What started out good leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
“The DeVos regulations were an example of an immoral administration doing the moral thing.”
Then just before entering the 2020 presidential race, Joe Biden was accused by several women of unwanted touching and hair sniffing. Biden didn’t quite apologize, but explained that all his physical contacts were well-meant gestures of friendship and support. This was followed by a more serious allegation of assault, a charge he credibly denied.
Characterizing DeVos refs as a moral thing done bumpy an immoral administration is nasty and unnecessary. Such a sweeping description of the Trump administration is reckless and wrong. It’s gratuitous and undermines the author’s credibility.
Similarly, claiming that Biden credibly denied a serious allegation of assault is little more than taking Biden‘s word for it. We’ve learned that’s a dangerous thing to do. “I know nothing about my son’s business dealings”. “The laptop is Russian disinformation”.
Serious false denials about serious matters shows that Biden’s “credible denials” that comprised of little more then a general denial bereft of detail or evidence are far from credible and far from the standard that the prior “immoral administration was held to”.
"Characterizing DeVos refs as a moral thing done bumpy an immoral administration is nasty and unnecessary. Such a sweeping description of the Trump administration is reckless and wrong. It’s gratuitous and undermines the author’s credibility."
Yeah, that kind of chapped my rear end, too. Folks should be careful what they say; they might have to back it up. I hear it all the time: "He lies!" Really, can you give an example? "Well, well, well .... he lies!" Right. "Immoral administration" - Really, can YOU give an example? How about five? You mean like destroying the oil industry? Promoting men to compete in women's sports? Driving inflation and impoverishing a large segment of the population to where they're choosing between food and medicine? No, wait a minute - that was somebody else.....
Keep in mind that many people surrounding him were telling him the opposite, but you won't hear them at the hearings. The 2020 elections were like no elections I've experienced in my lifetime, and I hope not to in the future. There is no doubt in my mind that had they been conducted the same as the 2016 elections, Trump would have won. Do I think they were 'rigged' or 'stolen'? No, but the rules were changed and allowed for things like ballot harvesting, late vote counting, and other such stuff that have less integrity than a voter showing up at a polling center, verifying their ID and voting.
Thousands of ballots were harvested by paid operatives in critical swing districts. THOUSANDS. It was a clever and concerted effort to flip the vote, and it worked.
In a normal election year, mailed ballots are about 10% improper and are discarded -- missing an address, improperly filled out, etc. Mailed forms tend to not be done as properly as ballots at a polling station. Yet, in 2020, something like 0.5% of faulty mailed ballots were discarded. The tabulators in Philadelphia and elsewhere were instructed to either waive the rules or send the ballot back for correction, an unprecedented effort to count every anti-Trump vote possible. In some districts, the ballots were 100% for Biden, 0% for Trump, which is statistically impossible. There were bundles of ballots, all pristine and neatly folded, where only "Biden" was ticked, no other candidates selected. Clearly these were harvested by professionals who went door-to-door requesting people to sign off on "whatever". There's video evidence of "mules" going from dropbox to dropbox at wee hours, inserting bundles of ballots. The day after the feds arrested someone out west whose fingerprints were on multiple ballots, suddenly these "mules" all started wearing gloves, which they were seen discarding in the trash bin right after use.
It's quite clear that a massive ballot harvesting operation was conducted that neutralized Trump's own massive in-person turnout, which netted him 12 million more votes than in 2016 yet the mailed operation outnumbered physical voters.
In several states, Biden won by only a few thousand ballots, and there were irregularities in the tens of thousands.
Because of this, millions of people are persuaded that the election was stolen.
In a very divided country, irregularities and cheating which always occur in normal times suddenly become the deciding factor in a highly contested election. To just blandly dismiss concerns of these irregularities is highly discrediting and disingenuous.
Under normal conditions, without Zuckerberg's ridiculous dropboxes and zero chain-of-custody ballot harvesting, Trump would have won in Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and probably Wisconsin and Nevada as well, and many things today would be different, including the topic of this article which is abuse of Title IX. My guess is, Russia also wouldn't have invaded Ukraine but liberals don't seem to care about that too much; gives them a chance to support a righteous war and distract everyone's attention from Democrats' abject failures in border, crime, economy, etc. here at home.
Your accounting of the facts comes straight from the most partisan and unreliable sources who are cobbling together anecdotes, rumors, and outright falsehoods to paint a picture that Republican elections officials across the country are calling false.
I might be wrong, Terry. But I remember reading way back in 2020 that Trump voted in the Florida primaries, how?..not in person, not by regular mail, but by using a third party..
A number of states dramatically laxed their election laws, which shouldn't have been able to be done according to their states constitution. They got away with it because the cowardly judicial class wanted the mean tweeter gone. This allowed for the ridiculous 3 week election, which anyone with a brain knows, that if it were Biden who lost a 3 week election on a bunch of bunk rules, this country would have been burnt to the fucking ground, and the Dems would have cheered it on.
And speaking on Insurrections, what's happening with AGs and the DOJ claiming the Supreme Court is illegitimate and they won't follow their rulings is an actual insurrection, and something that would have seen Trump impeached.
Trump hears what he wants to hear and he disregards the rest. If he had a single, and he had many, voice telling him "stolen" he'd accept that as fact over thunderous objection from everyone else. I think he did believe, now I forget the lawyer's name, legal counsel's quite imperfect argument about sending the issue back to the states. I think most people would think, rightly, that that was bonkers. But see first sentence.
The issue of fact regarding election improprieties is a distinct question (from the issue of how to sort them out). I do not think the assertion that irregularities and improper procedure, etc occurred is unreasonable. Just the way Trump and team went about trying to show it. For that he can thank Giuliani. Trump's original team was arguing actual equal protection arguments. Giuliani came in with unsustainable fraud allegations and blew it all up.
At the end of the day I think what most Trump supporters felt was that the Covid voting measures and massive complicity (collusion?) of the media and social media made the election an unfair full court press against Trump. Mostly, they are right. But I do not think that equates to fraud or a stolen election.
There have been many instances of irregularities and some strong arguments to show how ballot harvesting flipped the election.
The fraud-deniers always retreat to "there's no proof" and "the courts dismissed every case". Of course they did because courts need to see hard evidence, not just an appearance of fraud. It's actually very hard to prove election fraud, which is why it happens so often (and if you think it doesn't happen in every election in all 50 states plus the territories, you're naive beyond repair).
I personally believe Trump should have dropped the issue after November 30, 2020, when it was clear that nothing could be done. Just withdraw gracefully and "better luck next time" which is to say, "have better observers and ban the damn dropboxes next time".
The Democrats took several seats in southern California in 2018, in traditionally Republican areas, by means of ballot harvesting -- operatives going door to door, asking the Spanish speaking residents to kindly thumbprint a ballot (and probably paying them but no one has proven it), a practice that was illegal in California until the Dem-run legislature repealed the law. In 2020, the Republicans had wised up and resorted to ballot harvesting of their own, flipping a few seats back.
Great post. I made a post earlier that captured your final comments:
At the end of the day I think what most Trump supporters felt was that the Covid voting measures and massive complicity (collusion?) of the media and social media made the election an unfair full court press against Trump. Mostly, they are right. But I do not think that equates to fraud or a stolen election.
Again, Jovan Hutton Pulitzer has the hard evidence of the machine cheating. Will it ever see the light of day in this country of no more free speech and big tech along with media covering every thing up so most people never hear the the truth? I am not optimistic.
And, yeah, that's pretty much how I see it. Like YOu say, I think the biggest problem with the election was more how the media covered it and hushed up the Hunter Biden laptop thing. I don't think Trump got a fair hearing that way. But it's been a long time since the media was anywhere near non-biased. Just went to extremes this time more than most.
If there *is* election fraud (and there was, just saw comment about guy in Philly), people should go to jail. If it's big, find preventative measures. Mebbe national certification of valid voting machines. There's better ways and worse ways for machines to count the votes. Ohio and Texas are pretty good, from what I've seen and "heard."
In 1876, I wonder if Hayes knew he didn't win. After all, Hayes lost the popular vote and the electoral vote was 184 for Tilden and 165 for Hayes. But Hayes and the GOP contested a bunch of states, based most especially on the disenfranchisement of black voters, and it was basically an unresolvable controversy. In the end they won, by wheeling and dealing on matters unrelated to the presidency itself, and creating an acceptable compromise deal.
Was Hayes beyond the pale in legally contesting the elections in the four states in question, and were the people that submitted contesting slates of electors from those states criminally traitorous?
The reality is, nobody can prove anything about the legitimacy, or illegitimacy of the 2020 election. It may never be known, or perhaps, like Russiagate, after five years of actual investigation, it will be determined.
We’ve already had this discussion and my answer is still yes, the election was stolen. Just the 2000 miles evidence is enough to show the smoke. Plenty of other problems and statistical anomalies that were swept under the rug because no one wants to deal with the truth. And of course all the shenanigans with liberalizing voting procedures using COVID as an excuse. It all stinks to high hell.
I won’t be satisfied until elections are 100% in person requiring photo ID with rare exceptions for absentee voting.
That won’t happen because Republicans would win much more than they do now.
Dems have to cheat. They certainly can’t run on policy or results. If a Republican wins its because he/she REALLY wins by a lot. 2016 must have been a massive landslide. That or the Dems didn’t think they needed to cheat as much.
Nixon knew that the 1960 election was stolen. He didn't make a big deal of it, because he knew what happened was going to happen. He didn't run up a lead in enough swing states, and allowed the dead in Illinois and Texas to pip him at the wire.
Same deal with the hanging chads of 2000.
The idea that what happened in 2020 (edited) is anomalous in history is laughable. the only thing is that the orange buffoon didn't get paid off handsomely to remain in a "government/elite" sinecure not to complain.
You are right. Nixon did know but he didn't pursue it. Ballot boxes disappeared for almost a week in Texas and then mysteriously reappeared with the boxes stuffed with Kennedy ballots.
publius_x - your last sentence makes no sense to me. "orange buffoon" I assume you mean Trump? "didn't get paid off" huh??? Trump is independently wealthy. In fact he sacrificed a lot of wealth when he went into government, is building back now. Kind of the opposite of people like the Clintons & Obamas, who became fabulously wealthy as a result of government "service". Anyway... hate Trump, love Trump, whatevs. Election was stolen.
"Former state Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman discovered more than 90 Wisconsin nursing homes that had 95% to 100% voter participation, far above the national average rates."
If you can’t make your case in court, maybe the proof is deficient. Trump’s own DOJ ran down seemingly every lead, no matter how on its face ridiculous (like the Italian satellite caper), that was sent it’s way. They were dead ends.
Why is it so terribly difficult to recognize that the playbook was to sow confusion and doubt over the integrity of the election result rather than any real belief in the truth of these claims? Can’t you accept Giuliani at his word that they had plenty of theories but no evidence?
And does anyone remember that in the run-up to the 2016 election Trump was warning of massive fraud? Am I alone in seeing a pattern that Trump’s mentor Roy Cohn would have been proud of?
The evidence in Wisconsin came out long after the election was decided. The election officials there did not investigate in November, when they would have found out that far more votes came from nursing homes than was possible.
Plus, as you know, many of the complaints filed by the Republicans before Election Day were rejected by judges because the election had not taken place, and most of them filed after the counting had finished were rejected by judges because, since the election was over, they were too late.
You're in flat earth territory Terry. Republican officials across the country with the responsibility for running elections, and a detailed understanding of the facts, disagree with you; vehemently.
Giuliani’s admission is relevant here. He said that the Trump election committee had lots of theories but no evidence. And the overall context is of fraud so pervasive and systemic as to have changed the outcome of the 2020 election in certain swing states.
Giuliani’s admission of a lack of evidence has been confirmed by every court before whom the Trump election committee and its supporters filed lawsuits, up to and including the Supreme Court.
as a prosecutor of many years, and a very successful one at that, Giuliani is careful what he says, and I respect him for that. However if you ask Giuliani, "do you think that swing states flipped the election using tactics like illegally extending the voting period to harvest extra ballots?" he'll probably agree.
First, I don't think the election was stolen. I think Trump lost. I think Trump deserved to lose, and I think it was good that he lost.
But, your statement is simply not true.
I don't have comprehensive knowledge of the situation, but I do things like spot test such statements for truth. I tested this concept long ago. I only tested this for a couple states and didn't find much support for these things all being thrown out for lack of evidence. There was a pretty high rate of them being thrown out for other reasons, especially including the time-based review issue that especially affects judging election results. For Pennsylvania, for example, one major lawsuit contesting the election ended 4-3 at the state Supreme Court. The vote was 3 Democratic-appointed votes to dismiss the lawsuit, 3 GOP-appointed votes to allow the lawsuit, and 1 GOP-appointed justice's vote to dismiss the lawsuit. The GOP-appointed justice who voted to shut the lawsuit down said explicitly that the reason was laches. He explicitly said that the claims may have merit, and looked like they did, but that the issue needed to have been raised before the election. So from timing of the claim alone (laches) he didn't allow the lawsuit to proceed, not from merit or lack of evidence.
The courts can't possibly adjudicate vague claims of "cheating". It's not good enough to say it quacks like a duck. They need hard evidence, witnesses, video footage, boxes of ballots, etc. etc. These were not forthcoming. That's why the election fraud cases got no traction.
However, there are specific instances of blatant and probably fraudulent ballot harvesting as in Rfhirsch's example of Wisconsin nursing homes.
The thing is, this sort of thing happens in every election. It's nothing new. But there certainly seemed to be a desperate, almost hysterical effort on the part of Democrats to do whatever it takes to get him out of office. I personally know dozens of such people who were very relieved and happy when he lost, and openly celebrated. When I told them there was something fishy going on -- not here in this very blue state full of hopelessly liberal fools, but in some of the swing states -- they simply ignored me or said "so, where's the evidence? try and prove it!" knowing that it's difficult if not impossible to prove something like this. It's just thousands of poll workers and ballot mules and Zuckerberg dropboxes and state election boards bending the rules and on and on.
So, it's over. But millions of people will continue to believe that it's not a legit election. And, of course, Biden's total failure in everything he's done, the catastrophic Afghan withdrawal, the border, energy, inflation, crime... it just feeds people's anger and bitterness. If Biden had been semi-competent, people might have been able to put this behind them and more on. But it's plain to see that our country is heading down a very dark path right now. Everyone's saying, it's a shame Trump's not in charge. Even some Democrats are privately admitting it. So don't be too smug.
No offense meant, but there is so much irrefutable evidence of what took place that the only way to not know about it is to want to not know. Not, "not want to know," but "want to not know." Willful ignorance. Fingers in ears: LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA .......
Whether stolen or not, that election is past. However, there is another election coming up, and the two greatest potential sources of vote fraud are 1) mail-in ballots, described by Jimma Cahtah hisownself as having tremendous fraud potential, and 2) voting machines, which are nothing more than computers. What do computers do? Run code. Once your vote is scanned by that machine you have absolutely zero idea what happens to it. Zero. Fold a paper, put it in a box, guard that box, and you have a pretty good idea that the vote is true.
After the American 2020 election, France moved to ban mail-in ballots and voting machines from the entire country. There is absolutely no reason for us to not use paper ballots, as France has done. And when we do, the potential of Black Box computer fraud is eliminated.
Australia banned mail in ballots at the turn of the 20th century precisely for the reasons cited above banana republics don’t have them people come with their ID’s get their fingers inked and a paper ballot which in turn is placed in a ballot box when full it is taken away and guarded until counting takes place it’s that simple. Our elections have been fraudulent for the whole of the 20th century going into this one as well the problem going forward is how do we sort this out when we have a government who is hell bent on keeping power that’s the difficult question
The irrefutable evidence comes down on the side that Trump lied from the beginning about the election being stolen. Now, does that mean it's *impossible* there was fraud. No, not *impossible.* I'll believe it when I see it from an relatively impartial source. Anybody who believed Trumps lie is, by definition, not an impartial or good source.
But, just like You say, people want to not know. Willful ignorance. Can only see one side and that's Trump's side. I see Trump's good side. I see Trump's horrible side. You who can only see with one eye directed in one direction?
"Anybody who believed Trumps lie is, by definition, not an impartial or good source."
Which is to say, "I only believe people who agree with me." Nonsense - That's the very definition of bias, isn't it? Credibility - meet toilet - toilet, credibility.
If you want to see Kari Lake clean Brett "Lamestream Press" Baier's plow on this topic, just watch:
We use voting machines but have a paper ballot. You are issued a ballot when you check in, feed it into the voting machine, vote, retrieve the ballot, then scan it and drop the ballot itself into a secure receptical. If there are doubts each vote can be verified.
You saw the CISA announcement in May, of course, that Dominion machines were vulnerable to being hacked such that the paper ballot being produced says "I voted for A" while the bar code that gets read later says "She voted for B"?
"ATLANTA (AP) — Electronic voting machines from a leading vendor used in at least 16 states have software vulnerabilities that leave them susceptible to hacking if unaddressed, the nation’s leading cybersecurity agency says in an advisory sent to state election officials....
The advisory is based on testing by a prominent computer scientist and expert witness in a long-running lawsuit that is unrelated to false allegations of a stolen election pushed by former President Donald Trump after his 2020 election loss...
...the machines print a paper ballot that includes a barcode — known as a QR code — and a human-readable summary list reflecting the voter's selections, and the votes are tallied by a scanner that reads the barcode.
“When barcodes are used to tabulate votes, they may be subject to attacks exploiting the listed vulnerabilities such that the barcode is inconsistent with the human-readable portion of the paper ballot,” the advisory says"
It's almost a waste of time to go through all the ways the Dominion machines can be subverted. They don't necessarily have to be "hacked;" it can just be the way they are natively programmed. I repeat: they just run code. They can include a line of code that has a weighting function, such that candidate A's votes are tallied as 0.75 votes, while a vote for candidate B is 1.3333 votes. 0.75 * 1.33333 = 1, so the vote tally comes out correct, but you've just taken votes our of one candidate's bucket and put them in another. They can contain code that runs at a specific time and then erases itself. If they are network-connected, they can coordinate to synchronize voting percentages across multiple precincts in multiple states, which is of course exactly what happened.
Programmers are smart; they can make these machines do absolutely anything and then hide their own tracks. And of course, for some reason, Dominion won't release its source code - to ANYONE, including Congress. There is not a single reason to keep these machines and every reason to be rid of them, and IMHO that should be a top priority.
I voted on a machine in California, that machine printed out a result on plain computer paper which was put in a locked box. There is no chain of custody, no voter ID, no evidence that inside the machine the result was different. We in California know that the algorithm in the machines gave Biden 1.30 of a vote and Trump .70 of a vote. What happened to One Vote, One Person. Since when did fractionation of votes become legal?
This may be apocryphal, but it has been alleged that weighted voting was first implemented by Dominion in Venezuela as a method to keep Hugo Chavez in power.
There is absolutely no reason for any vote to be weighted. One vote should == 1.0. Period. If there is code weighting it as anything else, that is by definition fraud. But of course, Dominion won't release its source code and let independent sources look at it.
To my eye, no matter what is done I won't trust that what goes on inside those black boxes is true and fair. I see no possible way to secure it that cannot be hacked. And the moral hazard for hacking is just too great for one side or the other to not at least try. Paper ballots work and have worked for centuries. The idea that "there are too many voters" to count is nonsense. Just hire enough poll workers for ONE DAY, do the job, and call it good.
Out of curiosity, did it occur to you to check over the written piece of paper - was that possible to do, and if so was the ability to do that explained, and if so did you do it?
My interest is just understanding if the paper records created are even accurate - yes, they get spit out, but do people know they should read them over? I didn't, so my record could have been totally wrong!
That is my fear. I have reasonable confidence in my local elections. I do not count the votes but I have participated at every other stage. Some machines are better than others. I am out of town so I can't check my notes to see which ones we use. None of our equipment is hooked up to equipment outside the polling place. In the event of an issue the ballot itself can be verified. Texas is pretty election integrity conscious fortunately. But Texas is not one of the states that has major impact.
I do not understand your comment. Your local election administrator purchases the equipment for your jurisdiction, subject to state, and maybe some federal law. We quit hand marking ballots decades ago.The hanging chad controversy was in 2000 and we went largely automated after that. I guess my system.is a hybrid but I am greatly relieved thst each ballot can be verified. I don't think that is true everywhere. I also volunteer during elections so I see the process at work.
