsely alleging immigrants' genetics make them predisposed to committing the crime of murder, and says immigrants coming into the U.S. have "a lot of bad genes."

      The ex-president, a convicted felon running again for the White House falsely alleged his democratic presidential opponent, Vice President Harris, has allowed 13,000 murderers to enter the country. That figure is the sum total of all people convicted of murder who have crossed the border over the past 40 years, NBC News reported, including during Trump's time as president. It also incudes people who may currently be in state or federal prison.

      "When you look at the things that she proposes," Trump, speaking of Vice President Harris, told far-right pundit Hugh Hewitt Monday morning, "they're so far off she has no clue. How about allowing people to come to an open border? 13,000 of which were murderers, many of them, murdered far more than one person, and they are now happily living in the United States you know now, a murderer."

      "I believe this. It's in their genes, and we got a lot of bad genes in our country right now," Trump alleged (video below)."

      This doesn't say what you claim, David. He is saying that immigrants have bad genes, not just the ones who have committed murder.

      Delete
    7. Trump said, according to NBC News, "“Many of them murdered far more than one person, and they’re now happily living in the United States,” he added. “You know, now a murderer, I believe this, it’s in their genes. And we got a lot of bad genes in our country right now. They left, they had 425,000 people come into our country that shouldn’t be here, that are criminals.” (my boldface) I think that makes it clear that he's talking about murderers' genes.

      CNN didn't like what Trump said (neither do I), but at least CNN understood what Trump said.

      Delete
    8. He is saying that the immigrants coming into the US have murderer's genes, not that they committed crimes. There are not 425,000 people who have committed murders, coming into our country. There were 13,000 over 40 years, including people who are in jail for their crimes in the US. It is clear that Trump is calling the immigrants coming into our country murderers because of their genes.

      Delete
    9. "Somerby should say so and call out whatever newspapers do not report these despicable sentiments"

      Does this rule apply to all other bloggers/journalists? Sounds like it should so, you've got a lot of letters to the editor to write.

      Delete
    10. 'When someone runs a blog, they are subject to other people's criticism for what they do and do not say. That has nothing to do with "thought police."'

      There's nothing in common sense or decency that demands 'anniversary coverage' of an issue. This is something all media do, from some sort of herd instinct.

      Somerby should be praised for not being a sheep.

      Delete
    11. when there are important things happening, Somerby ignores them in order to gripe about some triviality.

      Delete
    12. Sure. Trump is only talking about the immigrant murderers having bad genes. That’s why he wants to deport 12,000,000 of them.

      Delete
    13. @1:20 You and I want the President to deport all the illegal immigrants. That’s what the laws enacted by our elected Congress requires.

      Delete
    14. Do immigrants have murderers genes? Probably in a lower frequency than the populations that they are entering. Otherwise, the crime rate in Texas would not 1qhave gone down year after year since Biden took office.

      Delete
    15. Anonymices endlessly mention right wingers as people who are marred/psychologically damaged by some sort trauma or unhealthy culture. Bob recently made the same claim.

      This is what Trump means by “bad genes”. He means people who have been raised in a pernicious/unwholesome environment and act like it…

      Delete
    16. 8:04: the Trump whisperer speaks.

      Delete
    17. Anonymouse 8:28am, I don’t have to have ESPN or any extra-sensory powers. Common sense and perspective work well enough.

      Delete
    18. Turns out, per 8:04, that Trump was referring to Republican voters with bad genes.
      Regardless, I'm still not sure bigotry is as genetic as Trump says it is.

      Delete
    19. Anonymouse 9:09pm, are you sure it wasn’t “bad jeans”?

      Delete
    20. This is what Trump means by “bad genes”.

      He's a big boy, momma maggot, why don't you let him explain what he means.

      Delete
    21. Anonymouse 10:31am, I think you just explained what he meant and echoed him.

      Delete
    22. Let me see if I understand, Cec, you take offense to being labeled a maggot? LOL, momma bear

      Delete
    23. "This is what Trump means by “bad genes”. He means people who have been raised in a pernicious/unwholesome environment and act like it…"

      Not to pick nits, but unwholesome environments can affect your behavior, but not your genes.

      Delete
    24. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    25. Anonymouse 11:03am, I’m not offended by anyone using the term maggot toward Trump supporters, however, I AM delighted when they do it the context of decrying dehumanization.

      Thank you, sweetheart.

      Delete
  16. Off topic -- Bad news. I HATE the Texas abortion law
    Supreme Court Declines to Hear Texas Abortion-Law Challenge in Blow to Biden Administration
    https://www.nationalreview.com/news/supreme-court-declines-to-hear-texas-abortion-law-challenge-in-blow-to-biden-administration/

    ReplyDelete
  17. This source debunks the FEMA criticisms being made by the right:

    https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/october-6-2024

    ReplyDelete
  18. BTW I caught a bit of Karine Jean Pierre's press conference. She's the source of the crazy idea that some people won't file for benefits because FEMA was criticized.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, FEMA is the source. She is a govt spokesperson repeating what is being experienced on the ground as FEMA tries to do its job.

