I've also never ceased to be amazed by Woodward's access. It's not just Trump. He's always been able to get insiders to tell him more than they have any business telling anyone remotely connected with journalism. Man's a wizard in that sense.

Where are “the authorities” I can go call to report that there is a complete moron in the Oval Office? Apparently these guys have more power than the President of the US.

But, again, in a 1 hour interview: how many times does Trump say something that contradicts something else he said? I'd wager it's at least a dozen times. That's part of his "strategy" as the rorschach "communicator" - people hear what they want to hear (or not hear) from him.

SI

All I can say is you have a far different bar about what is newsworthy than any other one I've encountered. If the POTUS lying about a major public health issue isn't newsworthy, I have a hard time imagining many things that ever would be.

I don't think it's even worth arguing at this point, but my devil's advocate gene won't let me not chime in.

I go back to the fact that this interview took place three entire weeks before the first covid death was even reported in America (wrongly, but that doesn't change the timeline). He was supposed to run to the hills screaming "Trump said it was deadly!!" three weeks before a single American had died?

There had to be a significant amount of deaths outside of the expectations for an extended amount of time (to a degree of tens-of-thousands), while Trump demonstrably acted and talked in the opposite manner, in order for the quote to even become remarkable. I suppose you could quibble about the exact moment of that tipping point, but the suggestion that he should've reported at as soon as he said it is absurd to me.

I'm going to concur; the fact is people still think it's a hoax, or that it was purposely released to cost Trump the election. So they give little fuck to what Woodward reported, regardless if it had been in February or now.

Republicans don't care about Americans, they only care about rich Americans who give nary a fuck about the rest of us.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ge%2Fstory-ans

I think that campaign ad spending is overrated, so this isn't that worrying of a sign for the GOP.

But it is kind of amazing that the grifters have managed to take a billion from the campaign at this point with not much to show for it.

I don't think the argument is that Woodward should have been screaming it to the hills when he was told in February, it's that maybe this made sense to release in April or May or whenever when Trump was downplaying it even against people like Fauci.

Except I think that's exactly what has been said twice in this thread (Ben/Brian): he should have released it in February. Either of you, correct me if I'm wrong on that - I'm not trying to put words in your mouth but that's what I was reading in both of your posts.

The point you made was something my wife and I were talking about tonight. I think I've articulated as much as I can how much I think it's an unfair standard to say it in February. But there might have been an ideal time (though, again, it would have been hard to figure that out in real time). Our best guess landed on the time Trump started trying to undercut Fauci and started doing opposition research on him which was about May-ish, maybe?

In the end, I feel like here we are going after these jangling keys again for the last page or so as Trump's got our eyes off the ball yet again. The story somehow isn't "Trump knew about it and he screwed it up" because we just assume he's a screw up and, yet there's still a decent chance he keeps the job. Somehow, we're talking about when Bob Woodward was supposed to leak his tapes of Trump doing something we all agree was awful.

SI

That's better than the way I was interpreting it, but it still seems like prematurely splitting hairs, inside a bubble, in order to shoot the messenger.

I mean I'm certainly not against the suggestion that Woodward is jaded towards the death count, or the general idea of 'doing the right thing whenever possible', but I think it helps to think of how obviously that directive fails (and is essentially trained against) in cases like undercover investigations or turning a lower criminal informant in order to catch a larger criminal/organization & investigative journalism probably falls into that same realm. It seems a little premature to pin tens of thousands of deaths on Woodward, having heard less than one percent of the story.

Ehh, if you think CNN/Fox etc discussing this could lessen the impact that's an argument, but I don't think there's anyone here who has been undecided on their vote since at least 2018, so I'd rather discuss the more nuanced or esoteric things here.

I get the argument that Woodward shouldn't be compelled to release things right away in order to get a bigger story and retain access, and I was even on the side where I wanted the restrictions lifted/eased even though I knew it would cause more deaths, but if you have evidence the President is lying to the public about how dangerous a disease is in order to push an agenda he thinks will help him get re-elected, and that agenda will almost certainly lead to more deaths, that seems like a point where actual lives should be measured vs continued access.