If you look at history of elections in the United States, almost every losing side claims the election was stolen or rigged dating back to early 1800s. It’s pretty wild. It’s almost as if this country has a whole bunch of entitled sore losers who only agree with things that go their way. Furthermore, I would argue that as a nation, we’ve ceased to be a true democracy and have moved into oligarchy territory. You really think Biden is making these decisions? That’s dude can’t even tie his shoes. It’s the overlords behind him making all these social controversies to distract the majority of the populace whilst they fleece our nations wealth and sell us out to China (see his recent moves with solar power). It’s all a Kansas City Shuffle.
There's an old saying: when they're out to get you, paranoia is good thinking. (I had a case like that when I was on a psychiatry rotation, actually. Pretty hairy, let me tell you...)
When a plurality of American voters believe that there has been fraud to the extent that it changed a presidential election, then it should be investigated. Really investigated, not just people slinging insults at each other. Open, free, fair investigation. An official, public investigation. With all parts televised and all evidence heard BY THE PUBLIC.
When the Supreme Court, whose creation was in large part to settle disputes between states refuses to hear a case where sixteen states sue other states for voter fraud - on the basis that those states have "no standing," then it's time for a real look under the hood. If the allegations are shown to be false, so be it, but this is like Roe: a huge judicial mistake that WILL NEVER GO AWAY until it is settled, and settled the right way, once and for all.
When I was a third-year med student on psych rotation, we were given responsibility for about four or five patients, for whom we acted as their primary doctor - always with supervision, of course. I admitted a patient from the ER, crazy as a June Bug. He said his father-in-law was after him, had shot him once, and meant to kill him. We admitted him with the DX of "paranoid reaction."
The next morning about 3:30 a.m. I got a call at home from the chair of Internal Medicine, which oversaw Psychiatry. "Jim, this is Bill J___. Today you admitted a patient, John M______. I want you to put on your clothes and go straight to the eighth floor and discharge him, and I mean right now."
It was the weirdest conversation I had ever had in my life. It was 3:30 in the morning. "Dr. J________. what's going on?"
"He's not paranoid and he's not psychotic. I just got a call from the sheriff of Monongalia County, and every word your patient told you is true. They're looking for the father-in-law, and if they don't find him, I don't want him shooting up the department."
I wasted no time. When they're out to get you, paranoia is indeed good thinking.
It’s early and I wrote this on my phone while in bed so didn’t notice my grammatical error until after I posted. I don’t believe we can edit comments so I can’t change it. I am aware of the mistake and it wasn’t intentional.
That said, I don’t know who writes the words on the teleprompter, but I agree with Taibi’s quip last week that we are moments away from a Ron Burgundy situation with Biden where tells the country, “**** you, San Diego.”
In a winner-takes-all system like ours, where the plurality victor assumes power and the loser is completely powerless, there is bound to be dissatisfaction following any election that is not at least a 60-40 overwhelming victory.
I think we should be seriously looking at a European style parliamentary system where the losers maintain a minority status with some influence rather than being cut out entirely.
It's true that a smart winner will not totally railroad over the losers, but will strive to make inroads, co-opt their ideas to build a stronger voter base for reelection and so forth. But in recent years, it's been a pendulum swing from one extreme to another, to the detriment of public policy.
As far as what a wise winner should do that just raises the specter of actual real, honest to God lies. "I am going to be a President for all Americans." He has thrown most Americans to the wolves over and over. "The border is not open." The hell it's not. "I am going to unify the country." Only by treating half of it as if it does not exist and that is not unifying. "Putin's inflation." Sure it is.
As for a European style parliamentary system, no thanks. Personally I think trying to be European chic is what has created this disaster. Let's just be Americans. Not Asian American. Not African American. Not Mexican American. Not Native Americans. Just Americans with respect for each other and willingness to use common sense and do what is right for the nation as a whole.
There was a time when we called ourselves a melting pot, proudly. Now a whole Left wing school of thought has arisen that looks down on the melting pot idea, perhaps because when certain minorities melt too much, they stop feeling oppressed and needy and the Left loses its reason for existing.
Yeah. Don't think much of parliamentary style. Elect new head whenever?
But also the minority party *does* hold a lotta power. In the legislative. As long as the filibuster is in place. It goes, then You got a situation where minority opinion means squat.
OTOH, that *still* doesn't make what Trump did acceptable, except amongst the majority here. Thing is, if You look at the *entire* country, I doubt the majority are just gonna over look that "minor detail" when it comes time to vote again. Biden's so bad, Trump *may* be able to get reelected. *May...* I don't see how any *other* R could possibly lose.
"What Trump Did"--not sure what that means. But here's the problem: By attacking opponents as "immoral" stops all intelligent conversation. And that is precisely what the Left has been doing for decades. They don't want a conversation, because they believe the right is evil, greedy, stupid, racist, homophobic, transphobic, anti-science, etc. etc. etc. It's very convenient, because they then don't have to engage with the knuckle draggers. We can go on forever about politicians' and parties' immorality--and in the end, in my opinion, the Left will come out the clear winner on the immorality scale, but what good does that do? It will get us nowhere.
What Trump did: Lie. Claimed the election was stolen, when he *should-a* and probably *did* know was a falsehood. Because if he wasn't lying, then he was denying good advice that he lost, in favor of poor advice that he'd "won."
You had me thinking about whether attacking Trump as immoral stops all intelligent conversation. You discussed the Left saying they believe the right is all kinds-a immoral things. Yeah, some do.
But then You come out and say the Left wins the immorality game.
Yeah, a blanket statement like that gets us nowhere. I agree.
Back to Trump. What it appears like is that the Religious Right endorsed a serial adulterer. So I think, on *both* sides of the aisle, morality doesn't really mean a lot these days. We all like a winner, no matter how ruthless, right? Not You, M. Bucknam, but most people admire *billionaires.* Wanna *be* one themselves one day. AFAIK, You can't accumulate that much money without being a ruthless SOB. ICBW, of course.
But You'd be surprised how long it would take someone making $1,000 cool cash a day to make a billion. Even with no days off and no holidays. That's a lotta money, but 2000 years, way back then, wouldn't be long enough.
I'm rambling. Point is, sometimes immorality mebbe should come into play, but usually it doesn't no matter what. Results count. I get it.
What exactly did Trump do that was so unacceptable ? The country was headed in a great direction under him? Mean tweets? Told it like it was, no sugar coating? No Wars? Serious question.
Trump's been so successful in his endorsements of America-first Republican candidates, that he might just sit back and be king maker. He's been there, done that, shouldn't really need to run again. Let Ron DeSantis or one of the other younger players take the field and things will be fine.
That's Your take on Trump. First of all, the facts of the matter is Trump's have a mixed bag of success. And generally, he tries to determine who's gonna be the winner, and endorses accordingly. But he made a big difference in OH, and mebbe some other places as well, so i'll give him that much.
And my take on Trump is entirely different. The $250 mill he duped his supporters for the "Stop the Steal" fund went into his PAC. What for, if he's not gonna run? The only thing that could *possibly* stop him, IMO, is the thought that he might lose. Otherwise, I can't see him *not* running. For president most likely, tho could be for something else. The president is *the king,* right? Why would he *wanna* take up the role of the kingmaker? That's second-hand power. ICBW, of course. No crystal ball.
By the Russians? Or by the democrats? You need to be specific about which group you are talking about because they both make that claim about different elections at different times.
My dad, whom I love, believes in his heart that Gore was robbed of his presidency, as was Carter and Clinton.
Arguably, Gore should have won in 2000; it was basically a coin toss. When it's that close, I think they should do a run-off (but only in person voting, none of this mailed crap).
H. Clinton lost, fair and square. Carter lost in a veritable landslide.
By the way, Richard Nixon probably should have beaten JFK in 1960. He chose not to contest some irregularities in Texas.
Gore could not have won in 2000. As has been pointed out many times, the Democratic party media announced that the state of Florida was won by Gore 10 minutes before the polls closed in the most Republican part of the state, the area including Pensacola. The media people did not know that Florida is in TWO time zones. People driving to the polls in the Central Time Zone portion, or already waiting in line, decided to forget about voting. Election experts estimated that Bush lost more than 5000 votes because of the false media reports. There would have been no doubt that he had won if his margin had been ~7500 over Gore.
I have read that in Georgia on January 5 2021, for the Senatorial run-off election, an estimated 300,000 mostly-conservative voters stayed home who had voted in 2020, handing the Senate seats to the two Democrats and altering the course of history.
Voters (and non-voters) are capricious and unpredictable.
Interesting how your original comment veered us into a long dialogue about voting, far from the subject of this post. But since we're here, if someone is making a list of possible changes, please ban ballot harvesting - legal in, where else? California. Talk about ripe for voting fraud!
And from that comes that every single action that the illegitimate administration has taken is to destroy the country, this included. And they will continue until stopped. One can only hope that it won't be too late.
“The DeVos regulations were an example of an immoral administration doing the moral thing.”
I'd love to believe Yoffe's comment was a backhanded way of characterizing the Biden and Obama administrations as immoral but somehow, I doubt that’s the case. When she expresses the same outage over the Kangaroo Courts that dogged the Trump Administration and continue with the January 6 inquisition maybe I’ll change my mind.
The phrase "immoral administration" is itself precious beyond belief, like something from Cotton Mather. For all their bleating about justice and liberation, these bluenoses really are the New Puritans--and even less appealing than the original batch, by a wide margin...
Agree - too precious and oh so leftist. Almost an oxymoron. An immoral administration doing a moral thing - why would they do that? Did they do a moral thing by accident? Didn't seem so. Seemed like they did it deliberately and on purpose. So wouldn't that make them moral?
Biden and his criminal Administration will continue to destroy America and its values until they are removed. Stark, but pretty simple and easy to understand. Nonetheless, I have zero doubt that the Progressives featured on this Substack will NEVER vote for a non-Democrat. Cognitive Dissonance of the purest kind.
People with mental dexterity would have pointed out where the Washington Post was incorrect; making an inane comment about Trump and Pelosi just shows ignorance.
That gratuitous potshot just smacks of the author trying to establish that she's on the "acceptable" side of the aisle despite her criticisms. Totally unnecessary, and I stopped reading at that point.
Agree. I have started listening to Bill Maher’s last word segment, I generally agree with everything he says. But he can’t help himself, he’s gotta take a swipe at Trump just to protect his left bona fides.
My wife and I were saying the same thing last night when we watched last Friday's show. He was one of the last to let Russiagate go, and he'll never concede that the 1/6 hearings are a joke. But, he's pretty much spot on regarding freedom of speech (which is why I love Bari, Matt and Glenn) and the implosion of the Dem party. I'm a lifelong conservative, but it's liberals (like I named above, as well as Krystal and Saager) who I go to anymore for my take on the news. Also, RCP and the WSJ op/ed.
For a little comic relief you should tune into Gutfeld! This latest episode of leftist overreach only adds increased validity to one of my favorite quips:
"There's a red wave coming, and it ain't because of the Tampon shortage"
I suspect she just wants to stay in good standing with the cancel culture leftists while still lightly criticizing an element of it.
Would have been far more credible I’d she was a bit more detailed about the hundreds of lives ruined by the type of new regulations reimposed. But that’s probably a step too far. Her colleagues may feel unsafe…..
Yup. Harder digging would've revealed additional inconvenient truths, so we definitely can't go there. The press's general lack of follow-through on anything that might make a D look bad is exactly why the Biden team feels justified in trotting out the "Putin price hike" codswallop.
Yoffee has written extensively on the subject in better detail than any journalist. Read her 3 articles "The Uncomfortable Truth" about campus sexual assault. She is a huge critique of Obama's Title IX policies, and now Biden's.
I believe EmilyYoffe wrote those articles after her son was accused in a title IX witch hunt. Kind of like a liberal who had been mugged, she found out first hand how incredibly biased and unfair the process was (is).
I should have too. When I saw the bio and the places she’s worked I should have just stopped right there. It was possible twenty years ago to work at the NYT, Wapo, the Atlantic, Slate and what are now other openly ideological outlets, and still be considered a trusted journalist who can check their personal bias at the door, but these days it’s like a giant red flag when a “journalist” bounces from one openly biased publication to another.
And to be fair, Donald trump is a liar. So is Joe Biden. So was bill Clinton. W told some whoppers in his day (like him being a conservative). Trump definitely has a knee jerk reaction of denying everything and exaggerating, and yes, lying outright. But to put some moral attachment to that suggests that they don’t all lie, and they do all lie. Trumps time in office was no less or more moral than anyone else’s, with the exception that he was an asshole more so than most.
In my career, I had to differentiate between competence and assholiness, as I didn't really have a choice in my working relationships. I found some of the biggest assholes could also be very productive and helpful resources. I just didn't want to have lunch with them.
That was Trump, yet most of the country can't grasp that.
I'm retired now, but over thirty years I had more than 500 mid level management and at least 100 executive managers who reported to me. No doubt that I'm in the 'asshole' bucket of a fair share of them, but many are now in CEO and executive positions in the Healthcare sector and still send me notes thanking me for the mentorship I provided.
I'm a big Meyers Briggs fan and realize that people are programmed differently, and not everyone is going to respond well to your style. For those of you familiar with MB, I'm an ENFP, and after taking the test many times over my career, that never changed. I hate to admit it, but I'm guessing Trump is an ENFP as well.
Terry...oh yes, Trumpty IS going to have more negatories, simply, he had Many more connections (dealings), he was not hidden, he is Very opinionated and uses words with 2 meanings, also he is Often Quoted while leaving Out the remainder of his quote.
I can't imagine, since he had 500 businesses, the amount of lawyers he dealt with, i do suspect some of the people he dealt with were goop, but Looking at his family and those close to him, my opinion of him is Higher, since his term in office.
He should be noted for the high total of Females that were appointed to office, none higher, as per Judge Pirro.
His Perplexing drop cloth opponents; such as the BO, Comey (lies), Clapper, Clintons, Pelosi, Shumers, Rice, Brennan, CNN, Msnbc, McCabe, Steele on and on, but , in my opinion, the biggest Fraud is the ongoing Jan 6th debunk crescendo, such little damage, when in comparison to the City Riots, not even close.
Me, he gets a pass , although not needed. He is obligated to strike back.
That’s how I feel about Trump. I agreed with some of his policies, and nothing was ever written about the benefits he extended to veterans who used to be stuck with shitty, red tape filled healthcare until Trump. The best bosses I ever had were not warm and fuzzy. People need to stop thinking that everything is popularly contest. What if the person you disliked the most was the best for the country?
Biden is horrible and they all lie.
But I disagree with judging the author for where she worked previously. She has the guts to call BS against the narrative. Don’t forget Bari worked for the NYT, too. :)
I also had a boss who was an asshole. An efficient and effective asshole. But an asshole nonetheless. He was openly vocal about the stupidity of women, and yet his employees were almost exclusively women. We did *everything* and did it well...and laughed at him behind his back.
I'm replying to my own post, which is kind of tacky but I wanted to make a point which I think many of you might find valid.
For anyone who's owned their own business, or been in corporate management, we weren't as put off by Trump's rough edges as we were supportive of his policies. What I came to realize is that the majority of the country looks at The West Wing as representative of how politics/business works. People in leadership roles don't judge people in business and government on their personality, but on the results. But most of the voters can't separate the two, which leads folks like Obama, perhaps the greatest figurehead but least competent leader, to be the next head on Mount Rushmore, and Trump, the most competent and least likeable to be canceled.
You're right about leadership and Trump being a different cat as he's a leader. But I wouldn't say he's being canceled because he's competent or unlikeable. He's generally likeable, got along with most of the same folks when he wasn't opposed to their politics. It's just that he's a threat because he was voted in by what they fear most - the classes and groups coming to take away what the elites have.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a results guy. On a lot of the issues that mattered to Trump, we were simpatico. I’ve been in the military and learned to work with people who are completely different than me in every way. People who I would not have a beer with privately, I’d run through hell to save if they needed it because they would do the same for me. So peoples weird personality quirks matter less than to me than what they are attempting to achieve.
Well-said. I wasn't in the military, so can't make as strong a statement as that. But in business, You hafta work with all kinds. Everybody's in it to make the company and themselves a buck. And if You aren't making the bucks, it's even more important (and desperate).
I know, and it's so pathetic. When I was a partner in a very successful business, one of the other partners was someone I really didn't care for (and vice-versa), yet we were both smart enough to realize that nobody cared about that business like the two of us did--we were a great team. It was SUCH an important lesson to learn to separate the personal from the professional. That's why I'm always saying: forget about the candidate--vote for the change you want to see happen!
I think most of the country can gasp it it’s the assholes out there who won’t let us have a legitimate vote and looking at the line up for 2024 currently they all look like assholes including the below 40 years I wouldn’t let them look after my animals let alone run America!
Trump had a loud mouth and poor self control. But the real reason he is hated and so viciously opposed was because he challenged the status quo.
That’s one of the reasons why so many people want to finish him off. They all thrive on and in the sewer.
They’re mustly scum.
Look at the Senator from Maine. She knows that Trump‘s people danced around the edge on abortion questions as they HAVE to. To call them liars is a lie itself
Really? Does she think that Justice Jackson wasn't lying by saying that she can't define a woman because she isn't a biologist? When will these assholes look at their own horseshit?
i have often thought that the left's obsession with hating Trump comes from their embarrassment that he is not cut from the same cloth as Kennedy and Obama. Since most of the extreme Trump haters in my circle are in the high middle to upper class in terms of education, success etc (I hurry to say I am an outlier in the group) they want someone who represents their status at home and abroad.
I remember voting for Kennedy and loving Jackie because he was so handsome and well spoken and she spoke fluent French and wore designer clothes. Indeed her pillbox hats etc became the example of how we young women wanted to look and Jack - he became the man we all wanted to marry. We didn't know then about the many infidelities .
Trump exposed to the world just how crass and crude many Americans really are = don't think so? read Twitter. And poor Melania - she could never be Jackie - just another immigrant who slept her way to the top. No television tour of WH with her. class is what matters in this country - not policy. Trump proved that.
Kennedy doesn't win without winning the Texas graveyards courtesy of LBJ. A president who was known to talk to the press whilst shitting on the toilet.
And Kennedy was a whoremaster who slept with mafia WAGs. The media kept you in the dark because they slept around too. You voted for what you wanted to believe in, not the truth.
Don’t forget Illinois as well, Nixon almost certainly either truly won or could have pursued a helluva an investigation but to his credit he didn’t want to put the country through it. Ironically some years later…
Obama, smooth talking immigrant from Kenya who lied his way to the top. Veneer of high class, but really a communist who couldn't wait to put in place a plan to destroy the county. And most of the country bought it hook line and sinker.
Almost everything Trump said has turned out to be true. Almost everything he did turned out to be the right policy moves. Almost all his predictions have come to pass.
History will look more kindly on Trump than do his contemporaries.
A generation removed from now, when people look at his achievements, and his unpleasant personal traits are forgotten or moved to the background, he would get his dues. I think his gruff New York manner will become a myth. I do not like him as a person, but there is nothing he has done that was detrimental to the country and its people. On the contrary. The current administration caused such a tremendous harm, that it would be a miracle if we recover.
Agree. He got shit done that I was waiting for 47 years (after I turned 18) to get done. If a Dem had accomplished what Trump did in Middle East peace alone, they would have written several books and produced a couple movies of them by now.
True historians are generally unbiased, much like true scientists. The problem is not that liberals write history, but that they write school curricula. Most people only know the history they learn in school.
You forgot that Obama was a liar too. I’m still waiting to save that $2500 a year on my insurance premiums. Obamacare cost my family at least $2500 more. Maybe he just got confused like his VP
No, Obama was a liar too. I was just throwing names out there. I didn’t intend to suggest he’s a truth teller. I will give Obama this, he was much better at letting others lie for him than most presidents I’ve seen. And there never seemed to be an end to people who would lie for Obama.
They should rename the five families of the mafia the seven families to include the Dems and the GOP. But the the Dems would be the capo di tutti capi.
You don't get it. You are not Yoffe's target audience. She's speaking to close-minded leftists who think anything a Democratic president does with Title IX and campus sexual assault is good, and anything a Republican president, especially Trump, does is bad. You should read some of her in-depth reporting on the subject before dismissing her out of hand. But again, her audience is not you, it's the Democrats and college administrators who have enshrined these horrible policies.
1. Starting off with "you don't get it" is not helping your point.
2. This was written for Common Sense, a place most of us ended up at looking for better, more honest journalism than we can get in other outlets. I, and I suspect most of us here, neither need nor want a journalist to establish their bona fides to tell us where they stand. Speaking for myself, I came here to get away from that.