      Delete
    2. https://www.fema.gov/disaster/current/hurricane-helene/rumor-response

      Delete
    3. "She's the source of the crazy idea that some people won't file for benefits"

      No.

      Delete
    4. Evidently, Americans didn’t gets a memo as to dangerous speech during Hurricane Katrina.

      Delete
    5. @6:12 — This alleged problem is not being experienced on the ground. Nobody has identified even one individual who didn’t apply for benefits because FEMA was criticized

      Delete
    6. Don’t be an idiot.

      Delete
    7. The lie was propagated by Trump that FEMA was only paying out $750 to the survivors of this disaster. It needed to be debunked by FEMA. Partisan trolls like DiC would like to turn this into a criticism aimed at Democrats when Trump initiated the controversy with a flat out lie.

      Delete
    8. The irony of this brouhaha is that Trump was charged with using FEMA money for the border when he was president.

      https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1046691

      Delete
    9. Yes, so ironic, that Trump routinely accuses others of doing exactly what he has done. It’s part of his and the GOP’s pathology.

      Delete
    10. Anonymouse 9:28am, my take would be that pulling from FEMA is not something that’s particularly unusual, but you do anonymouse.

      Delete
  19. From the Washington Post:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/10/04/michele-morrow-superintendent-candidate-north-carolina-gop/

    As if the good people of North Carolina haven’t suffered enough lately, they also have to worry about this: a network of child traffickers and pedophiles that tortures and kills children to harvest their blood for an anti-aging elixir known as adrenochrome.
    Or so believes the Republican candidate to be the state’s superintendent of public instruction, Michele Morrow.
    “The evil, demon-possessed people who worship Satan have been using this to try to keep their youth,” Morrow said in a video she posted on Facebook in 2020. “They’ve been using it as a drug that is more powerful than street drugs. ... It is gotten through children who are being tortured and know that they are about to die. Guys, this is deep, it is evil, and it is real. It is truly happening, and we have got to stop it.” Among those she has identified as adrenochrome users is the actor Jim Carrey.
    She previously proposed a “Pay Per View” of Barack Obama “in front of the firing squad” because “I do not want to waste another dime on supporting his life. We could make some money back from televising his death.” She also called for the executions of President Joe Biden, Bill Gates and several others....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sounds like she wants to make America great again.

      Delete
    2. But of course Democrats need to tone down their rhetoric. The Republican Party attracts these types like shit attracts flies.

      Delete
  20. I think the commenter's time would be better served acknowledging a "revolt of the masses" is simmering in our country and that Democrats are not addressing it properly.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Wow! DeSantis says he never received a call from Harris. He says he did talk to Biden and the Federal Government is giving Florida everything they want.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let's wait and see what Trump thinks about the FEMA response in Florida to Milton. He is the expert.

      Delete
    2. @12:21 — regardless of the reality Trump will say FEMA did a terrible job and Dems will say FEMA did a great job.

      Delete
    3. ...regardless of the reality...

      Go fuck yourself, maggot.

      Delete
  22. Lying liar (DeSantis)

    ReplyDelete
  23. 9:24 as a resident of Florida I completely agree.

    ReplyDelete
  24. AFAIK the original story did not have a named source. I did not see a quote from Harris saying she had called DeSantis and he refused to take her calls. This not a He said-She said. It's just a He said.

    I feel pretty silly for arguing the political morality of something that seemingly never happened.

    ReplyDelete
  25. An aide to DeSantis said it.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This tiny issue is a winner for the Republicans. The bickering between DeSantis and Harris makes both of them look bad. However, Harris is running for President and DeSantis isn't.

    ReplyDelete
  27. In the upside down world of DiC’s gop, DeSantis lying about Harris makes Harris look bad. Got it, David. It’s twisted.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Any lead Harris had over Trump in the polls is long gone. We are soon to be entering a phase of savage desperation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “The [new Times/Siena] poll found Harris led Trump by 49% to 46% ...Trump and Harris had been even, at 47% each, in mid-September...Harris has begun making inroads among Republicans: 9% said they planned to support her, up slightly from 5% last month."

      Delete
    2. Tell you what, like with the Australian wildfires, those affected by these catastrophic storms will be questioning the lies told to them by republicans all these years. It will make a difference, as it did in Australia.

      Delete
  29. ...DeSantis isn't.

    Oh, really. LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  30. This tiny issue....

    Oh, now it's a "tiny" issue? It was such a "tiny" issue that you ran here to post about it the minute you thought you had caught the VP in a lie.

    You're such a fucking transparent fraud, Dickhead.

    ReplyDelete