That seems fair enough, but if we're accounting for threat it certainly seems worth noting that just one of the other things that we DO know was under discussion/consideration was literally a super-weapon.

...but I still feel like I've argued far too much about talking points I don't really care that much about, while Ben is talking in terms of real loss close to him, and that feels incosiderate. Sorry, Ben.

The President wakes early on 9/11 and, as his first message of the day shows us that he truly understands the gravity of the situation

Congratulations to JPMorgan Chase for ordering everyone BACK TO OFFICE on September 21st. Will always be better than working from home!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 11, 2020

There is also this:

Trump’s lost summer: Focused on Fox News, not on battleground states - POLITICO

My brother in law is 2 steps below Jamie Dimon. I sent this tweet to him this morning giving him shit as he hates Trump. Waiting for a reply.

I feel like Baghdad Bob was made for this administration.

Remember how America collectively laughed it ass off at him, every time he spoke? Yet, his behavior and words would fit right in with trump.

Fuck Jaime Dimon.

My BIL just works for the guy, never said he liked him (no idea if he does)

Our president forgot the words to the pledge and the first lady doesn't even make an effort.

President Trump recites the Pledge of Allegiance at this morning's 9/11 commemoration in Shanksville, PA. pic.twitter.com/KZPWjai9ye

— The Recount (@therecount) September 11, 2020

I really wonder if he's going to do any debates this year. On the one hand, he's losing and needs to shake the race up.

On the other, look at him here.

Does he still have the tallest buildings in NY?

So I was just informed by my brother in law that it is 1% of workers. I know, shocking Trump wouldn’t have his facts straight.

I was curious and found an online book that had the OVER of 2.5 debates at -300.

That feels about right. The debates are likely to happen.

But I wouldn't bet my actual money on it, you know?

Remember when Trump was demanding MORE debates?

FWIW I don't actually think Woodward had an obligation to publish in February. I was simply trying to clarify what it is that Ben had been trying to say and it seemed to me that people were just not understanding. I'm generally of the 'outcomes don't determine morality' school of thought, just perhaps not to as great an extent as some are.


Number of deaths are irrelevant. The statements contradicting the way he was minimizing the virus publicly do that all on their own, whether any American ever died of it or not.

You know how Trump always wants the biggest? If the American COVID deaths surpass WW2 American deaths, can we the people have the biggest monument on the Mall dedicated to his colossal failure in this? Something both to honor the dead and also remind us of what a horrible mistake in history this was?

SI

I think it's well-established by polling that there are a significant number of such people in every election. Heck, it's just common sense from logic. On any continuum there are people near the middle. On one like this where most will eventually choose one end of the continuum or another, the situation cannot be any other than that some will be be persuaded by vanishingly small criteria.

That's not a laughable concept, it's one inherent to and unavoidable in this kind of voting exercise.

FL appeals court reinstates poll tax on former felons.

Each election cycle the GOP has to work a little harder to disenfranchise enough voters.

Real quite on the "textualist" crowds. You'd think they'd be upset that a bunch of judges just ignored it. Almost like they don't really believe in it.

A US appeals court says Florida can stop ex-felons from voting if they owe court fines or fees associated with their convictionshttps://t.co/mNSjhVyQYk

— CNN Breaking News (@cnnbrk) September 11, 2020

People have pointed out how it would have been easier for Trump to just get the virus under control than it has been for him to justify not getting the virus under control. He's made more work for himself in the long run.

I feel the same way about the GOP. At some point, instead of continuing to work to disenfranchise people, you could just support popular policies. Seems easier in the long run.

What makes it worse is there is no definitive way for them to know what they might owe. If they vote and it is later found they had outstanding fees, they can be prosecuted for that.

But they probably can't be so all in on white nationalism. Without all of the counter-majoritarian elements of our system, white nationalism wouldn't be a successful strategy at the national level.