Get real. You came here because You don't wanna hear anything against Trump. And it usually works out that way. This time there was one sentence, and the whole crowd just gets hysterical.
That doesn't really reflect well on the commenters. And the more defensive of Trump they get, the further it shows, right?
jt, the problem is that you don't seem to understand that if people get jabbed with something pointy, they're going to fight back.
While some of us here are willing to overlook random disparagement of Trump (usually because we know the writer is trying to maintain credibility with people much further to the Left), a lot of people--even those who don't particularly like Trump as a person--are offended by what they see as poor rhetoric (the random side-swipes). Me? I roll my eyes and move on.
But people who voted for Trump both times are likely to see these jabs as not only an attack on Trump, but as an attack on THEMSELVES. They've been called Nazis, fascists, racists, Deplorables. It should surprise no one that they're more than a little sensitive when someone starts in on TrumpTrumpTrump, because that conversation has historically ended with a personal attack on THEM.
You see a lot of people defending Trump here when someone starts in on OrangeManBad, not always because they LIKE him, but because they perceive him as having been under grossly unfair attack from the Left throughout his entire campaign and presidency.
If Trump was mentioned less by Bari's writers, you would see a lot fewer comments about Trump.
I am quite sick of having to preface things with "I am not a Trump fan" or "I am not a Trump supporter", just to be listened to. It's absolutely ridiculous. I've never made anyone do that, in my lifetime. Yet, here we are. I don't like what happened, in 2020. I am not a fan of Donald Trump.
To quote Jules: 'Look at the big brains on Brad (aka CeliaM)
I think you nailed it.
Another problem I have is that people judged him, most times, based on emotion and not empirically. Most voters are too lazy to understand the details of issues and rely on emotion, or Colbert/Maddow for their votes.
Wow. You know nothing about me. And judging from your other comments I've seen on other Substacks, you don't know much about anything.
Frankly, I don't like the guy, but at least he got shit done. Not going to say there's nothing negative about him, and not going out of my way to avoid it. Just trying to find something that doesn't immediately go straight to "Trump Bad". Why are you so against a reporter coming across as objective for a change?
So, and I'm going to say this as kindly as I can, go fuck yourself with a cactus.
To be frank, I don't always notice who I'm replying to. It's all instinct. So I may have misjudged You personally. By Your reply, probably not.
You Rs are predictable, is all I'm saying. Yeah, You're all unique as everybody is. People fall into groups in spite-a that. But all 8 B are unique. I get it.
'You came here because You don't wanna hear anything against Trump'
Please, that's painting with a pretty broad brush. I personally come here, and to many other liberal substacks and podcasts because they're leading the movement for free speech, and in opposition to woke. I doubt I've ever voted for the same President as any of the folks I'm following now, but I absolutely respect what they're doing.
I appreciate that you think Trump was a horrible President, and I'm patient and tolerant of Trump hate, but I don't think that commentors here are that one dimensional.
Let me rephrase that. When people here get the least little bit of Trump "hate" they tend to fly off the handle and start to get defensive. And compare Trump to Biden. That's a pretty low bar, right?
And that's not everybody, but most who decided to post today had to praise Trump. I didn't actually count the number of people who praised Trump, but just going by feel. ICBW. (I Could Be Wrong.)
Finally, I don't hate Trump. You're wrong about that. I hate everything he did about the election. But I've learned he did a lotta good things, too.
“You came here because You don't wanna hear anything against Trump”. “You Rs are predictable”
It seems to that you have finally exposed yourself as a democrat still suffering from Trump derangement syndrome. You and your kind incessantly accuse Trump of the “big lie” but ignore the MULTIPLE lies your fellow travelers smeared him with for over 5 years.
Of course “there are lies and there are damn lies”. After the big smear directed at Trump that continues to this day, as well as the electoral shenanigans arrayed against him in 2020, I’m willing to put his in the former. Your crowd engages exclusively in the latter.
Sorry. Nice try. Unfortunately, entirely devoid of the FACTS of the matter.
You must not-a read where I posted plenty-a times: I'll NEVER vote for a Dem the rest-a my LIFE. (Again, no crystal ball tho.)
TDS is the trope that's *always* said about *anybody* says anything against Trump. IOW, it's pretty much devoid of any meaning at this point. Just means someone who isn't delusionally favorable to Trump, which I most certainly am *not.*
My crowd? This here Substack makes up the bulk-a my crowd. You see many people here who are *Dead Center?* No crowd here.
jt's okay, even though he just dressed me down pretty good earlier today.
CeliaM made a great post about Trump sensitivity here earlier today, that I thought was near prefect. I don't like the drive by Trumptrolling that people do routinely, because I take it as a personal criticism. I don't work Trump promotion into my posts, but I do take the bait whenever I see some unjustly criticizing him, Especially with our current President.
Believe all women unless it is an accuser of a Democrat. Tara Reid was 100 times more credible than Kavanaugh's accusers because she told people at the time what happened and was consistent. This compared to Ford who didn't tell anyone and when she tried to give witnesses, they all denied what she said. I was very disappointed in those assertions because they took away from the credibility of the entire article.
I had the same reaction. What were the immoral acts of the Trump administration? No one ever enumerates. They drop that bomb and then immediately move on. It’s so gratuitous and infuriating. If a booming economy and stock market, low crime, a secure border, no wars, real wage growth for all ethnicities, low inflation, a covid vaccine (for those who want it), and successful, respectable children not addicted to crack, prostitutes, or sleeping and doing drugs with their deceased sibling’s spouses is immoral, then what is Joe Biden’s administration?
I am with you. I found that little nasty insertion about an "immoral administration" disgusting.
The writer is obviously NOT a Trump fan. This makes the article even more amazing because it lauds the professional and essentially fair way Betsy DeVos undertook to correct a horrid wrong.
So many young men were destroyed during the Obama administration. Someday someone is going to write an accurate biography of Joe Biden and it's not going to be pretty.
It's not a step too far. Read Yoffee's Slate articles. She pulls no punches about the problems with Title IX under Obama. The immoral administration comment is to gain the trust of people who hate Trump so that they'll keep reading her articles.
If Yoffee didn't at least acknowledge that people consider him to be immoral (she's not even saying she believes this) she knows people on the left would discredit her argument as right-wing propaganda. Her audience is Democrats, not Republicans. Republicans don't need to be convinced that Obama's Title IX policies are garbage.
Thank you for focusing on 'immoral administration doing the moral thing'. Goodness. How the hell was it an immoral administration? The Chaos came from everywhere OTHER than the Trump administration; the media and the federal government(but I repeat myself) who voted 94% against him was absolutely batshit crazy all. the. time.
Common Sense is waking up but not awake. Their Donkey and TDS still show. The Trump administration was no more amoral (and perhaps much less at the levels that really matter) than either the Obama or Biden administration, and while I found Biden's accuser questionable, she was far more credible than Christine Blasey Ford. The Common Sense authors still sip the Kool-Aid, is what I'm saying, but at least they only sip. They're not drowning in it anymore.
Maybe, but looks more like a calculated attempt not to burn bridges with former employers. In case she is invited back, then this written piece would be a convenient reference, sort of like a party card. All the right boxes are checked.
I felt the same way reading that comment but realized that the only way she could write anything positive about the Trump Administration and still keep her friends was to caveat it with unnecessary snark...
Agreed. That backhanded compliment about an "immoral administration doing the moral thing" stuck in my craw. You need a disclaimer to acknowledge that Trump did a good thing, so we good people won't think poorly of you? Do I have to wear a MAGA hat to look objectively at his policies and recognize that sometimes they were correct? He also banned Diversity Equity & Inclusion trainings at the Federal level, another excellent move (of course, Biden reversed it back).
I highly recommend this interview. As a lifelong feminist who was raped twice in my teens by young men I knew, I should be the first to champion the current policy, but nobody who hears the appalling stories of innocent young men having their lives destroyed due to false accusations, kangaroo courts and an utter lack of due process, can be anything but furious and disgusted.
I'm awaiting Megyn Kelly's follow up conversation now that Biden has reversed deVos' policies. I remember listening to this podcast while on a walk on vacation thinking about my college freshman son back home....and wanting to throw up.
President Trump's administration was in no way immoral! His foreign policy was outstanding: strongly oppose the major countries that are most oppressive of the rights of women, LGBTQ people and religions: Russia, Iran, and China. And be strongly supportive in words and actions of countries and groups that support freedom.
He led 5 majority-Muslim countries to recognize Israel (only two had done so in the previous 70 years), the one country in the Middle East where women have full freedom, LGBTQ+ people can live openly, and people of all religions are welcome. He flew NON-STOP from Saudi Arabia to Israel as part of his historic speeches in the spring of 2021 (and now there are routine flights that allow the many Muslim citizens in Israel to make their pilgrimage to Mecca).
He took at least 10 major actions against Russia and prevented them from touching Ukraine.
He ended the 2015 agreement that provided billions of dollars for Iran's terrorist groups and nuclear weapons programs.
And he stood up to Communist China's multiple attacks, stopping their theft of US intellectual property (tens of billions of dollars a year), urging removal of Confucius centers (which allowed Chinese infiltration of US universities), and promoting manufacture in the US of critical materials now outsourced to China).
He took the US out of UN "Human Rights" Council, which has some of the most immoral countries in the world as members, and stopped our funding of the UN refugee council in the Middle East, which was getting more than $20 thousand a year for each Palestinian refugee while the actual refugees were receiving almost nothing.
That is a VERY MORAL administration. The Obama (and now Biden) administration was highly IMMORAL on these major issues.
Bill Clinton is amoral as is his wife. Bill should have gone to prison for perjury and for molesting women. He is loved by the Dems. He has spoken at every Dem national convention since he left office. The Dems treat him like a rock star.
Agree. The perfunctory classification of the Trump administration as immoral should be seen as signaling the writer's elite class sympathies. No explanation, such as a short paragraph listing Trump's most notable policy immoralities, is needed. I have seen Bari do the same thing. Powerul reasoning in one compartment and unsupported anti-Trump rhetoric in another. It's a defensive quirk of the conflicted left, I think.
I hope you are right. Our experience with useful idiots and fellow travelers from the Soviet Union says they can't and won't. Eric Hoffer wrote about these fanatical followers in "True Believer." Mattias Desmet addresses it again in "The Psychology of Totalitarianism" which has just been released.
I agree it is unlikely. One of the hardest, and best, things a human can do is admit the error of their ways. In all honestly though for the Leftists it might well be overwhelming.
"Biden credibly denied a serious allegation of assault" How can anyone believe anything that comes out of Joe Bidens mouth? Before this last run for President, he ran twice before and had to drop out because of the blatant lies he told on the campaign trail and his plagiarism. (He funked a course in law school for plagiarism.)
When Bill Clinton and Barack Obama lied, they knew they were lying. I believe when Biden lies, he thinks it is the truth. The litany of his lies is overwhelming. I can give example after example of his lies. Unlike the author who says he gave credible explanations for his assaults. His touching of little girls creeps me out but to a leftist to touch little girls in this manner is OK as long as a Democrat does it. And what happened to the me-too slogan that all women should be believed? I guess that only applies to Republicans who are accused of improper behavior towards women.
How come there wasn't an outcry against Biden as there was by blatantly false accusations against Bret Kavanaugh. Not one of the supposed witness the California nut case brought to testify against Kavanaugh said they ever recalled this supposed attempted rape happening. There was a leftist/media feeding frensy over the Kavanaugh lies. Yet four or five women came forward to accuse Biden of touching them. The Democrats and the press spiked these accusations. And the author claims the senile, lying Joe Biden gave "credible denials". My god just look at Joe's track record of lies.
How can anyone but a Democrat say that anything that comes out of that moron's mouth is credible?
the net result of people like Biden in high office is that Americans will simply believe nothing that any politician ever says. Not that they did before, but cynical fools like him have laid it bare. Government office is a place to make money and gain power, not serve the people.
The one man in decades (maybe even centuries) who took office without the goal of making money or gaining power, was impeached several times falsely, viciously attacked for every single thing he said and did, all his accomplishments and successes hidden from the public or somehow distorted into failures, and all his supporters smeared and insulted.
It's just sad to see people here, on Bari Weiss substack forum, repeating CNN smears about "orange man". What a shame.
Harry Truman said, I am paraphrasing, "Anybody who makes money while in office is a crook." When Truman retired, he was living in penury. The Presidential retirement was enacted because of him.
Of anyone who held the office of the President was honest, it was him.
I'm a conservative and voted for Trump twice because I could not bring myself to vote for the Communist/Democrat Party. Having said this, I thought Trump was a despicable, megalomaniacal, lying, loudmouthed, bully but he wasn't a spineless, PC, Woke, snow flack.
What we need to appreciate is how oblivious these zealots are to their own extraordinary, constant dishonesty. They think that writing this way is normal and even-handed.
This is going to accelerate fleeing colleges, particularly private woke liberal arts. Boys can be expelled for baseless accusations. Girls can be expelled for protesting having a mentally disturbed male roommate that thinks he’s a girl. They can all be expelled for refusing three useless clot shots or advocating for realistic approaches to life based in reality. Our university system is a 💩show joke, and Biden is making it much worse at the behest of outright evil humans like Bill Gates and George Soros. Least we forget Gates stole the ideas of others to become a billionaire, and Soros impoverished countless Britts by intentionally crashing the sterling. People have some false sense of moral superiority complaining about orange man while voting for Biden who is the lap dog for the most cruel and destructive ideologies and policies ever implemented in my 4 decades on Earth.
It will also poison relationships between young people. Actually, men have it good. They can go to prostitutes, or just MGTOW avoid all women.
Women will have to deal with a reduced number of available males, particularly the gentle, civilized, high achiever variety who have the most to lose from false accusations. Those elite males will seek out similar high achievers, vetted, safe, and unlikely to Title IX someone. Even then, they will require prenups, and the smarter guys will compile a dossier on potential future partners -- "go there and this goes viral".
It's the clash of traditional gender roles with modernity. We thought women were liberated in 1965, but really that process is still ongoing, and the abusers of the process are poisoning the well for everyone.
This last sentence, "People have some false sense of moral superiority complaining about orange man..." is the best sentence I've read all week. Thank you.
Could not agree more. It felt as a compelling subject and a well written piece until “immoral administration” made me cringe. Won’t it be logical then to say that Obama and Biden administration implemented an immoral policy? But no, I guess the schooling received from prior employers doesn’t allow to cross the party lines. The journalists have to investigate and bring us facts, not to pass moral judgement Allow us as competent adults to draw conclusions who and what is moral.
Regardless of one's view of Trump, Betsy DeVos was his best appointment. She removed this awful Obama "guidance" (which was akin to a mob boss "suggesting" courses of actions lest consequences be suffered) and defended the right to due process. In addition to that and equally important, DeVos is about the only one in government who thinks the job of education is actually about educating children.
Unlike the hypocrites who laud the public school system yet send their own kids to private schools, she is well aware of the failings of the cesspools of government run public shools and is trying to change them for the betterment of the kids.
Betsy DeVos took continual heat from the liberal/Left side of the world. The media despised her.
She isn't the only good Cabinet appointment. Dr. Ben Carson was excellent as was Rick Perry at Energy. Remember the Energy crisis we had during the Trump years? I don't either. I was glad of the $1.89/gal gas. Homeland Security functioned the way it was intended to, Mike Pompeo was an intelligent and real Secretary of State. Nikki Haley was the best UN ambassador since Jeanne Kirkpatrick. I am sure others can add their favorites to the list.
Betsy DeVos may or not have done a good job. But she is forever tainted by Amway which is forever a fraud. DeVos and trump both benefited financial from multi level marketing scams.
The Democrat voters have been gaslighted by their leaders regarding the Teachers Union leaders. That organization is nothing but a money-laundering operation for the Democrat party campaign coffers, and the result is not good for school children who need and deserve a great education.
“This was followed by a more serious allegation of assault, a charge he credibly denied”
I have no idea if Biden did what he was accused by that woman. My question is who decides what is credible or not? I saw that at the Kavanaugh hearing as well, when he was “credibly accused” of sexual assault. If no one else who is claimed to be a witness agrees, and the FBI looks into and finds no evidence, why is it still credible? Similarly, if the only people who looked into Bidens accuser are openly biased reporters who were looking to support their candidate last election, why is his denial credible? Has it been investigated by the police?
My point is that the author writes this excellent piece that is essentially about the lack of due process, and then goes and paints a woman who accused Biden of sexual assault as a liar, without due process of any kind. If the author is suggesting that journalists have decided it’s not credible, my question is why should I listen? When did society decide that journalists get to make that call, especially at a time in history where most journalists from legacy outlets openly admit they take sides, which they do not need to do because we can all tell by their work that they no longer attempt to control that bias?
Again, I have no idea whether Biden did that or not. Looking at his public behavior for the last 40 years and the values he taught his son (looking at you Hunter) and his ability to lie without hesitation (a truly bipartisan trait), I could easily see a misunderstanding, if not actual sexual assault. Who knows?
My overall point is the author engages in exactly the behavior she reports in this article. She has decided that she gets to make that call. It hasn’t been investigated by anyone with subpoena power or other intrusive police powers. Biden has denied it, so is that what makes the denial credible? Has any witness gone under oath?
This is what irritates me about modern times. Yes, the author is able to be objective about this issue, but somehow in doing so, still manages to remind me that young journalists can’t shut their bias off, and they still believe they get to make the call on what’s credible and what’s not. It’s like a tic. So this article is excellent otherwise, but it still has the stank of open bias that one would expect from an author who worked at NYT, Slate, the Atlantic, ect. It’s not a coincidence she worked exclusively at openly non neutral outlets I would assume. And it shows. Please make it not show especially when you toss a nugget around like that in a story about due process.
"It’s not a coincidence she worked exclusively at openly non neutral outlets I would assume. And it shows."
Unfortunately, there are ZERO neutral outlets, other than here on Substack. And with the exception of the WSJ editorial page (not the front page), Fox/Newsmax/Oann, and conservative talk radio, there are literally zero conservative outlets in the country.
The fact our media is in the back pocket of the DNC is truly destroying this country, because the left can say anything they want, or do anything they desire, with zero pushback.
The author, as do all authors, edit carefully what they write. How could Bari or Yoffe not know that this would be a lightening rod for all of the comments. The "immoral administration" and "Biden denial" comment literally leap from the page and unnecessarily derail an incredibly important topic and Biden change. BTW, is there literally anything left of the Trump admin that is still in place?
But Trump did leave one important thing behind that cannot be changed easily, a conservative majority on SCOTUS. Which will haunt democrats for many years to come. Just think of all of the administrative state government overreach regulations that can now be blocked with a SCOTUS that follows the law. Many more cases like the recent EPA case will rise up from the ashes.
I think you are missing the obvious upside here. I have always wanted to own a college, I've always wanted to be rich, and I've always wanted to eviscerate the Leftist influence on our universities. This gives us the opportunity to do all three at once. I am willing to donate generously to a fund to sue the pants off any college (after affirmative pants-removal consent, of course) that uses these unconstitutional measures against any American citizen, while also generating a suit that can be taken all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, this court which seems to be rather kindly disposed to the rights of citizens vis à vis the Feds. What's not to like?
In a different vein, this is precisely why young men stay home, play video games, and watch porn. The girls are prettier, they never say no, and they will never drag you into an inquisition should they have buyer's remorse at a later date. It now appears that the single greatest threat to Western civilization is not global "warming," nor population explosion, but rather population depletion. (Bricker and Ibbitsen) Don't think that the Titular President Asterisk administration, whose ultimate goal is a totalitarian world government, is ignorant of the effect of this new abortion they are foisting on young Americans. Population "control" is part and parcel of their plan, and when the boys are afraid to touch the girls, well, you figure it out.
Two things. First one commonality among many of the mass shooter's is involuntary celibacy. Two, the unintended consequences of this BS is that women will ultimately be set back to the stone age; on second thought it may not be unintended given the trans women in women's sports fiasco and the genuflecting to authoritarian Muslim regimes. I said authoritarian, meaning those that require feminine submission.
Liberals are truly reaping what they have sown with their casual dismissal of biology and human nature. Managing the instinctual drives of young single men is an absolute imperative for maintaining a civilized society. The preferred solution of liberals appears to be demonizing men to the point where they all just voluntarily choose to become women.
"women will ultimately be set back to the stone age;"
Could happen. Wouldn't surprise me. OTOH, women have gotten themselves into a lotta the positions of authority over the years. Yeah, some-a them are playing the victims. Others are playing the authoritarian role pretty viciously. Some both.
I just want those women to pick a lane. Either they are strong and assertive or they are victims in need of protection. Sometimes years after the fact and with scarcely a nod to due process. I do not include myself in there because I have chosen - I am strong and assertive and woe be unto anyone who tries to victimize me. Of course like any other human I could be the victim of a crime. If I was I would speak up. Immediately.
What I'm suggesting is that most-a them have decided to pick the lane of being authoritarians. That's my guess. But I'd expect them to play the victim-card when it was to their advantage.
Jim Wills, Thanks for your clear and helpful points.
Population depletion in fact is a world-wide problem and it is already happening in a big way. Countries such as Russia, Japan, and Spain are already losing population. China could already have a net loss (more deaths than births) this year, as it came very close in 2021. And many countries have fertility rates below replacement level (2.1, but 2.2 in China due to the abortion of so many more women than men)
Every country in Europe and North America is well below 2.1 except Mexico, which is at 2.1.
India is at 2.2 and Indonesia at 2.3 and both have rates that are decreasing. China is at 1.7, as is the U.S. These are the four most populated countries.
Only the countries in Africa are well above 2.1. As they get much needed electricity and can develop their economies, they will have fewer children.
Currently, estimates are than the world's population will be no higher in 2100 than it is now (~8 billion) and probably somewhat lower.
Regardless, the end result will be fewer men in higher education. There will also be more social turmoil, distrust, and fear.
In short, these policies are unmistakably designed to create strife and uncertainty. Therefore, that is the intent. You cannot create utopia until you burn it all down.
It all moves in the same direction, doesn't it? Destruction of male-female relationships caused by deep distrust. This results in the lack of formation of stable marriages which in turn means fewer children being born.
It's another step in the destruction of the family.
Listen to Tucker's interview with Kimberly Ells. She's become an expert on this topic.
It's even worse than that, Ma'am, AFAIK. I think I mentioned once or twice before: The Chinese are working on the "ultimate." The external womb. Ponder the state of the family after *that* machine is "perfected."
Some will make babies the old fashioned Way.
The elite? When they can "optimize" everything and pipe the voice of the "mother" into the baby? Then the upper middle-class when the cost comes down? Dunno.
I haven't seen the Americans working on this. But that doesn't mean they aren't or they won't in future.
Hadn't heard that one. Lordy, lordy. I'm not sure I wanna ask.
But after I hit post I recalled one Martin "Martine" Rothblatt, the transsexual. He wrote a book "From Transgender to Transhumanism." He invented Sirius XM. Many, many multi-millionaire. Mebbe 500, can't recall. He not only wants to do with the whole biology of gender, but biology altogether. Download Your consciousness so You can live forever inside chips.
Now he owns a multi-billion company that engineers human parts from pigs. He created a heart but, IIRC, the patient died. Depends on Your POV.
He's never *said* he's trying to create a womb, so dunno. But wouldn't surprise me if some autogynephiles would wanna give birth. Ewwww.
Those In vitro fertilizations (IVF) have to implanted into a uterus. I doubt your premise. I know several married couples who could only become pregnant and have their children by IVF.
Trump never gets credit. You, as all Trump haters do, make sure to disavow anything positive that the former president did. Even if you hate it, it was a Trump administration policy. It was good policy. Betsy DaVos was a Trump appointee and although she was tortured throughout her time as Education Secretary, she did a good job. It won’t kill you, or make you less credible to say it. This whole piece is really good, except the Trump hate and the Biden love. Nobody’s asking you to vote red, but writing a fair, balanced piece isn’t asking too much.
As for the new sexual harassment policy, God protect our men.
She did say it. She just had to distance herself first. If she were honest she would have said "[I] know some of you are going to hate me for saying this, but . . .". That is why my verdict is out on many of these people - the Levi's lady, the "elite" pre-school (ugh!) parents and many others who have posted on here. Have they actually learned anything or are they just whining?
You are very kind. I probably need to take a page out of your book. To me it signifies thar she does not really have the courage of her convictions. Regrettably.
I think Democrats have very successfully implemented the Cloward-Piven Strategy by "isolating" and "ridiculing" anyone who voices support for Trump or his policies--even if his policies are successful. Democrats have spent quite a bit of time creating in my opinion propaganda painting any non-Democrat, any "flyover country" person, any non-college educated person, any Christian or even any devout Jewish person, any POOR person, as a loser and a moron undeserving of a voice, a job, of society, in this country. In other words, Democrats are now the bullies of this country.
I found her story exceedingly credible mostly by the effort the media went to destroy her. The simple fact Google worked with CNN to renumber all the Larry King Live episodes and scrub the episode Tara's mom called in to discuss how ineffective reporting assault against a powerful Senator really is, gives even more credence to the allegations.
The made up ideas of "There are always tons of people there so a 20-30 second finger grab could never have happened" is copium and nothing else.
..."could have been seen", never stopped others in the past. Public sex acts on Capital grounds, including on the steps has been documented by confessions...
"This was followed by a more serious allegation of assault, a charge he credibly denied."
Basically, he had Nancy P. say "Come on... This is Joe Biden.". He got the press to completely ignore it. He never addressed it.
We have Tara's mom talking to Larry King about a sexual assault on her daughter by an unnamed Senator (Tara worked for Joe Biden) on live TV recorded some 20 years ago. A video Google worked with CNN to scrub off the internet (though they couldn't scrub the old TV guides).
Saying Biden "credibly denied" the allegations is "Biden Love".
This change in policy is nothing short of horrifying. I was not previously aware that a third party could make an accusation that would be acted upon by campus administrators, regardless of the wishes of the two people actually involved.
Under these rules, it seems as if male students are better off not having sex with female fellow students at all. Or maybe they can claim to be trans, which--according to trans activists--makes lesbian women obligated to have sex with them. Kind of an extreme way to get laid. But this policy invites extreme responses.
This is what you get with identity politics. Few if any cases were brought against modern women and I can tell you that women can be just as aggressive as men.
But women is a target audience of the left and so naturally you get these refs. Sadly, the author makes zero effort to examine WHY such atrocious policies returned when the left took the WH.
A very artfully written article complaining about the acts, but spending zero time on its motivations.
Well said Rick. It's a shame that no effort was placed on explaining the root cause of these policies or why they have straddled two Democrat presidencies. Why is the left seems hellbent on destroying due process? This isn't a quirk of Biden's, this was a central tenet to the Obama presidency's Woke Inc agenda. I went back to college in my late twenties during the Obama admin and I can assure you that many young men, especially right wing young men were afraid to date women at their school.
Due process has been destroyed with the Jan 6 political prisoners. Being held for over a year, some in solitary confinement, in horrendous condition. No excuse for any of this, no one committed any crime above a misdemeanor. Some are being forced to admit to crimes far worse than they committed just to get it over with. This is not what the founding fathers wanted. This is a dicatorship.
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW /ˈmɪɡtaʊ/) is an anti-feminist, misogynistic, mostly-online community advocating for men to separate themselves from women and from a society which they believe has been corrupted by feminism.
I have a son in college. What I have been telling him for years is to avoid casual sex- one night stands are risky. There is too much potential for things to go wrong ( including pregnancy).
On the other end of things, at the first sign of trouble, you get a lawyer for your son. That indicates to the university that you mean business, and it won't be so easy to steamroller your son.
I currently have two sons in college and an older daughter and we have had extensive conversations about this. I raised my sons to be respectful of woman, but this atmosphere is terrifying and really does make them think about what most of us consider to be normal behavior and growth. Innocent flirting, how to ask someone out, how to navigate a new relationship, the growth of a relationship, a breakup or hurt feelings. We are all human and and sometimes humans lie, have misunderstandings and yes, do things against others wishes, the worst of these being rape and of course for this, there should be consequences. However, there is a lot of gray area and mature responsibility and communication is needed. I have told my boys to not only hear the words, but ask in a text or something documented in writing, “Yes, I want to do this with you.” Not romantic, and under these regulations, may not even matter. And no, I don’t think this always happens, just my advice. I have firsthand knowledge of a consensual encounter in which a young man was accused, and during the kangaroo court, the girl broke down sobbing and admitted it was consensual. If that had not happened, the young man would’ve have been expelled. I think if there is truly a rape, which does happen, it needs to be reported to the police and go through the regular court system, not this kangaroo court in which there is no upside tor anyone, including the victim, because if a rape really occurred, the consequence should not be expulsion, but jail.
This is biggest issue I have with the whole "campus justice" thing: if she was raped, why did she not go to the police? Why was he not arrested? Why was there no rape kit?
I do not understand how a woman could expect to have any accusation of RECENT rape believed in this day and age if she did not report that rape to the police. Why would a woman not want to have evidence collected in order to make sure her rapist goes to prison? Why tell no authorities except university authorities?
I have said the same to my college aged son. But I have an ignorant SIL and her son finds himself in a very unprotected situation. She wants to keep boiling the pot and I told her she'd do so at her own peril. Her son will be the perp no matter what really happened and to leave it alone. It's best that right now he's the victim of the nastiness of two girls. Keep all of the info in case, but don't spike the ball. I worry for my son and honestly hope he engages with women after graduation!
Sadly, while there are all female schools, there no all male schools. Send him to Hillsdsle, where they don’t take federal money and the refs are in applicable.
I have daughters, and one about to go to college. If she were a son, I wound strongly encourage him to avoid dating anyone attending his college. The risk is not worth the reward. The long term affect of these policies will be less men on campus and more risk for those who attend.
But's that what's so sad. My daughter, soon a college senior, has had difficulty finding a great guy. Thankfully that just changed. The Biden admin and the one he left 8 years ago is masterful at instilling terror into children's/young adults' lives. I thank God that I can have open conversations with my son and daughter to help them balance the ideals of loving, respectful, kind and generous relationships with the realities of cultural/political retaliation on seemingly every front. Back in the day, once we were adults, our parents could relax their parenting. Not anymore!
Bingo! I’m guessing these folks, especially the DEI crowd, all went to school and received degrees that would not allow them to get an actual job so we had to create an office in every school and corporation that is populated by partisan democrats with dubious education in pseudo science, and those people now have a say in all university and corporate policies.
YES! 100%! I am teaching my kids to be part of the "producing" class where they develop marketable skills and work for a living, ideally in their own business, but now, if they want to go into public policy or run for office, as a voice of moderation to turn this ship around, I'm all for it.
I find this to be a perfect example of the the hypocrisy of modern feminism.
On the one hand they stand up and talk about women's agency and about how women are tough and smart and just as capable as men.
BUT...then they turn around and talk about how they are all victims who need special protections.
AND.....despite their rejection of the idea, popular in earlier ages, that women need to be protected and that they are wholesome, innocent and should be put on pedestals, they somehow manage to act as though women are incapable of immoral, destructive, selfish behavior. Further, they will readily talk about how women are suffering all kinds of mental issues today but then refuse to consider that those issues could translate into cruel or anti-social behavior, such as falsely claiming that they are victims of sexual harassment or rape.
The problem I see is that modern feminism wants it ALL. All the privileges, but none of the responsibilities or downsides.
As a result, women can wear whatever hat serves them best at the moment. If they want to be seen as powerful, they wear that hat. If they want to be seen as victims, they wear the other hat.
The feminist denial of the fact that women are, in fact, quite capable of lying--about rape, about being on birth control, about anything else--does a great deal of harm, not only to the feminist movement, but to all women.
Women, in general, are now LESS trusted. Men do not want to mentor them. More and more men are less willing to enter relationships with women. Men are now placed in the position of every interaction with a female being a calculated risk.
Every interaction I have with a woman, at work or in relationships, is fraught with risks.
It only take ONE misinterpretation or one woman with a grudge or just a nutcase to ruin your entire life.
At work, I keep all women at bay. I never ever talk to a woman, other than my boss, alone. I always make sure that there is another person, preferably in management and preferably a woman, present. Even with Zoom calls, I now record them if it is just me and a woman. Not that I go out of my way to deny them opportunities or support them in their careers, but I am never, ever, going to have or allow the kind of casual, personal conversations that I might have with other men.
Does this have an impact? Well, I had to take a business trip to Hawaii to meet with a client. It was 4 days and I met with some potential partners and multiple potential clients. I wanted someone from BD to go with me but the only person available to go was this very attractive blonde in her early 30's. There was NO WAY IN HELL I was going to take her with me. NO WAY. There was no winning in that scenario for me. Even asking her to go was risky, just from the potential appearance. Heck, I would have questioned that if the trip had been to Omaha. But a romantic scene like Hawaii? NO WAY. Even if it had been Omaha, where I do go now and again, I would have taken different flights and booked different hotels. I would have had lunch with her but never dinner. Whereas with a guy I might have flown with him and worked on the flight. Probably would crash at the same hotel so we could meet early for breakfast and probably would work over dinner. I might even have asked him if he wanted to take a walk around and see the sights since I had never been there. BUT NO WAY would I ever ever do that with a woman.
Did that hinder her career? Possibly. I met with some great connections that might have served her well. There were a couple of potential deals she maybe could have worked on. But the risk was JUST untenable for me.
My dad had a practice of keeping his office door always open so he had total transparency.
The policy came in handy when he was targeted by a female grifter who tried to accuse him of misbehavior. His secretary testified the door was always open, and nothing the accuser described had happened.
She never got consequences for her lies, no, she moved up the executive line eventually.
Great comment, and I completely get it. My husband and I own a business and he is a great boss and mentor. He has an amazing personality in which people, including some of his employees open up to him and tell him personal things and he has gone out of his way to help them. On occasion, in certain situations with certain employees, I have warned him that although this is a wonderful quality, it could backfire on him. I have asked him to to be careful, because if he needs to fire any of these people, especially young woman, everything is open to interpretation. From my own perspective, I have noticed after all the “me too” ridiculousness, some men being less friendly to me, or going out of their way to make sure they are not alone with me. I get it. All of this is kind of sad really.
I'll give you an example from yesterday how just talking with a woman casually can create havoc.
SO....I took my fiance to a winery. We were sitting outside looking over the mountains and just enjoying the day. She asked me to go inside and grab her another glass of wine. SO...I did.
I got to the bar, ordered her wine and a flight of beer for me. One of the women working behind the bar had a cool tattoo on her upper arm. I casually said that I thought that was a great tattoo. She then proceeded to give me the whole history of it. I thought that was interesting. Come to find out there was a connection to some art work that my grandmother had done and I mentioned it. Just chit chat.
As soon as the beers showed up I went back outside. Not 5 minutes later, that woman with the tattoo, who turned out to be the manager, came outside and pulled up a chair at our table and tried to strike up a longer conversation.
Well, ultimately the woman walked away and my fiance and I left to go to a flea market but I could tell my fiance was pissed off. She finally said to me that she was angry about it. She also said that it was because I had flirted. I told her that all I had done was comment on a tattoo and chatted while waiting for my beer. How was I supposed to know that she would take that as license to come over and sit down?
So I asked my fiance what she would have had me do? Be rude and ask the woman, who happens to be the manager and who theoretically could just be doing a table visit, to leave? My fiance responded "no" that would be rude. But she was still pissed.
So, you see the risk. A simple, casual, in passing conversation, with a woman, that would have meant NOTHING had it been a guy, creates chaos.
SO, what have I learned from this? I am going to keep any conversation with any woman not a family member or my fiance to nothing but business. I will even be rude if that is what it takes to assure that there is nothing that can be interpreted as flirting. No longer will I have even the most innocuous conversation but will proactively assert that I have no interest.
Sad. As someone who has been married to a friendly guy for 27 years - It didn’t have to be that way. You could have gotten a good laugh together or made a new friend.
I live near Napa Valley. Its commonplace for winery staff to occasionally join couples/small groups for conversation. It adds to the winetasting experience, and it's part of their job to sell wine and wine club memberships to the tsting room guests.
If my husband of 25 years couldn't carry on a conversation with a bar tender/winery manager, I'd be annoyed and actually find it disrespectful. Insecurity is a real thing, and therefore, so is a sense of security. Wishing you the best.
Have you read Suzi Wiess Commn Sense piece on David Sabatini? It is the most gobsmacking, horrific example of what you've outlined. We all lose because David Sabatini is side lined.
OMG so true. All those opportunities to work with smart men they could learn from—gone. How do they expect to get noticed and promoted? Oh silly me, they just deserve promotions because ya know, equity.
I don't see it as hypocritical. Their language has always been about "empowerment" being a feminist virtue. There's a lot of power in victimization - look at Jussie Smollett.
Being assertive and confident one day and then a helpless victim the next is potent emotional manipulation. It's empowering!
Imagine what Camille Paglia would say about all this.
Women wanted liberation, equal rights, free sexuality. Of course that meant risk, hurt feelings, rejection, hook ups that didn’t go well. But they were free, and freedom doesn’t guarantee nice.
Now we have a generation of helicopter kids. They can’t tolerate freedom, risk, hurt. They need nanny to swoop in and make it all better. And our Leviathan progressives want to do that.
"(A)n immoral administration doing the moral thing."
Trump is bad! Bad, bad, bad! But considering the Democratic Party is in favor of abortion to the moment of birth, providing hormone treatment to children, an open border, a weak foreign policy that led to the collapse of Afghanistan and war in Ukraine, high gas prices, and inflation... how immoral was his administration compared to the current one?
I think Victor Davis Hanson's assessment of Trump is the most accurate. His accomplishments will never be appreciated because of how he has been popularly characterized.
Donald Trump is John Wayne from "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance."
I believe Trumps reputation amongst independents has only grown over the last 18 months as voters witness how awful Biden is by comparison. The media and Democrat elected officials have gone the other way as their credibility is going south for demonizing one of the most effective Presidents of my lifetime, and they seek to try and maintain whatever remains of their reputations. That's exactly what the 1/6 hearings are about. The media, elected officials and hardcore left look at it as a way of validating their mischaracterizations of the Trump administrations many, many positive accomplishments. My regrets of those years was that he was such an awful figurehead. Imagine what more he might have accomplished, and still be accomplishing, if he could of even kept half of his thoughts to himself?
"My regrets of those years was that he was such an awful figurehead. Imagine what more he might have accomplished, and still be accomplishing, if he could of even kept half of his thoughts to himself?"
And if he hadn't spent so much time accumulating scorn and adoration on Twitter at all hours of the day and night.
Trumps Twitter habits were just awful. And it was a constant reminder to myself how incredibly immature I am still, in my 40s, because I would occasionally giggle at the stupidity before remembering that this is the president of the US. Not one of the Plastics from the movie Mean Girls.
Imagine what he could have accomplished if not for a baseless investigation run by James Comey, Andrew McCabe and passed off to Robert Mueller. They prevented the peaceful transition to a new President for the first time ion history, aided by their media accomplices. The FBI lied about Page to get FISA warrants, lied to Congress about Steele’s sources, used outside law firms to actively monitor FBI databases to track Trump communications, etc. If that’s not Treason and Sedition, I’m not sure what is. Imagine where we would be now - no Russian invasion, no dollar on the precipice due to the BRICs, energy independence, etc.
First of all the facts: That was bad what they did, but they in *no* way prevented a peaceful transition, right? Trump was already in power, right? Treason?
What would-a happened if Trump was in power? He PRAISED Putin for invading, right? Just as likely Putin would-a have overrun Ukraine and the tiny NATO countries and be pushing up against Germany and France right now.
The grass is *always* greener on the other side-a the fence. THere's nobody on this planet with a crystal ball as to what WOULD-a happened IF... That's why I don't spend mental energy on those kinds-a things, myself.
President Trump was hamstrung throughout his Presidency due to the fraudulent investigation. His DOJ was being run by Rosenstein, who abdicated all responsibility to Weissman during the Mueller investigation. His communications were being monitored by Joffe and the FBI as seen in the Sussman trial.
OTOH, the U.S. had no wars for four years. Trump had bombed Russian forces in Syria, was pulling us out of Afghanistan, we had a secure border and were reorienting the predatory trade practices of China. You don't have to guess what would -a happened if Trump was in power, you already know.
You can *pretend* to know all You want. But glad You brought that up. Trump, "the MASTER NEGOTIATOR?" Negotiated with the TALIBAN to get us outta Afghanistan. How'd that work out for the Afgan women? I know.. I know.. Trump can do no wrong. I get it. It's all of no importance.
You mean when Trump told the Taliban leaders that we were tracking them and their families and would bomb them if they didn't adhere to the agreement or when Biden decided to ignore the timeline that was agreed to, went against the military recommendation to keep Bagram Air Base open to provide air cover for an orderly departure, gave the Taliban a list of people who worked with us, left $80 billion in weapons and got 13 troops killed?