This shit is going to lead to mass violence. You can't have a system where the minority keeps the majority from power without it eventually ending in violence.

Yeah. I'm biased here b/c I think that if the GOP went back to a "support small business, national security, low unemployment, free trade, low deficits" platform, it would be for the good of the country. And I actually think that having an active White Nationalist party is overall bad for the country.

So part of what I think is for the good of the party is based on what I think would be for the good of the country.

Bordering on banana republic territory.

“Federal prosecutor Nora Dannehy, a top aide to U.S. Attorney John H. Durham, has resigned from the Justice Department probe out of concern that the investigative team is being pressed for political reasons to produce a report before its work is done.” https://t.co/qv2l29Iv5H

— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) September 11, 2020

I don't think there's any doubt that a Tory style GOP would win plenty of elections. Hell, the Obama Dems weren't too far from that. The problem is that conservatives have defined conservative as supporting white nationalism. It isn't enough for the GOP to win elections, they could do that with a more Euro-style platform, they have to win with white nationalism. The only way to do that is to exploit every avenue that suppresses possible Dem votes and power.

Trump losing by 3-5 points and still winning will end with mass chaos and violence. I'm pretty certain of that, but I'm not so clear on what comes next.

Democrats in this country are further to the right of the Tories.

Yup. I think both parties need a much bigger shift to the left.

I dunno what's true at this point, but I just read a text suggesting that folks are confusing Bureau of Land Management workers with Black Lives Matter activists setting fires. Perfect.

Back around the time of W, there were a number of GOP voices who were pushing for a Red Toryism sort of movement - Ross Douthat, Reihan Salam, that sort. They were never really listened to. The W part of the party kept being the party of small government* (for the parts of government they didn't like), free trade, and low taxes. And maybe there was lip service of child care but it didn't realty go all the far.

Then Trump tried to take that mantle on. He took the white supremacist parts of the party and tried to meld it to a government will help take care of you (white people) by giving you child care and making favorable trade deals. Of course he lied about the child care parts and made random trade deals which ended up not really helping anyone... then had to walk parts of them back. Though the scary part is that one can see that slightly dampening the white supremacy and lifting up the we'll help save you from big corporations by helping with child care and college debt in a 'market' way does have a future. The question is does it have one outside of Trump's personality?

Good Lord I kind of love that the Durham report is still trudging along in the middle of all of this. If even the tiniest charge materializes out of that clusterfuck it will be some kind of miracle, but will also surely be "the greatest scandal in American political history!!"

I feel like anything that may legitimately come out about Biden/Harris/Dems down the stretch may just end up getting masked with a Chicken Little type effect. I just don’t see how a Durham report before the election is going to budge any voters.

But her emails.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

wait til you hear how 2016 happened

June 11 - Biden +7.6 per 538

Sept. 11 - Biden +7.5 per 538

The bad news is that nothing matters, but the good news is that nothing matters.

The Dem candidate running against the GA Qanon candidate has dropped out of the race. So, she's unopposed. Yay.

Why?

Nice that Bahrain is joining the party but eh, it's not quite significant enough as a +1 for the Peace Prize. Get SA into the fold and now you're talking.

It does seem that Trump is putting great effort to get others to join, preferably before elections, or at the very least before early Dec when the Peace Prize is awarded. I'm sure there are "enticements" to make it happen. Regardless of how it impacts the elections (have to believe he'll win over some more of the Jewish vote), I'm glad there is real momentum on normalizing relations with Israel.

The ME no longer revolves around the Palestinian-Israeli conflict (or not near as much as it used to) and has migrated to the Iran-SA conflict where Israel is viewed as a strategic foil against Iran.

Nothing specific but he was losing by a lot and made a cryptic remark about leaving GA. Doubtful that would be happening if it was a competitive race. Hard to beat the new GOP in rural GA. And it's too late to replace him.

His wife filed divorce papers on him and kicked him out of his house. He is moving to Indiana to live with other family. He had no chance to win, but still sucks.