It seems to me that over the past 20 years, there was only one president that didn't oversee Putin invading another country. Russia invaded Georgia under Bush, Crimea under Obama (I refer you to the notorious hot-mic of Obama asking Medvedev to give him breathing-room until after the 2012 election), and now Ukraine under Biden. I wonder who the exception was?
Interesting to explore how our “hair sniffer” in chief got to be associated with such deeply psychopathic prurient involvement in “due-process.” Seen this issue as a long history with deviance a la Harvard, universities, Epstein, Gates, Clinton, Biden and company. Kind of forget but it wasn’t long ago that Biden tweeted that it wasn’t unusual for good folks to get caught with pictures of unmentionables on their phones. This guy and all his associates are certifiable. No contest.
I was tangentially connected to someone who went through the nightmare of the campus sex police. He was a Black guy who was the first person in his family in generations to to college. He had sex with a well-to-do white girl who later decided she hadn’t really wanted to do it. He was expelled, sued, and won a big court verdict. The jury was out I think less than 15 minutes. There was video—which I don’t think he got a chance to see or argue during the University investigation—that made it clear as day that the girl had not been blackout drunk as she claimed.
The courts can fix a wrongful expulsion on paper, but unfortunately they can’t come close to making a wrongfully expelled student whole. Missing a year or more of college, having your friends graduate without you, the nightmare of a false investigation (which in his case was probably a classic example of racially motivated sex accusations, one of the uglier parts of Jim Crow that is resurgent under the Obama Title IX regs), having a gap in your resume you have to explain for your next ten years of job interviews, the stigma of being expelled for sexual misconduct… nothing a court can do can fix that.
Hopefully universities will wake up to the legal liability they face for wrongful expulsions and will voluntarily keep more robust protections for the accused than the regulations require.
Interesting. But that’s of a piece with the democrat party. They use blacks and then spit them out when not needed for votes anymore. They promise the world to get those votes and then never deliver.
Hispanics are learning fast. Blacks need to wake up too.
Yeah. 100%. But it's not *only* that. What it indicates is the hierarchy of oppression. White women are higher. When it comes to oppression, a black *man* gets sacrificed. Funny that.
If the Trump regs were an example of an immoral administration doing the moral thing, what would you call the BIden example on Title IX?
Also, just curious, since we're assigning modifiers to each administration, but what would $2/gal gas, low inflation, wages outpacing inflation for blue and brown collar workers, and a (relatively speaking, anyway) secure border be an example of: a moral or immoral administration? And what would the opposite or diametrically opposed outcomes be an example of? Moral? Immoral? Super moral?
Or, as anyone with a brain can infer, doesn't matter because the author's north star is her "feelings" and one President makes her "feel" bad for reasons no sane person can articulate, but another President makes her "feel" good for reasons that are completely belied by reality - like the reality of the article she just authored.
My boys should not have to live in fear of everything they say and do. They have a responsibility to treat "women" (which really means anyone) with respect but should not have to walk on eggshells to do so. In my opinion, the REAL victims of sexual assault will be undermined by a whole lot of "guilty by affirmation" rather than an appropriate trial. It serves neither the real victims nor the young men who are found "guilty" because a school administrator says so.
What started out good leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
“The DeVos regulations were an example of an immoral administration doing the moral thing.”
Then just before entering the 2020 presidential race, Joe Biden was accused by several women of unwanted touching and hair sniffing. Biden didn’t quite apologize, but explained that all his physical contacts were well-meant gestures of friendship and support. This was followed by a more serious allegation of assault, a charge he credibly denied.
Characterizing DeVos refs as a moral thing done bumpy an immoral administration is nasty and unnecessary. Such a sweeping description of the Trump administration is reckless and wrong. It’s gratuitous and undermines the author’s credibility.
Similarly, claiming that Biden credibly denied a serious allegation of assault is little more than taking Biden‘s word for it. We’ve learned that’s a dangerous thing to do. “I know nothing about my son’s business dealings”. “The laptop is Russian disinformation”.
Serious false denials about serious matters shows that Biden’s “credible denials” that comprised of little more then a general denial bereft of detail or evidence are far from credible and far from the standard that the prior “immoral administration was held to”.
"Characterizing DeVos refs as a moral thing done bumpy an immoral administration is nasty and unnecessary. Such a sweeping description of the Trump administration is reckless and wrong. It’s gratuitous and undermines the author’s credibility."
Yeah, that kind of chapped my rear end, too. Folks should be careful what they say; they might have to back it up. I hear it all the time: "He lies!" Really, can you give an example? "Well, well, well .... he lies!" Right. "Immoral administration" - Really, can YOU give an example? How about five? You mean like destroying the oil industry? Promoting men to compete in women's sports? Driving inflation and impoverishing a large segment of the population to where they're choosing between food and medicine? No, wait a minute - that was somebody else.....
My thoughts exactly. It's like liberal writers need to temper their praise of conservative policies because, you know, conservatives are bad.
Pro forma TDS.
Here is basically Joe Biden's "credible denial" that he molested women.
"I didn't do it."
I like what You write. But first, last, and only lie that matters:
"The election was stolen."
The election was stolen, though. It's rather obvious to anyone who examines the copious evidence.
Obvious? Trump knew the election wasn't stolen. People around him told him so, right up until 1/6. Ivanka knew the election wasn't stolen.
What people take for evidence is up to them. I take Trump at his word. He says he lies and You can believe him on that. *That's* what obvious means.
Keep in mind that many people surrounding him were telling him the opposite, but you won't hear them at the hearings. The 2020 elections were like no elections I've experienced in my lifetime, and I hope not to in the future. There is no doubt in my mind that had they been conducted the same as the 2016 elections, Trump would have won. Do I think they were 'rigged' or 'stolen'? No, but the rules were changed and allowed for things like ballot harvesting, late vote counting, and other such stuff that have less integrity than a voter showing up at a polling center, verifying their ID and voting.
Yes, mail in ballots are what tipped the election in favor of Biden.
And the mail in ballot “process” was very far from pure.
Yeah, You noticed *who* it was telling him the election was stolen? That factor into Your calculations at *all?*
Btw, did You read Trump's statement? It was a joke. It was a "pep-rally for the troops" piece. That's what he submitted to the hearings. What a joker.
Thousands of ballots were harvested by paid operatives in critical swing districts. THOUSANDS. It was a clever and concerted effort to flip the vote, and it worked.
In a normal election year, mailed ballots are about 10% improper and are discarded -- missing an address, improperly filled out, etc. Mailed forms tend to not be done as properly as ballots at a polling station. Yet, in 2020, something like 0.5% of faulty mailed ballots were discarded. The tabulators in Philadelphia and elsewhere were instructed to either waive the rules or send the ballot back for correction, an unprecedented effort to count every anti-Trump vote possible. In some districts, the ballots were 100% for Biden, 0% for Trump, which is statistically impossible. There were bundles of ballots, all pristine and neatly folded, where only "Biden" was ticked, no other candidates selected. Clearly these were harvested by professionals who went door-to-door requesting people to sign off on "whatever". There's video evidence of "mules" going from dropbox to dropbox at wee hours, inserting bundles of ballots. The day after the feds arrested someone out west whose fingerprints were on multiple ballots, suddenly these "mules" all started wearing gloves, which they were seen discarding in the trash bin right after use.
It's quite clear that a massive ballot harvesting operation was conducted that neutralized Trump's own massive in-person turnout, which netted him 12 million more votes than in 2016 yet the mailed operation outnumbered physical voters.
In several states, Biden won by only a few thousand ballots, and there were irregularities in the tens of thousands.
Because of this, millions of people are persuaded that the election was stolen.
In a very divided country, irregularities and cheating which always occur in normal times suddenly become the deciding factor in a highly contested election. To just blandly dismiss concerns of these irregularities is highly discrediting and disingenuous.
Under normal conditions, without Zuckerberg's ridiculous dropboxes and zero chain-of-custody ballot harvesting, Trump would have won in Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and probably Wisconsin and Nevada as well, and many things today would be different, including the topic of this article which is abuse of Title IX. My guess is, Russia also wouldn't have invaded Ukraine but liberals don't seem to care about that too much; gives them a chance to support a righteous war and distract everyone's attention from Democrats' abject failures in border, crime, economy, etc. here at home.
Not to mention that US cybersecurity now admits the Dominion voting machines can be hacked.
Your accounting of the facts comes straight from the most partisan and unreliable sources who are cobbling together anecdotes, rumors, and outright falsehoods to paint a picture that Republican elections officials across the country are calling false.
Yes, the Zuckerberg $money$ is what pushed the mail in ballots into Biden’s column.
Your account is interesting. But no judge saw anything wrong. AG Barr didn't see anything wrong.
How come?
I might be wrong, Terry. But I remember reading way back in 2020 that Trump voted in the Florida primaries, how?..not in person, not by regular mail, but by using a third party..
Ballot harvesting?
A number of states dramatically laxed their election laws, which shouldn't have been able to be done according to their states constitution. They got away with it because the cowardly judicial class wanted the mean tweeter gone. This allowed for the ridiculous 3 week election, which anyone with a brain knows, that if it were Biden who lost a 3 week election on a bunch of bunk rules, this country would have been burnt to the fucking ground, and the Dems would have cheered it on.
And speaking on Insurrections, what's happening with AGs and the DOJ claiming the Supreme Court is illegitimate and they won't follow their rulings is an actual insurrection, and something that would have seen Trump impeached.
Point, Set and Match to Russell
That's news to me. Bad news.
You got a link to somebody who isn't Trump-blind?
Trump hears what he wants to hear and he disregards the rest. If he had a single, and he had many, voice telling him "stolen" he'd accept that as fact over thunderous objection from everyone else. I think he did believe, now I forget the lawyer's name, legal counsel's quite imperfect argument about sending the issue back to the states. I think most people would think, rightly, that that was bonkers. But see first sentence.
The issue of fact regarding election improprieties is a distinct question (from the issue of how to sort them out). I do not think the assertion that irregularities and improper procedure, etc occurred is unreasonable. Just the way Trump and team went about trying to show it. For that he can thank Giuliani. Trump's original team was arguing actual equal protection arguments. Giuliani came in with unsustainable fraud allegations and blew it all up.
At the end of the day I think what most Trump supporters felt was that the Covid voting measures and massive complicity (collusion?) of the media and social media made the election an unfair full court press against Trump. Mostly, they are right. But I do not think that equates to fraud or a stolen election.
There have been many instances of irregularities and some strong arguments to show how ballot harvesting flipped the election.
The fraud-deniers always retreat to "there's no proof" and "the courts dismissed every case". Of course they did because courts need to see hard evidence, not just an appearance of fraud. It's actually very hard to prove election fraud, which is why it happens so often (and if you think it doesn't happen in every election in all 50 states plus the territories, you're naive beyond repair).
I personally believe Trump should have dropped the issue after November 30, 2020, when it was clear that nothing could be done. Just withdraw gracefully and "better luck next time" which is to say, "have better observers and ban the damn dropboxes next time".
The Democrats took several seats in southern California in 2018, in traditionally Republican areas, by means of ballot harvesting -- operatives going door to door, asking the Spanish speaking residents to kindly thumbprint a ballot (and probably paying them but no one has proven it), a practice that was illegal in California until the Dem-run legislature repealed the law. In 2020, the Republicans had wised up and resorted to ballot harvesting of their own, flipping a few seats back.
Great post. I made a post earlier that captured your final comments:
At the end of the day I think what most Trump supporters felt was that the Covid voting measures and massive complicity (collusion?) of the media and social media made the election an unfair full court press against Trump. Mostly, they are right. But I do not think that equates to fraud or a stolen election.
Again, Jovan Hutton Pulitzer has the hard evidence of the machine cheating. Will it ever see the light of day in this country of no more free speech and big tech along with media covering every thing up so most people never hear the the truth? I am not optimistic.
Eastman was the lawyer.
And, yeah, that's pretty much how I see it. Like YOu say, I think the biggest problem with the election was more how the media covered it and hushed up the Hunter Biden laptop thing. I don't think Trump got a fair hearing that way. But it's been a long time since the media was anywhere near non-biased. Just went to extremes this time more than most.
If there *is* election fraud (and there was, just saw comment about guy in Philly), people should go to jail. If it's big, find preventative measures. Mebbe national certification of valid voting machines. There's better ways and worse ways for machines to count the votes. Ohio and Texas are pretty good, from what I've seen and "heard."
In 1876, I wonder if Hayes knew he didn't win. After all, Hayes lost the popular vote and the electoral vote was 184 for Tilden and 165 for Hayes. But Hayes and the GOP contested a bunch of states, based most especially on the disenfranchisement of black voters, and it was basically an unresolvable controversy. In the end they won, by wheeling and dealing on matters unrelated to the presidency itself, and creating an acceptable compromise deal.
Was Hayes beyond the pale in legally contesting the elections in the four states in question, and were the people that submitted contesting slates of electors from those states criminally traitorous?
The reality is, nobody can prove anything about the legitimacy, or illegitimacy of the 2020 election. It may never be known, or perhaps, like Russiagate, after five years of actual investigation, it will be determined.
TY for the info on Hayes election.
We’ve already had this discussion and my answer is still yes, the election was stolen. Just the 2000 miles evidence is enough to show the smoke. Plenty of other problems and statistical anomalies that were swept under the rug because no one wants to deal with the truth. And of course all the shenanigans with liberalizing voting procedures using COVID as an excuse. It all stinks to high hell.
I won’t be satisfied until elections are 100% in person requiring photo ID with rare exceptions for absentee voting.
That won’t happen because Republicans would win much more than they do now.
Dems have to cheat. They certainly can’t run on policy or results. If a Republican wins its because he/she REALLY wins by a lot. 2016 must have been a massive landslide. That or the Dems didn’t think they needed to cheat as much.
Nixon knew that the 1960 election was stolen. He didn't make a big deal of it, because he knew what happened was going to happen. He didn't run up a lead in enough swing states, and allowed the dead in Illinois and Texas to pip him at the wire.
Same deal with the hanging chads of 2000.
The idea that what happened in 2020 (edited) is anomalous in history is laughable. the only thing is that the orange buffoon didn't get paid off handsomely to remain in a "government/elite" sinecure not to complain.
You are right. Nixon did know but he didn't pursue it. Ballot boxes disappeared for almost a week in Texas and then mysteriously reappeared with the boxes stuffed with Kennedy ballots.
publius_x - your last sentence makes no sense to me. "orange buffoon" I assume you mean Trump? "didn't get paid off" huh??? Trump is independently wealthy. In fact he sacrificed a lot of wealth when he went into government, is building back now. Kind of the opposite of people like the Clintons & Obamas, who became fabulously wealthy as a result of government "service". Anyway... hate Trump, love Trump, whatevs. Election was stolen.
I think I followed you, until 2016. Did you mean 2020?
Yes, there is general agreement among non-partisan specialists that Wisconsin was stolen.
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/donald-trump-applauds-outstanding-wisconsin-special-counsel-2020
"Former state Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman discovered more than 90 Wisconsin nursing homes that had 95% to 100% voter participation, far above the national average rates."
https://thefederalist.com/2021/12/10/5-biggest-takeaways-from-the-latest-review-of-wisconsins-rigged-2020-election/
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/wisconsin-county-sheriff-reveals-findings-investigation-election-law
If you can’t make your case in court, maybe the proof is deficient. Trump’s own DOJ ran down seemingly every lead, no matter how on its face ridiculous (like the Italian satellite caper), that was sent it’s way. They were dead ends.
Why is it so terribly difficult to recognize that the playbook was to sow confusion and doubt over the integrity of the election result rather than any real belief in the truth of these claims? Can’t you accept Giuliani at his word that they had plenty of theories but no evidence?
And does anyone remember that in the run-up to the 2016 election Trump was warning of massive fraud? Am I alone in seeing a pattern that Trump’s mentor Roy Cohn would have been proud of?
You seem unfamiliar with the actual timelines.
The evidence in Wisconsin came out long after the election was decided. The election officials there did not investigate in November, when they would have found out that far more votes came from nursing homes than was possible.
Plus, as you know, many of the complaints filed by the Republicans before Election Day were rejected by judges because the election had not taken place, and most of them filed after the counting had finished were rejected by judges because, since the election was over, they were too late.
You're in flat earth territory Terry. Republican officials across the country with the responsibility for running elections, and a detailed understanding of the facts, disagree with you; vehemently.
Breaking News on Elections: Undocumented Democrats can't vote in NYC elections!
https://abcnews.go.com/US/york-citys-noncitizen-voting-law-struck/story?id=85796384
EDIT: That's great news.
Who enforces these laws? If they don’t have a handle on enforcing crime now, who will enforce this law in NY?
Giuliani’s admission is relevant here. He said that the Trump election committee had lots of theories but no evidence. And the overall context is of fraud so pervasive and systemic as to have changed the outcome of the 2020 election in certain swing states.
Giuliani’s admission of a lack of evidence has been confirmed by every court before whom the Trump election committee and its supporters filed lawsuits, up to and including the Supreme Court.
as a prosecutor of many years, and a very successful one at that, Giuliani is careful what he says, and I respect him for that. However if you ask Giuliani, "do you think that swing states flipped the election using tactics like illegally extending the voting period to harvest extra ballots?" he'll probably agree.
First, I don't think the election was stolen. I think Trump lost. I think Trump deserved to lose, and I think it was good that he lost.
But, your statement is simply not true.
I don't have comprehensive knowledge of the situation, but I do things like spot test such statements for truth. I tested this concept long ago. I only tested this for a couple states and didn't find much support for these things all being thrown out for lack of evidence. There was a pretty high rate of them being thrown out for other reasons, especially including the time-based review issue that especially affects judging election results. For Pennsylvania, for example, one major lawsuit contesting the election ended 4-3 at the state Supreme Court. The vote was 3 Democratic-appointed votes to dismiss the lawsuit, 3 GOP-appointed votes to allow the lawsuit, and 1 GOP-appointed justice's vote to dismiss the lawsuit. The GOP-appointed justice who voted to shut the lawsuit down said explicitly that the reason was laches. He explicitly said that the claims may have merit, and looked like they did, but that the issue needed to have been raised before the election. So from timing of the claim alone (laches) he didn't allow the lawsuit to proceed, not from merit or lack of evidence.
The courts can't possibly adjudicate vague claims of "cheating". It's not good enough to say it quacks like a duck. They need hard evidence, witnesses, video footage, boxes of ballots, etc. etc. These were not forthcoming. That's why the election fraud cases got no traction.
However, there are specific instances of blatant and probably fraudulent ballot harvesting as in Rfhirsch's example of Wisconsin nursing homes.
The thing is, this sort of thing happens in every election. It's nothing new. But there certainly seemed to be a desperate, almost hysterical effort on the part of Democrats to do whatever it takes to get him out of office. I personally know dozens of such people who were very relieved and happy when he lost, and openly celebrated. When I told them there was something fishy going on -- not here in this very blue state full of hopelessly liberal fools, but in some of the swing states -- they simply ignored me or said "so, where's the evidence? try and prove it!" knowing that it's difficult if not impossible to prove something like this. It's just thousands of poll workers and ballot mules and Zuckerberg dropboxes and state election boards bending the rules and on and on.
So, it's over. But millions of people will continue to believe that it's not a legit election. And, of course, Biden's total failure in everything he's done, the catastrophic Afghan withdrawal, the border, energy, inflation, crime... it just feeds people's anger and bitterness. If Biden had been semi-competent, people might have been able to put this behind them and more on. But it's plain to see that our country is heading down a very dark path right now. Everyone's saying, it's a shame Trump's not in charge. Even some Democrats are privately admitting it. So don't be too smug.
A literal tsunami of evidence, including everything that we all saw with our own eyes. If they didnt see it, it's bc their eyes are clamped shut.
You are truly delusional. Not sure why you are on common sense. YOu should be on 4Chan with your QAnon buddies.
No offense meant, but there is so much irrefutable evidence of what took place that the only way to not know about it is to want to not know. Not, "not want to know," but "want to not know." Willful ignorance. Fingers in ears: LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA .......
Whether stolen or not, that election is past. However, there is another election coming up, and the two greatest potential sources of vote fraud are 1) mail-in ballots, described by Jimma Cahtah hisownself as having tremendous fraud potential, and 2) voting machines, which are nothing more than computers. What do computers do? Run code. Once your vote is scanned by that machine you have absolutely zero idea what happens to it. Zero. Fold a paper, put it in a box, guard that box, and you have a pretty good idea that the vote is true.
After the American 2020 election, France moved to ban mail-in ballots and voting machines from the entire country. There is absolutely no reason for us to not use paper ballots, as France has done. And when we do, the potential of Black Box computer fraud is eliminated.
Australia banned mail in ballots at the turn of the 20th century precisely for the reasons cited above banana republics don’t have them people come with their ID’s get their fingers inked and a paper ballot which in turn is placed in a ballot box when full it is taken away and guarded until counting takes place it’s that simple. Our elections have been fraudulent for the whole of the 20th century going into this one as well the problem going forward is how do we sort this out when we have a government who is hell bent on keeping power that’s the difficult question
The irrefutable evidence comes down on the side that Trump lied from the beginning about the election being stolen. Now, does that mean it's *impossible* there was fraud. No, not *impossible.* I'll believe it when I see it from an relatively impartial source. Anybody who believed Trumps lie is, by definition, not an impartial or good source.
But, just like You say, people want to not know. Willful ignorance. Can only see one side and that's Trump's side. I see Trump's good side. I see Trump's horrible side. You who can only see with one eye directed in one direction?
2000 Mules. There you go, now try to say “irrefutable evidence”.
Gimme a break. You call that guy an impartial observer? I didn't even bother to look. Why add to his money bags? Or was it free? Even then.
"Anybody who believed Trumps lie is, by definition, not an impartial or good source."
Which is to say, "I only believe people who agree with me." Nonsense - That's the very definition of bias, isn't it? Credibility - meet toilet - toilet, credibility.
If you want to see Kari Lake clean Brett "Lamestream Press" Baier's plow on this topic, just watch:
https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/breaking-boom-kari-lake-goes-full-election-truther-on-bret-baier/
We use voting machines but have a paper ballot. You are issued a ballot when you check in, feed it into the voting machine, vote, retrieve the ballot, then scan it and drop the ballot itself into a secure receptical. If there are doubts each vote can be verified.
You saw the CISA announcement in May, of course, that Dominion machines were vulnerable to being hacked such that the paper ballot being produced says "I voted for A" while the bar code that gets read later says "She voted for B"?
"ATLANTA (AP) — Electronic voting machines from a leading vendor used in at least 16 states have software vulnerabilities that leave them susceptible to hacking if unaddressed, the nation’s leading cybersecurity agency says in an advisory sent to state election officials....
The advisory is based on testing by a prominent computer scientist and expert witness in a long-running lawsuit that is unrelated to false allegations of a stolen election pushed by former President Donald Trump after his 2020 election loss...
...the machines print a paper ballot that includes a barcode — known as a QR code — and a human-readable summary list reflecting the voter's selections, and the votes are tallied by a scanner that reads the barcode.
“When barcodes are used to tabulate votes, they may be subject to attacks exploiting the listed vulnerabilities such that the barcode is inconsistent with the human-readable portion of the paper ballot,” the advisory says"
It's almost a waste of time to go through all the ways the Dominion machines can be subverted. They don't necessarily have to be "hacked;" it can just be the way they are natively programmed. I repeat: they just run code. They can include a line of code that has a weighting function, such that candidate A's votes are tallied as 0.75 votes, while a vote for candidate B is 1.3333 votes. 0.75 * 1.33333 = 1, so the vote tally comes out correct, but you've just taken votes our of one candidate's bucket and put them in another. They can contain code that runs at a specific time and then erases itself. If they are network-connected, they can coordinate to synchronize voting percentages across multiple precincts in multiple states, which is of course exactly what happened.
Programmers are smart; they can make these machines do absolutely anything and then hide their own tracks. And of course, for some reason, Dominion won't release its source code - to ANYONE, including Congress. There is not a single reason to keep these machines and every reason to be rid of them, and IMHO that should be a top priority.
Thank you. I knew there were reportedly issues with the Dominion machines but not thr specifics.
I voted on a machine in California, that machine printed out a result on plain computer paper which was put in a locked box. There is no chain of custody, no voter ID, no evidence that inside the machine the result was different. We in California know that the algorithm in the machines gave Biden 1.30 of a vote and Trump .70 of a vote. What happened to One Vote, One Person. Since when did fractionation of votes become legal?
This may be apocryphal, but it has been alleged that weighted voting was first implemented by Dominion in Venezuela as a method to keep Hugo Chavez in power.
There is absolutely no reason for any vote to be weighted. One vote should == 1.0. Period. If there is code weighting it as anything else, that is by definition fraud. But of course, Dominion won't release its source code and let independent sources look at it.
To my eye, no matter what is done I won't trust that what goes on inside those black boxes is true and fair. I see no possible way to secure it that cannot be hacked. And the moral hazard for hacking is just too great for one side or the other to not at least try. Paper ballots work and have worked for centuries. The idea that "there are too many voters" to count is nonsense. Just hire enough poll workers for ONE DAY, do the job, and call it good.
Out of curiosity, did it occur to you to check over the written piece of paper - was that possible to do, and if so was the ability to do that explained, and if so did you do it?
My interest is just understanding if the paper records created are even accurate - yes, they get spit out, but do people know they should read them over? I didn't, so my record could have been totally wrong!
That is my fear. I have reasonable confidence in my local elections. I do not count the votes but I have participated at every other stage. Some machines are better than others. I am out of town so I can't check my notes to see which ones we use. None of our equipment is hooked up to equipment outside the polling place. In the event of an issue the ballot itself can be verified. Texas is pretty election integrity conscious fortunately. But Texas is not one of the states that has major impact.
Why do that? Why have two systems? Why not use ONE system which has proven accurate and reliable for centuries?
I do not understand your comment. Your local election administrator purchases the equipment for your jurisdiction, subject to state, and maybe some federal law. We quit hand marking ballots decades ago.The hanging chad controversy was in 2000 and we went largely automated after that. I guess my system.is a hybrid but I am greatly relieved thst each ballot can be verified. I don't think that is true everywhere. I also volunteer during elections so I see the process at work.
If you look at history of elections in the United States, almost every losing side claims the election was stolen or rigged dating back to early 1800s. It’s pretty wild. It’s almost as if this country has a whole bunch of entitled sore losers who only agree with things that go their way. Furthermore, I would argue that as a nation, we’ve ceased to be a true democracy and have moved into oligarchy territory. You really think Biden is making these decisions? That’s dude can’t even tie his shoes. It’s the overlords behind him making all these social controversies to distract the majority of the populace whilst they fleece our nations wealth and sell us out to China (see his recent moves with solar power). It’s all a Kansas City Shuffle.
There's an old saying: when they're out to get you, paranoia is good thinking. (I had a case like that when I was on a psychiatry rotation, actually. Pretty hairy, let me tell you...)
When a plurality of American voters believe that there has been fraud to the extent that it changed a presidential election, then it should be investigated. Really investigated, not just people slinging insults at each other. Open, free, fair investigation. An official, public investigation. With all parts televised and all evidence heard BY THE PUBLIC.
When the Supreme Court, whose creation was in large part to settle disputes between states refuses to hear a case where sixteen states sue other states for voter fraud - on the basis that those states have "no standing," then it's time for a real look under the hood. If the allegations are shown to be false, so be it, but this is like Roe: a huge judicial mistake that WILL NEVER GO AWAY until it is settled, and settled the right way, once and for all.
I agree. I always liked the old saying that just because a fellow is paranoid does not mean no one is out to get him.
When I was a third-year med student on psych rotation, we were given responsibility for about four or five patients, for whom we acted as their primary doctor - always with supervision, of course. I admitted a patient from the ER, crazy as a June Bug. He said his father-in-law was after him, had shot him once, and meant to kill him. We admitted him with the DX of "paranoid reaction."
The next morning about 3:30 a.m. I got a call at home from the chair of Internal Medicine, which oversaw Psychiatry. "Jim, this is Bill J___. Today you admitted a patient, John M______. I want you to put on your clothes and go straight to the eighth floor and discharge him, and I mean right now."
It was the weirdest conversation I had ever had in my life. It was 3:30 in the morning. "Dr. J________. what's going on?"
"He's not paranoid and he's not psychotic. I just got a call from the sheriff of Monongalia County, and every word your patient told you is true. They're looking for the father-in-law, and if they don't find him, I don't want him shooting up the department."
I wasted no time. When they're out to get you, paranoia is indeed good thinking.
"That[] dude can’t even tie his shoes."
Exactly. So who decides what goes on his teleprompter?
It’s early and I wrote this on my phone while in bed so didn’t notice my grammatical error until after I posted. I don’t believe we can edit comments so I can’t change it. I am aware of the mistake and it wasn’t intentional.
That said, I don’t know who writes the words on the teleprompter, but I agree with Taibi’s quip last week that we are moments away from a Ron Burgundy situation with Biden where tells the country, “**** you, San Diego.”
I very much agree with the oligarchy statement. The rest too.
In a winner-takes-all system like ours, where the plurality victor assumes power and the loser is completely powerless, there is bound to be dissatisfaction following any election that is not at least a 60-40 overwhelming victory.
I think we should be seriously looking at a European style parliamentary system where the losers maintain a minority status with some influence rather than being cut out entirely.
It's true that a smart winner will not totally railroad over the losers, but will strive to make inroads, co-opt their ideas to build a stronger voter base for reelection and so forth. But in recent years, it's been a pendulum swing from one extreme to another, to the detriment of public policy.
As far as what a wise winner should do that just raises the specter of actual real, honest to God lies. "I am going to be a President for all Americans." He has thrown most Americans to the wolves over and over. "The border is not open." The hell it's not. "I am going to unify the country." Only by treating half of it as if it does not exist and that is not unifying. "Putin's inflation." Sure it is.
As for a European style parliamentary system, no thanks. Personally I think trying to be European chic is what has created this disaster. Let's just be Americans. Not Asian American. Not African American. Not Mexican American. Not Native Americans. Just Americans with respect for each other and willingness to use common sense and do what is right for the nation as a whole.
There was a time when we called ourselves a melting pot, proudly. Now a whole Left wing school of thought has arisen that looks down on the melting pot idea, perhaps because when certain minorities melt too much, they stop feeling oppressed and needy and the Left loses its reason for existing.
Yeah. Don't think much of parliamentary style. Elect new head whenever?
But also the minority party *does* hold a lotta power. In the legislative. As long as the filibuster is in place. It goes, then You got a situation where minority opinion means squat.
I'm afraid You've got the right of it, M. Stark. If it was *only* the oligarchs, it'd be bad enough.
Oh, but its AOK when the Left does it. For Decades. https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/06/who-are-the-election-deniers.php
I'm not a great apologist for the Left. So, no.
OTOH, that *still* doesn't make what Trump did acceptable, except amongst the majority here. Thing is, if You look at the *entire* country, I doubt the majority are just gonna over look that "minor detail" when it comes time to vote again. Biden's so bad, Trump *may* be able to get reelected. *May...* I don't see how any *other* R could possibly lose.
"What Trump Did"--not sure what that means. But here's the problem: By attacking opponents as "immoral" stops all intelligent conversation. And that is precisely what the Left has been doing for decades. They don't want a conversation, because they believe the right is evil, greedy, stupid, racist, homophobic, transphobic, anti-science, etc. etc. etc. It's very convenient, because they then don't have to engage with the knuckle draggers. We can go on forever about politicians' and parties' immorality--and in the end, in my opinion, the Left will come out the clear winner on the immorality scale, but what good does that do? It will get us nowhere.
What Trump did: Lie. Claimed the election was stolen, when he *should-a* and probably *did* know was a falsehood. Because if he wasn't lying, then he was denying good advice that he lost, in favor of poor advice that he'd "won."
You had me thinking about whether attacking Trump as immoral stops all intelligent conversation. You discussed the Left saying they believe the right is all kinds-a immoral things. Yeah, some do.
But then You come out and say the Left wins the immorality game.
Yeah, a blanket statement like that gets us nowhere. I agree.
Back to Trump. What it appears like is that the Religious Right endorsed a serial adulterer. So I think, on *both* sides of the aisle, morality doesn't really mean a lot these days. We all like a winner, no matter how ruthless, right? Not You, M. Bucknam, but most people admire *billionaires.* Wanna *be* one themselves one day. AFAIK, You can't accumulate that much money without being a ruthless SOB. ICBW, of course.
But You'd be surprised how long it would take someone making $1,000 cool cash a day to make a billion. Even with no days off and no holidays. That's a lotta money, but 2000 years, way back then, wouldn't be long enough.
I'm rambling. Point is, sometimes immorality mebbe should come into play, but usually it doesn't no matter what. Results count. I get it.
What exactly did Trump do that was so unacceptable ? The country was headed in a great direction under him? Mean tweets? Told it like it was, no sugar coating? No Wars? Serious question.
No jt. Amongst millions and millions of your fellow citizens.
Trump's been so successful in his endorsements of America-first Republican candidates, that he might just sit back and be king maker. He's been there, done that, shouldn't really need to run again. Let Ron DeSantis or one of the other younger players take the field and things will be fine.
That's Your take on Trump. First of all, the facts of the matter is Trump's have a mixed bag of success. And generally, he tries to determine who's gonna be the winner, and endorses accordingly. But he made a big difference in OH, and mebbe some other places as well, so i'll give him that much.
And my take on Trump is entirely different. The $250 mill he duped his supporters for the "Stop the Steal" fund went into his PAC. What for, if he's not gonna run? The only thing that could *possibly* stop him, IMO, is the thought that he might lose. Otherwise, I can't see him *not* running. For president most likely, tho could be for something else. The president is *the king,* right? Why would he *wanna* take up the role of the kingmaker? That's second-hand power. ICBW, of course. No crystal ball.
I am keeping this just for fun references, or may be you think that this is NOT the same as claiming stolen election???
Hillary Clinton: Trump is an 'illegitimate president'https://www.washingtonpost.com › politics › 2019/09/26
No, I think it's the same. What say YOu now?
By the Russians? Or by the democrats? You need to be specific about which group you are talking about because they both make that claim about different elections at different times.
My dad, whom I love, believes in his heart that Gore was robbed of his presidency, as was Carter and Clinton.
Arguably, Gore should have won in 2000; it was basically a coin toss. When it's that close, I think they should do a run-off (but only in person voting, none of this mailed crap).
H. Clinton lost, fair and square. Carter lost in a veritable landslide.
By the way, Richard Nixon probably should have beaten JFK in 1960. He chose not to contest some irregularities in Texas.
Gore could not have won in 2000. As has been pointed out many times, the Democratic party media announced that the state of Florida was won by Gore 10 minutes before the polls closed in the most Republican part of the state, the area including Pensacola. The media people did not know that Florida is in TWO time zones. People driving to the polls in the Central Time Zone portion, or already waiting in line, decided to forget about voting. Election experts estimated that Bush lost more than 5000 votes because of the false media reports. There would have been no doubt that he had won if his margin had been ~7500 over Gore.
Interesting; I didn't know that.
I have read that in Georgia on January 5 2021, for the Senatorial run-off election, an estimated 300,000 mostly-conservative voters stayed home who had voted in 2020, handing the Senate seats to the two Democrats and altering the course of history.
Voters (and non-voters) are capricious and unpredictable.
Having lived in Pensacola and Ft. Walton Beach I remember that vividly. This is in response to Rfhirsch.
I thought the irregularities came from the Chicago Machine. That was when I was a kid, so dunno. Remember the original Richard Daley tho.
Interesting how your original comment veered us into a long dialogue about voting, far from the subject of this post. But since we're here, if someone is making a list of possible changes, please ban ballot harvesting - legal in, where else? California. Talk about ripe for voting fraud!
And from that comes that every single action that the illegitimate administration has taken is to destroy the country, this included. And they will continue until stopped. One can only hope that it won't be too late.
Here is basically Joe Biden's "credible denial" that he molested women.
"I didn't do it."
“The DeVos regulations were an example of an immoral administration doing the moral thing.”
I'd love to believe Yoffe's comment was a backhanded way of characterizing the Biden and Obama administrations as immoral but somehow, I doubt that’s the case. When she expresses the same outage over the Kangaroo Courts that dogged the Trump Administration and continue with the January 6 inquisition maybe I’ll change my mind.
The phrase "immoral administration" is itself precious beyond belief, like something from Cotton Mather. For all their bleating about justice and liberation, these bluenoses really are the New Puritans--and even less appealing than the original batch, by a wide margin...
Agree - too precious and oh so leftist. Almost an oxymoron. An immoral administration doing a moral thing - why would they do that? Did they do a moral thing by accident? Didn't seem so. Seemed like they did it deliberately and on purpose. So wouldn't that make them moral?
Indeed...
Biden and his criminal Administration will continue to destroy America and its values until they are removed. Stark, but pretty simple and easy to understand. Nonetheless, I have zero doubt that the Progressives featured on this Substack will NEVER vote for a non-Democrat. Cognitive Dissonance of the purest kind.
Lol
I guess it depends on your perspective .
“DeVos regulations were an example of an immoral administration doing the moral thing”
I’d characterize trump as ignoring accepted rules of engagement to pull no punches against a pernicious evil.
Presumably she does that to make sure to establish “good liberal” bona fides. 
Jim, ask and you shall receive:
“The most dangerous lie: The coronavirus was under control”
“The most telling lie: It didn't rain on his inauguration”
"The most traditional big lie: Trump didn't know about the payment to Stormy Daniels"
"The most depressing lie: Trump won the election"
“Trump’s false or misleading claims total 30,573 over 4 years”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/24/trumps-false-or-misleading-claims-total-30573-over-four-years/
A WaPo article as evidence of Trump mendacity has about as much validity as taking a Trump statement about Nancy Pelosi at face value.
People with mental dexterity would have pointed out where the Washington Post was incorrect; making an inane comment about Trump and Pelosi just shows ignorance.
It takes some mental myopia to use an ad hominem attack to claim that someone's on the low road and not perceive you're on the lowest one possible.
I love this comment so much I copied and pasted it to a list of great comments I read and keep. Credit applied.
That gratuitous potshot just smacks of the author trying to establish that she's on the "acceptable" side of the aisle despite her criticisms. Totally unnecessary, and I stopped reading at that point.
Agree. I have started listening to Bill Maher’s last word segment, I generally agree with everything he says. But he can’t help himself, he’s gotta take a swipe at Trump just to protect his left bona fides.
My wife and I were saying the same thing last night when we watched last Friday's show. He was one of the last to let Russiagate go, and he'll never concede that the 1/6 hearings are a joke. But, he's pretty much spot on regarding freedom of speech (which is why I love Bari, Matt and Glenn) and the implosion of the Dem party. I'm a lifelong conservative, but it's liberals (like I named above, as well as Krystal and Saager) who I go to anymore for my take on the news. Also, RCP and the WSJ op/ed.
For a little comic relief you should tune into Gutfeld! This latest episode of leftist overreach only adds increased validity to one of my favorite quips:
"There's a red wave coming, and it ain't because of the Tampon shortage"
He has a barnful of great writers as is Gutfiield! himself.
I suspect she just wants to stay in good standing with the cancel culture leftists while still lightly criticizing an element of it.
Would have been far more credible I’d she was a bit more detailed about the hundreds of lives ruined by the type of new regulations reimposed. But that’s probably a step too far. Her colleagues may feel unsafe…..
Yup. Harder digging would've revealed additional inconvenient truths, so we definitely can't go there. The press's general lack of follow-through on anything that might make a D look bad is exactly why the Biden team feels justified in trotting out the "Putin price hike" codswallop.
Yoffee has written extensively on the subject in better detail than any journalist. Read her 3 articles "The Uncomfortable Truth" about campus sexual assault. She is a huge critique of Obama's Title IX policies, and now Biden's.
I believe EmilyYoffe wrote those articles after her son was accused in a title IX witch hunt. Kind of like a liberal who had been mugged, she found out first hand how incredibly biased and unfair the process was (is).
Thanks - missed that at the end. At least I admitted that I stopped reading before I could get there, though ;-)
And what of staying in good standing with honest people who are actually right about things?
Our tolerance isn't serving us very well.
I should have too. When I saw the bio and the places she’s worked I should have just stopped right there. It was possible twenty years ago to work at the NYT, Wapo, the Atlantic, Slate and what are now other openly ideological outlets, and still be considered a trusted journalist who can check their personal bias at the door, but these days it’s like a giant red flag when a “journalist” bounces from one openly biased publication to another.
And to be fair, Donald trump is a liar. So is Joe Biden. So was bill Clinton. W told some whoppers in his day (like him being a conservative). Trump definitely has a knee jerk reaction of denying everything and exaggerating, and yes, lying outright. But to put some moral attachment to that suggests that they don’t all lie, and they do all lie. Trumps time in office was no less or more moral than anyone else’s, with the exception that he was an asshole more so than most.
But, a very competent asshole.
In my career, I had to differentiate between competence and assholiness, as I didn't really have a choice in my working relationships. I found some of the biggest assholes could also be very productive and helpful resources. I just didn't want to have lunch with them.
That was Trump, yet most of the country can't grasp that.
Yet, there are many testimonials from those who have interacted with Trump that he treated them in a kind and compassionate manner.
I'm retired now, but over thirty years I had more than 500 mid level management and at least 100 executive managers who reported to me. No doubt that I'm in the 'asshole' bucket of a fair share of them, but many are now in CEO and executive positions in the Healthcare sector and still send me notes thanking me for the mentorship I provided.
I'm a big Meyers Briggs fan and realize that people are programmed differently, and not everyone is going to respond well to your style. For those of you familiar with MB, I'm an ENFP, and after taking the test many times over my career, that never changed. I hate to admit it, but I'm guessing Trump is an ENFP as well.
Terry...oh yes, Trumpty IS going to have more negatories, simply, he had Many more connections (dealings), he was not hidden, he is Very opinionated and uses words with 2 meanings, also he is Often Quoted while leaving Out the remainder of his quote.
I can't imagine, since he had 500 businesses, the amount of lawyers he dealt with, i do suspect some of the people he dealt with were goop, but Looking at his family and those close to him, my opinion of him is Higher, since his term in office.
He should be noted for the high total of Females that were appointed to office, none higher, as per Judge Pirro.
His Perplexing drop cloth opponents; such as the BO, Comey (lies), Clapper, Clintons, Pelosi, Shumers, Rice, Brennan, CNN, Msnbc, McCabe, Steele on and on, but , in my opinion, the biggest Fraud is the ongoing Jan 6th debunk crescendo, such little damage, when in comparison to the City Riots, not even close.
Me, he gets a pass , although not needed. He is obligated to strike back.
Viva La France!
Exactly! I always said to people who foamed at the mouth over Trump’s behaviors, “but you’re not dating him, so…”
The smartest, best boss I ever had was also an asshole. I just had to ignore that part to appreciate the incredible mentoring I got from him.
That’s how I feel about Trump. I agreed with some of his policies, and nothing was ever written about the benefits he extended to veterans who used to be stuck with shitty, red tape filled healthcare until Trump. The best bosses I ever had were not warm and fuzzy. People need to stop thinking that everything is popularly contest. What if the person you disliked the most was the best for the country?
Biden is horrible and they all lie.
But I disagree with judging the author for where she worked previously. She has the guts to call BS against the narrative. Don’t forget Bari worked for the NYT, too. :)
I used to say similar things to those who opposed him based on personality. I wasn’t voting for him to be my best friend or my husband.
NC...very funny, on point.
I also had a boss who was an asshole. An efficient and effective asshole. But an asshole nonetheless. He was openly vocal about the stupidity of women, and yet his employees were almost exclusively women. We did *everything* and did it well...and laughed at him behind his back.
I'm replying to my own post, which is kind of tacky but I wanted to make a point which I think many of you might find valid.
For anyone who's owned their own business, or been in corporate management, we weren't as put off by Trump's rough edges as we were supportive of his policies. What I came to realize is that the majority of the country looks at The West Wing as representative of how politics/business works. People in leadership roles don't judge people in business and government on their personality, but on the results. But most of the voters can't separate the two, which leads folks like Obama, perhaps the greatest figurehead but least competent leader, to be the next head on Mount Rushmore, and Trump, the most competent and least likeable to be canceled.
You're right about leadership and Trump being a different cat as he's a leader. But I wouldn't say he's being canceled because he's competent or unlikeable. He's generally likeable, got along with most of the same folks when he wasn't opposed to their politics. It's just that he's a threat because he was voted in by what they fear most - the classes and groups coming to take away what the elites have.
Jon..oh, nice work on the Rolls, Rushmore would Melt with the BO.
That would be sickening.
Totally agree
Exactly.
Well said.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a results guy. On a lot of the issues that mattered to Trump, we were simpatico. I’ve been in the military and learned to work with people who are completely different than me in every way. People who I would not have a beer with privately, I’d run through hell to save if they needed it because they would do the same for me. So peoples weird personality quirks matter less than to me than what they are attempting to achieve.
Well-said. I wasn't in the military, so can't make as strong a statement as that. But in business, You hafta work with all kinds. Everybody's in it to make the company and themselves a buck. And if You aren't making the bucks, it's even more important (and desperate).
jt...very nice, sounding like Trumpty.
Biz...I like that.
Apparently they’re all snowflakes, and Trump is a bit of a blowtorch
David...good one, "blowtorch" fits in a good way.
And "a bit of" a blowtorch......as if those two things can be in the same thought! Love it!
I know, and it's so pathetic. When I was a partner in a very successful business, one of the other partners was someone I really didn't care for (and vice-versa), yet we were both smart enough to realize that nobody cared about that business like the two of us did--we were a great team. It was SUCH an important lesson to learn to separate the personal from the professional. That's why I'm always saying: forget about the candidate--vote for the change you want to see happen!
I think most of the country can gasp it it’s the assholes out there who won’t let us have a legitimate vote and looking at the line up for 2024 currently they all look like assholes including the below 40 years I wouldn’t let them look after my animals let alone run America!
well said.
Trump had a loud mouth and poor self control. But the real reason he is hated and so viciously opposed was because he challenged the status quo.
That’s one of the reasons why so many people want to finish him off. They all thrive on and in the sewer.
They’re mustly scum.
Look at the Senator from Maine. She knows that Trump‘s people danced around the edge on abortion questions as they HAVE to. To call them liars is a lie itself
Really? Does she think that Justice Jackson wasn't lying by saying that she can't define a woman because she isn't a biologist? When will these assholes look at their own horseshit?
Probably never
Never.
publius x = your rather crass and crude post proves my point.
i have often thought that the left's obsession with hating Trump comes from their embarrassment that he is not cut from the same cloth as Kennedy and Obama. Since most of the extreme Trump haters in my circle are in the high middle to upper class in terms of education, success etc (I hurry to say I am an outlier in the group) they want someone who represents their status at home and abroad.
I remember voting for Kennedy and loving Jackie because he was so handsome and well spoken and she spoke fluent French and wore designer clothes. Indeed her pillbox hats etc became the example of how we young women wanted to look and Jack - he became the man we all wanted to marry. We didn't know then about the many infidelities .
Trump exposed to the world just how crass and crude many Americans really are = don't think so? read Twitter. And poor Melania - she could never be Jackie - just another immigrant who slept her way to the top. No television tour of WH with her. class is what matters in this country - not policy. Trump proved that.
Yes Melania has more class than any of the nasty women on liberal networks who were constantly mocking and deriding her. A hundred times more.
Kennedy doesn't win without winning the Texas graveyards courtesy of LBJ. A president who was known to talk to the press whilst shitting on the toilet.
And Kennedy was a whoremaster who slept with mafia WAGs. The media kept you in the dark because they slept around too. You voted for what you wanted to believe in, not the truth.
Don’t forget Illinois as well, Nixon almost certainly either truly won or could have pursued a helluva an investigation but to his credit he didn’t want to put the country through it. Ironically some years later…
Obama, smooth talking immigrant from Kenya who lied his way to the top. Veneer of high class, but really a communist who couldn't wait to put in place a plan to destroy the county. And most of the country bought it hook line and sinker.
dorthy...i like the slant
Almost everything Trump said has turned out to be true. Almost everything he did turned out to be the right policy moves. Almost all his predictions have come to pass.
History will look more kindly on Trump than do his contemporaries.
A generation removed from now, when people look at his achievements, and his unpleasant personal traits are forgotten or moved to the background, he would get his dues. I think his gruff New York manner will become a myth. I do not like him as a person, but there is nothing he has done that was detrimental to the country and its people. On the contrary. The current administration caused such a tremendous harm, that it would be a miracle if we recover.
Agree. He got shit done that I was waiting for 47 years (after I turned 18) to get done. If a Dem had accomplished what Trump did in Middle East peace alone, they would have written several books and produced a couple movies of them by now.
And awarded them a Pulitzer.
Jon...another great call
Unfortunately, history is written by liberals, and the 1/6 hearings are the beginning of rewriting history. I don't think Trump will get his due.
True historians are generally unbiased, much like true scientists. The problem is not that liberals write history, but that they write school curricula. Most people only know the history they learn in school.
And Fauchi will be exposed for the incompetent criminal that he is, but that may actually start to come out once the house is back in R control.
Then it’s his'own fault. Meh has a stupid mouth
so what, lots of people have stupid-mouth.
I will agree to the extent that he could have, should have been more diplomatic.
However that's what his base wanted... a bulldozer, not a clown car.
Sadly, we are back to clown car.
You forgot that Obama was a liar too. I’m still waiting to save that $2500 a year on my insurance premiums. Obamacare cost my family at least $2500 more. Maybe he just got confused like his VP
No, Obama was a liar too. I was just throwing names out there. I didn’t intend to suggest he’s a truth teller. I will give Obama this, he was much better at letting others lie for him than most presidents I’ve seen. And there never seemed to be an end to people who would lie for Obama.
100% agree- most of them are liars
They should rename the five families of the mafia the seven families to include the Dems and the GOP. But the the Dems would be the capo di tutti capi.
Your words are gold!
You don't get it. You are not Yoffe's target audience. She's speaking to close-minded leftists who think anything a Democratic president does with Title IX and campus sexual assault is good, and anything a Republican president, especially Trump, does is bad. You should read some of her in-depth reporting on the subject before dismissing her out of hand. But again, her audience is not you, it's the Democrats and college administrators who have enshrined these horrible policies.
1. Starting off with "you don't get it" is not helping your point.
2. This was written for Common Sense, a place most of us ended up at looking for better, more honest journalism than we can get in other outlets. I, and I suspect most of us here, neither need nor want a journalist to establish their bona fides to tell us where they stand. Speaking for myself, I came here to get away from that.
Get real. You came here because You don't wanna hear anything against Trump. And it usually works out that way. This time there was one sentence, and the whole crowd just gets hysterical.
That doesn't really reflect well on the commenters. And the more defensive of Trump they get, the further it shows, right?
jt, the problem is that you don't seem to understand that if people get jabbed with something pointy, they're going to fight back.
While some of us here are willing to overlook random disparagement of Trump (usually because we know the writer is trying to maintain credibility with people much further to the Left), a lot of people--even those who don't particularly like Trump as a person--are offended by what they see as poor rhetoric (the random side-swipes). Me? I roll my eyes and move on.
But people who voted for Trump both times are likely to see these jabs as not only an attack on Trump, but as an attack on THEMSELVES. They've been called Nazis, fascists, racists, Deplorables. It should surprise no one that they're more than a little sensitive when someone starts in on TrumpTrumpTrump, because that conversation has historically ended with a personal attack on THEM.
You see a lot of people defending Trump here when someone starts in on OrangeManBad, not always because they LIKE him, but because they perceive him as having been under grossly unfair attack from the Left throughout his entire campaign and presidency.
If Trump was mentioned less by Bari's writers, you would see a lot fewer comments about Trump.
Well put!! Thank you!
I am quite sick of having to preface things with "I am not a Trump fan" or "I am not a Trump supporter", just to be listened to. It's absolutely ridiculous. I've never made anyone do that, in my lifetime. Yet, here we are. I don't like what happened, in 2020. I am not a fan of Donald Trump.
Newsflash: I can be BOTH of those things.
To quote Jules: 'Look at the big brains on Brad (aka CeliaM)
I think you nailed it.
Another problem I have is that people judged him, most times, based on emotion and not empirically. Most voters are too lazy to understand the details of issues and rely on emotion, or Colbert/Maddow for their votes.
My problem with me is, I take the bait.
Weeeel, Ma'am. What You don't seem to realize is that people view it as an attack on them because they idolize him and identify with him.
How else do You explain all-a this about one sentence? Just one *whiff* of something that's anti-Trump sets off *all* the bells and whistles.
I think they expect that if they don't get the pure Trump side-a things, they should unsubscribe. FINE.. DO! That's better 'n complaining anyway.
And how I know they idolize him. No matter. Day about done.
Wow. You know nothing about me. And judging from your other comments I've seen on other Substacks, you don't know much about anything.
Frankly, I don't like the guy, but at least he got shit done. Not going to say there's nothing negative about him, and not going out of my way to avoid it. Just trying to find something that doesn't immediately go straight to "Trump Bad". Why are you so against a reporter coming across as objective for a change?
So, and I'm going to say this as kindly as I can, go fuck yourself with a cactus.
Tommy...you shouted " I am not fully Developed and I am an embarrassment to my family". till then, you were fine...relax
Your kind would consider that as kindly.
To be frank, I don't always notice who I'm replying to. It's all instinct. So I may have misjudged You personally. By Your reply, probably not.
You Rs are predictable, is all I'm saying. Yeah, You're all unique as everybody is. People fall into groups in spite-a that. But all 8 B are unique. I get it.
Yes, I personally subscribed to a normally rational gay rights supporter because I didn’t want to hear bad things about Trump. You got me
I suspected as much
:)
'You came here because You don't wanna hear anything against Trump'
Please, that's painting with a pretty broad brush. I personally come here, and to many other liberal substacks and podcasts because they're leading the movement for free speech, and in opposition to woke. I doubt I've ever voted for the same President as any of the folks I'm following now, but I absolutely respect what they're doing.
I appreciate that you think Trump was a horrible President, and I'm patient and tolerant of Trump hate, but I don't think that commentors here are that one dimensional.
You're right. That was a broad brush.
Let me rephrase that. When people here get the least little bit of Trump "hate" they tend to fly off the handle and start to get defensive. And compare Trump to Biden. That's a pretty low bar, right?
And that's not everybody, but most who decided to post today had to praise Trump. I didn't actually count the number of people who praised Trump, but just going by feel. ICBW. (I Could Be Wrong.)
Finally, I don't hate Trump. You're wrong about that. I hate everything he did about the election. But I've learned he did a lotta good things, too.
“You came here because You don't wanna hear anything against Trump”. “You Rs are predictable”
It seems to that you have finally exposed yourself as a democrat still suffering from Trump derangement syndrome. You and your kind incessantly accuse Trump of the “big lie” but ignore the MULTIPLE lies your fellow travelers smeared him with for over 5 years.
Of course “there are lies and there are damn lies”. After the big smear directed at Trump that continues to this day, as well as the electoral shenanigans arrayed against him in 2020, I’m willing to put his in the former. Your crowd engages exclusively in the latter.
Sorry. Nice try. Unfortunately, entirely devoid of the FACTS of the matter.
You must not-a read where I posted plenty-a times: I'll NEVER vote for a Dem the rest-a my LIFE. (Again, no crystal ball tho.)
TDS is the trope that's *always* said about *anybody* says anything against Trump. IOW, it's pretty much devoid of any meaning at this point. Just means someone who isn't delusionally favorable to Trump, which I most certainly am *not.*
My crowd? This here Substack makes up the bulk-a my crowd. You see many people here who are *Dead Center?* No crowd here.
Care to try again?
You know, jt, you are for the most part what we affectionately refer to as a troll. And your trademark "hick shtik" is kind of childish
jt's okay, even though he just dressed me down pretty good earlier today.
CeliaM made a great post about Trump sensitivity here earlier today, that I thought was near prefect. I don't like the drive by Trumptrolling that people do routinely, because I take it as a personal criticism. I don't work Trump promotion into my posts, but I do take the bait whenever I see some unjustly criticizing him, Especially with our current President.
No, steven, he is not a troll. Trump is the one issue that he doesn't react reasonably about. Much like others here, but in the opposite direction.
You know, M. Koenig, I think Celia pretty much proved You wrong about Your first sentence.
As for the second, if I was childish, I'd take offense at Your second. None taken. Anybody can be wrong two outta two times.
I don’t like ANY writer who talks out of both sides of their mouth
you're both right.
We have a Bingo!
Then the premise of Bari’s Substack is false
Believe all women unless it is an accuser of a Democrat. Tara Reid was 100 times more credible than Kavanaugh's accusers because she told people at the time what happened and was consistent. This compared to Ford who didn't tell anyone and when she tried to give witnesses, they all denied what she said. I was very disappointed in those assertions because they took away from the credibility of the entire article.
I had the same reaction. What were the immoral acts of the Trump administration? No one ever enumerates. They drop that bomb and then immediately move on. It’s so gratuitous and infuriating. If a booming economy and stock market, low crime, a secure border, no wars, real wage growth for all ethnicities, low inflation, a covid vaccine (for those who want it), and successful, respectable children not addicted to crack, prostitutes, or sleeping and doing drugs with their deceased sibling’s spouses is immoral, then what is Joe Biden’s administration?
Preach!
I am with you. I found that little nasty insertion about an "immoral administration" disgusting.
The writer is obviously NOT a Trump fan. This makes the article even more amazing because it lauds the professional and essentially fair way Betsy DeVos undertook to correct a horrid wrong.
So many young men were destroyed during the Obama administration. Someday someone is going to write an accurate biography of Joe Biden and it's not going to be pretty.
Exactly, her audience is on the left and she's signaling tribal identity so they'll trust her reporting on this,
Her friends and social contacts are on the Left so she has to keep her bonafides with them.
Notice there’s no detail or deep dive into the harm these regulations caused. Probably a step too far for her.
It's not a step too far. Read Yoffee's Slate articles. She pulls no punches about the problems with Title IX under Obama. The immoral administration comment is to gain the trust of people who hate Trump so that they'll keep reading her articles.
If Yoffee didn't at least acknowledge that people consider him to be immoral (she's not even saying she believes this) she knows people on the left would discredit her argument as right-wing propaganda. Her audience is Democrats, not Republicans. Republicans don't need to be convinced that Obama's Title IX policies are garbage.
Kemah...gees, you do have clarity with a shrill...without a clinker. thanks
That's what her three articles linked at the bottom are about...
Thank you for focusing on 'immoral administration doing the moral thing'. Goodness. How the hell was it an immoral administration? The Chaos came from everywhere OTHER than the Trump administration; the media and the federal government(but I repeat myself) who voted 94% against him was absolutely batshit crazy all. the. time.
Common Sense is waking up but not awake. Their Donkey and TDS still show. The Trump administration was no more amoral (and perhaps much less at the levels that really matter) than either the Obama or Biden administration, and while I found Biden's accuser questionable, she was far more credible than Christine Blasey Ford. The Common Sense authors still sip the Kool-Aid, is what I'm saying, but at least they only sip. They're not drowning in it anymore.
Lillia...smoothly done.
Classic liberal first has to establish her "woke" credentials as a Trump hater before allowed to say anything else. "I hate Trump, but..."
I suppose it's a reflexive act, sort of like genuflecting.
Maybe, but looks more like a calculated attempt not to burn bridges with former employers. In case she is invited back, then this written piece would be a convenient reference, sort of like a party card. All the right boxes are checked.
there are plenty of people who knock on wood without knowing why the practice started in the first place.
I felt the same way reading that comment but realized that the only way she could write anything positive about the Trump Administration and still keep her friends was to caveat it with unnecessary snark...
Agreed. That backhanded compliment about an "immoral administration doing the moral thing" stuck in my craw. You need a disclaimer to acknowledge that Trump did a good thing, so we good people won't think poorly of you? Do I have to wear a MAGA hat to look objectively at his policies and recognize that sometimes they were correct? He also banned Diversity Equity & Inclusion trainings at the Federal level, another excellent move (of course, Biden reversed it back).
I first learned about the appalling federal policy on campus rape in a conversation between Megyn Kelly and author KC Johnson, mentioned in Yoffe's article. https://podcasts.podinstall.com/devil-may-care-media-megyn-kelly-show/202102081000-biden-brings-back-believe-all-women-kc-johnson-key-title-ix.html
I highly recommend this interview. As a lifelong feminist who was raped twice in my teens by young men I knew, I should be the first to champion the current policy, but nobody who hears the appalling stories of innocent young men having their lives destroyed due to false accusations, kangaroo courts and an utter lack of due process, can be anything but furious and disgusted.
I'm awaiting Megyn Kelly's follow up conversation now that Biden has reversed deVos' policies. I remember listening to this podcast while on a walk on vacation thinking about my college freshman son back home....and wanting to throw up.
You are an admirable human being. We need more of you.
And Rolling Stone.
President Trump's administration was in no way immoral! His foreign policy was outstanding: strongly oppose the major countries that are most oppressive of the rights of women, LGBTQ people and religions: Russia, Iran, and China. And be strongly supportive in words and actions of countries and groups that support freedom.
He led 5 majority-Muslim countries to recognize Israel (only two had done so in the previous 70 years), the one country in the Middle East where women have full freedom, LGBTQ+ people can live openly, and people of all religions are welcome. He flew NON-STOP from Saudi Arabia to Israel as part of his historic speeches in the spring of 2021 (and now there are routine flights that allow the many Muslim citizens in Israel to make their pilgrimage to Mecca).
He took at least 10 major actions against Russia and prevented them from touching Ukraine.
He ended the 2015 agreement that provided billions of dollars for Iran's terrorist groups and nuclear weapons programs.
And he stood up to Communist China's multiple attacks, stopping their theft of US intellectual property (tens of billions of dollars a year), urging removal of Confucius centers (which allowed Chinese infiltration of US universities), and promoting manufacture in the US of critical materials now outsourced to China).
He took the US out of UN "Human Rights" Council, which has some of the most immoral countries in the world as members, and stopped our funding of the UN refugee council in the Middle East, which was getting more than $20 thousand a year for each Palestinian refugee while the actual refugees were receiving almost nothing.
That is a VERY MORAL administration. The Obama (and now Biden) administration was highly IMMORAL on these major issues.
Bill Clinton is amoral as is his wife. Bill should have gone to prison for perjury and for molesting women. He is loved by the Dems. He has spoken at every Dem national convention since he left office. The Dems treat him like a rock star.
Well said!
Agree. The perfunctory classification of the Trump administration as immoral should be seen as signaling the writer's elite class sympathies. No explanation, such as a short paragraph listing Trump's most notable policy immoralities, is needed. I have seen Bari do the same thing. Powerul reasoning in one compartment and unsupported anti-Trump rhetoric in another. It's a defensive quirk of the conflicted left, I think.
Well put. Nellie Bowles does it too. It's a reflexive gesture to let their Left coterie know they have not quite left the fold.
It's an irrational reflex that they NEVER support with real facts. It's a shame that such otherwise intelligent people have this huge blindspot.
Well when they give it up they will have to face how many things they were wrong about.
I hope you are right. Our experience with useful idiots and fellow travelers from the Soviet Union says they can't and won't. Eric Hoffer wrote about these fanatical followers in "True Believer." Mattias Desmet addresses it again in "The Psychology of Totalitarianism" which has just been released.
I agree it is unlikely. One of the hardest, and best, things a human can do is admit the error of their ways. In all honestly though for the Leftists it might well be overwhelming.
No one ever specifically picks at his policies - other than immigration. It’s a turn-off.
"Biden credibly denied a serious allegation of assault" How can anyone believe anything that comes out of Joe Bidens mouth? Before this last run for President, he ran twice before and had to drop out because of the blatant lies he told on the campaign trail and his plagiarism. (He funked a course in law school for plagiarism.)
When Bill Clinton and Barack Obama lied, they knew they were lying. I believe when Biden lies, he thinks it is the truth. The litany of his lies is overwhelming. I can give example after example of his lies. Unlike the author who says he gave credible explanations for his assaults. His touching of little girls creeps me out but to a leftist to touch little girls in this manner is OK as long as a Democrat does it. And what happened to the me-too slogan that all women should be believed? I guess that only applies to Republicans who are accused of improper behavior towards women.
How come there wasn't an outcry against Biden as there was by blatantly false accusations against Bret Kavanaugh. Not one of the supposed witness the California nut case brought to testify against Kavanaugh said they ever recalled this supposed attempted rape happening. There was a leftist/media feeding frensy over the Kavanaugh lies. Yet four or five women came forward to accuse Biden of touching them. The Democrats and the press spiked these accusations. And the author claims the senile, lying Joe Biden gave "credible denials". My god just look at Joe's track record of lies.
How can anyone but a Democrat say that anything that comes out of that moron's mouth is credible?
the net result of people like Biden in high office is that Americans will simply believe nothing that any politician ever says. Not that they did before, but cynical fools like him have laid it bare. Government office is a place to make money and gain power, not serve the people.
The one man in decades (maybe even centuries) who took office without the goal of making money or gaining power, was impeached several times falsely, viciously attacked for every single thing he said and did, all his accomplishments and successes hidden from the public or somehow distorted into failures, and all his supporters smeared and insulted.
It's just sad to see people here, on Bari Weiss substack forum, repeating CNN smears about "orange man". What a shame.
Harry Truman said, I am paraphrasing, "Anybody who makes money while in office is a crook." When Truman retired, he was living in penury. The Presidential retirement was enacted because of him.
Of anyone who held the office of the President was honest, it was him.
I'm a conservative and voted for Trump twice because I could not bring myself to vote for the Communist/Democrat Party. Having said this, I thought Trump was a despicable, megalomaniacal, lying, loudmouthed, bully but he wasn't a spineless, PC, Woke, snow flack.
Here is basically Joe Biden's "credible denial" that he molested women.
"I didn't do it."
What we need to appreciate is how oblivious these zealots are to their own extraordinary, constant dishonesty. They think that writing this way is normal and even-handed.
This is going to accelerate fleeing colleges, particularly private woke liberal arts. Boys can be expelled for baseless accusations. Girls can be expelled for protesting having a mentally disturbed male roommate that thinks he’s a girl. They can all be expelled for refusing three useless clot shots or advocating for realistic approaches to life based in reality. Our university system is a 💩show joke, and Biden is making it much worse at the behest of outright evil humans like Bill Gates and George Soros. Least we forget Gates stole the ideas of others to become a billionaire, and Soros impoverished countless Britts by intentionally crashing the sterling. People have some false sense of moral superiority complaining about orange man while voting for Biden who is the lap dog for the most cruel and destructive ideologies and policies ever implemented in my 4 decades on Earth.
It will also poison relationships between young people. Actually, men have it good. They can go to prostitutes, or just MGTOW avoid all women.
Women will have to deal with a reduced number of available males, particularly the gentle, civilized, high achiever variety who have the most to lose from false accusations. Those elite males will seek out similar high achievers, vetted, safe, and unlikely to Title IX someone. Even then, they will require prenups, and the smarter guys will compile a dossier on potential future partners -- "go there and this goes viral".
It's the clash of traditional gender roles with modernity. We thought women were liberated in 1965, but really that process is still ongoing, and the abusers of the process are poisoning the well for everyone.
This last sentence, "People have some false sense of moral superiority complaining about orange man..." is the best sentence I've read all week. Thank you.
NCmom, another winner! Thanks.
Could not agree more. It felt as a compelling subject and a well written piece until “immoral administration” made me cringe. Won’t it be logical then to say that Obama and Biden administration implemented an immoral policy? But no, I guess the schooling received from prior employers doesn’t allow to cross the party lines. The journalists have to investigate and bring us facts, not to pass moral judgement Allow us as competent adults to draw conclusions who and what is moral.
Regardless of one's view of Trump, Betsy DeVos was his best appointment. She removed this awful Obama "guidance" (which was akin to a mob boss "suggesting" courses of actions lest consequences be suffered) and defended the right to due process. In addition to that and equally important, DeVos is about the only one in government who thinks the job of education is actually about educating children.
Unlike the hypocrites who laud the public school system yet send their own kids to private schools, she is well aware of the failings of the cesspools of government run public shools and is trying to change them for the betterment of the kids.
Betsy DeVos took continual heat from the liberal/Left side of the world. The media despised her.
She isn't the only good Cabinet appointment. Dr. Ben Carson was excellent as was Rick Perry at Energy. Remember the Energy crisis we had during the Trump years? I don't either. I was glad of the $1.89/gal gas. Homeland Security functioned the way it was intended to, Mike Pompeo was an intelligent and real Secretary of State. Nikki Haley was the best UN ambassador since Jeanne Kirkpatrick. I am sure others can add their favorites to the list.
Betsy DeVos may or not have done a good job. But she is forever tainted by Amway which is forever a fraud. DeVos and trump both benefited financial from multi level marketing scams.
Yes, I agree. You mention some really excellent people.
The Democrat voters have been gaslighted by their leaders regarding the Teachers Union leaders. That organization is nothing but a money-laundering operation for the Democrat party campaign coffers, and the result is not good for school children who need and deserve a great education.
“This was followed by a more serious allegation of assault, a charge he credibly denied”
I have no idea if Biden did what he was accused by that woman. My question is who decides what is credible or not? I saw that at the Kavanaugh hearing as well, when he was “credibly accused” of sexual assault. If no one else who is claimed to be a witness agrees, and the FBI looks into and finds no evidence, why is it still credible? Similarly, if the only people who looked into Bidens accuser are openly biased reporters who were looking to support their candidate last election, why is his denial credible? Has it been investigated by the police?
My point is that the author writes this excellent piece that is essentially about the lack of due process, and then goes and paints a woman who accused Biden of sexual assault as a liar, without due process of any kind. If the author is suggesting that journalists have decided it’s not credible, my question is why should I listen? When did society decide that journalists get to make that call, especially at a time in history where most journalists from legacy outlets openly admit they take sides, which they do not need to do because we can all tell by their work that they no longer attempt to control that bias?
Again, I have no idea whether Biden did that or not. Looking at his public behavior for the last 40 years and the values he taught his son (looking at you Hunter) and his ability to lie without hesitation (a truly bipartisan trait), I could easily see a misunderstanding, if not actual sexual assault. Who knows?
My overall point is the author engages in exactly the behavior she reports in this article. She has decided that she gets to make that call. It hasn’t been investigated by anyone with subpoena power or other intrusive police powers. Biden has denied it, so is that what makes the denial credible? Has any witness gone under oath?
This is what irritates me about modern times. Yes, the author is able to be objective about this issue, but somehow in doing so, still manages to remind me that young journalists can’t shut their bias off, and they still believe they get to make the call on what’s credible and what’s not. It’s like a tic. So this article is excellent otherwise, but it still has the stank of open bias that one would expect from an author who worked at NYT, Slate, the Atlantic, ect. It’s not a coincidence she worked exclusively at openly non neutral outlets I would assume. And it shows. Please make it not show especially when you toss a nugget around like that in a story about due process.
Otherwise great work.
"It’s not a coincidence she worked exclusively at openly non neutral outlets I would assume. And it shows."
Unfortunately, there are ZERO neutral outlets, other than here on Substack. And with the exception of the WSJ editorial page (not the front page), Fox/Newsmax/Oann, and conservative talk radio, there are literally zero conservative outlets in the country.
The fact our media is in the back pocket of the DNC is truly destroying this country, because the left can say anything they want, or do anything they desire, with zero pushback.
"... there are ZERO neutral outlets, other than here on Substack."
Every writer on Substack has his or her own point of view. I suppose the platform as a whole might be considered "neutral" in the aggregate, though.
Or is the DNC in the back pocket of the media? And the media is in the back pocket of the three letter agencies?
I think it might be debatable
Great, great observation.
I thought so, too. Problem is, I judge on a case-by-case basis, so very *rarely* say *everything* a person writes is good.
The rare does happen, tho, so there is that.
Great observation.
I can’t wait to read Bari’s reaction to all of the comments.
It can’t be what she expected.
The author, as do all authors, edit carefully what they write. How could Bari or Yoffe not know that this would be a lightening rod for all of the comments. The "immoral administration" and "Biden denial" comment literally leap from the page and unnecessarily derail an incredibly important topic and Biden change. BTW, is there literally anything left of the Trump admin that is still in place?
Only in the minds of democrats.
But Trump did leave one important thing behind that cannot be changed easily, a conservative majority on SCOTUS. Which will haunt democrats for many years to come. Just think of all of the administrative state government overreach regulations that can now be blocked with a SCOTUS that follows the law. Many more cases like the recent EPA case will rise up from the ashes.
I think you are missing the obvious upside here. I have always wanted to own a college, I've always wanted to be rich, and I've always wanted to eviscerate the Leftist influence on our universities. This gives us the opportunity to do all three at once. I am willing to donate generously to a fund to sue the pants off any college (after affirmative pants-removal consent, of course) that uses these unconstitutional measures against any American citizen, while also generating a suit that can be taken all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, this court which seems to be rather kindly disposed to the rights of citizens vis à vis the Feds. What's not to like?
In a different vein, this is precisely why young men stay home, play video games, and watch porn. The girls are prettier, they never say no, and they will never drag you into an inquisition should they have buyer's remorse at a later date. It now appears that the single greatest threat to Western civilization is not global "warming," nor population explosion, but rather population depletion. (Bricker and Ibbitsen) Don't think that the Titular President Asterisk administration, whose ultimate goal is a totalitarian world government, is ignorant of the effect of this new abortion they are foisting on young Americans. Population "control" is part and parcel of their plan, and when the boys are afraid to touch the girls, well, you figure it out.
Two things. First one commonality among many of the mass shooter's is involuntary celibacy. Two, the unintended consequences of this BS is that women will ultimately be set back to the stone age; on second thought it may not be unintended given the trans women in women's sports fiasco and the genuflecting to authoritarian Muslim regimes. I said authoritarian, meaning those that require feminine submission.
Liberals are truly reaping what they have sown with their casual dismissal of biology and human nature. Managing the instinctual drives of young single men is an absolute imperative for maintaining a civilized society. The preferred solution of liberals appears to be demonizing men to the point where they all just voluntarily choose to become women.
And women choose to become men because the "threat" that all biological men pose to women is too unbearable.
Very true, Ma'am.
"women will ultimately be set back to the stone age;"
Could happen. Wouldn't surprise me. OTOH, women have gotten themselves into a lotta the positions of authority over the years. Yeah, some-a them are playing the victims. Others are playing the authoritarian role pretty viciously. Some both.
I just want those women to pick a lane. Either they are strong and assertive or they are victims in need of protection. Sometimes years after the fact and with scarcely a nod to due process. I do not include myself in there because I have chosen - I am strong and assertive and woe be unto anyone who tries to victimize me. Of course like any other human I could be the victim of a crime. If I was I would speak up. Immediately.
What I'm suggesting is that most-a them have decided to pick the lane of being authoritarians. That's my guess. But I'd expect them to play the victim-card when it was to their advantage.
You I knew about. :-)
Me too!!!
I'm glad you live in my state :,)
I have $50 to invest. I’m sorry but I’m still paying off my law school loans. Will invest more in 20 years when they are paid off.
Jim Wills, Thanks for your clear and helpful points.
Population depletion in fact is a world-wide problem and it is already happening in a big way. Countries such as Russia, Japan, and Spain are already losing population. China could already have a net loss (more deaths than births) this year, as it came very close in 2021. And many countries have fertility rates below replacement level (2.1, but 2.2 in China due to the abortion of so many more women than men)
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/total-fertility-rate
Every country in Europe and North America is well below 2.1 except Mexico, which is at 2.1.
India is at 2.2 and Indonesia at 2.3 and both have rates that are decreasing. China is at 1.7, as is the U.S. These are the four most populated countries.
Only the countries in Africa are well above 2.1. As they get much needed electricity and can develop their economies, they will have fewer children.
Currently, estimates are than the world's population will be no higher in 2100 than it is now (~8 billion) and probably somewhat lower.
no problem boys can touch boys , few abortions needed i think
“Harvard has 50 Title IX coordinators.”
Now I’m beginning to understand the grift.
Regardless, the end result will be fewer men in higher education. There will also be more social turmoil, distrust, and fear.
In short, these policies are unmistakably designed to create strife and uncertainty. Therefore, that is the intent. You cannot create utopia until you burn it all down.
It all moves in the same direction, doesn't it? Destruction of male-female relationships caused by deep distrust. This results in the lack of formation of stable marriages which in turn means fewer children being born.
It's another step in the destruction of the family.
Listen to Tucker's interview with Kimberly Ells. She's become an expert on this topic.
This is the move to babies created in test tubes. I think that is why the push initially toward homosexuality and now transgenderism was/is endorsed.
It's even worse than that, Ma'am, AFAIK. I think I mentioned once or twice before: The Chinese are working on the "ultimate." The external womb. Ponder the state of the family after *that* machine is "perfected."
Some will make babies the old fashioned Way.
The elite? When they can "optimize" everything and pipe the voice of the "mother" into the baby? Then the upper middle-class when the cost comes down? Dunno.
I haven't seen the Americans working on this. But that doesn't mean they aren't or they won't in future.
I agree. The Chinese have created a human with something else chimera that lived 8 days.
Hadn't heard that one. Lordy, lordy. I'm not sure I wanna ask.
But after I hit post I recalled one Martin "Martine" Rothblatt, the transsexual. He wrote a book "From Transgender to Transhumanism." He invented Sirius XM. Many, many multi-millionaire. Mebbe 500, can't recall. He not only wants to do with the whole biology of gender, but biology altogether. Download Your consciousness so You can live forever inside chips.
Now he owns a multi-billion company that engineers human parts from pigs. He created a heart but, IIRC, the patient died. Depends on Your POV.
He's never *said* he's trying to create a womb, so dunno. But wouldn't surprise me if some autogynephiles would wanna give birth. Ewwww.
a boy and his dog is our future ??? please no
That is my husband's theory - that people will marry their pets.
Those In vitro fertilizations (IVF) have to implanted into a uterus. I doubt your premise. I know several married couples who could only become pregnant and have their children by IVF.
I do too. But China is already creating clones and chimeras. Don't underestimate the power of science not grounded in ethics.
That was me.
Trump never gets credit. You, as all Trump haters do, make sure to disavow anything positive that the former president did. Even if you hate it, it was a Trump administration policy. It was good policy. Betsy DaVos was a Trump appointee and although she was tortured throughout her time as Education Secretary, she did a good job. It won’t kill you, or make you less credible to say it. This whole piece is really good, except the Trump hate and the Biden love. Nobody’s asking you to vote red, but writing a fair, balanced piece isn’t asking too much.
As for the new sexual harassment policy, God protect our men.
I've noticed experts tend to say, "Trump was terrible . . . well, except in this one area where I am an expert."
She did say it. She just had to distance herself first. If she were honest she would have said "[I] know some of you are going to hate me for saying this, but . . .". That is why my verdict is out on many of these people - the Levi's lady, the "elite" pre-school (ugh!) parents and many others who have posted on here. Have they actually learned anything or are they just whining?
Perhaps they are just starting to learn. Learning has to start somewhere and then it may or may not continue.
You are very kind. I probably need to take a page out of your book. To me it signifies thar she does not really have the courage of her convictions. Regrettably.
I think Democrats have very successfully implemented the Cloward-Piven Strategy by "isolating" and "ridiculing" anyone who voices support for Trump or his policies--even if his policies are successful. Democrats have spent quite a bit of time creating in my opinion propaganda painting any non-Democrat, any "flyover country" person, any non-college educated person, any Christian or even any devout Jewish person, any POOR person, as a loser and a moron undeserving of a voice, a job, of society, in this country. In other words, Democrats are now the bullies of this country.
I could not like this comment so I'm just going to say I agree 100%
Right? Nope, just complaining and then going back to their social circle to gather more to complain about but never change a damn thing!
True again. Your Q: My A: Dunno. Just know it *is* possible to do both. But, no, dunno.
I think the "Biden love" was evident in the phrase "credibly denied." It's not STRONG love, but it's there.
The way the woman described the assault it never could have happened. There are people everywhere and they would have been seen. She was not credible.
I found her story exceedingly credible mostly by the effort the media went to destroy her. The simple fact Google worked with CNN to renumber all the Larry King Live episodes and scrub the episode Tara's mom called in to discuss how ineffective reporting assault against a powerful Senator really is, gives even more credence to the allegations.
The made up ideas of "There are always tons of people there so a 20-30 second finger grab could never have happened" is copium and nothing else.
did they give him the sniff test ?
..."could have been seen", never stopped others in the past. Public sex acts on Capital grounds, including on the steps has been documented by confessions...
I read it.
"This was followed by a more serious allegation of assault, a charge he credibly denied."
Basically, he had Nancy P. say "Come on... This is Joe Biden.". He got the press to completely ignore it. He never addressed it.
We have Tara's mom talking to Larry King about a sexual assault on her daughter by an unnamed Senator (Tara worked for Joe Biden) on live TV recorded some 20 years ago. A video Google worked with CNN to scrub off the internet (though they couldn't scrub the old TV guides).
Saying Biden "credibly denied" the allegations is "Biden Love".
This change in policy is nothing short of horrifying. I was not previously aware that a third party could make an accusation that would be acted upon by campus administrators, regardless of the wishes of the two people actually involved.
Under these rules, it seems as if male students are better off not having sex with female fellow students at all. Or maybe they can claim to be trans, which--according to trans activists--makes lesbian women obligated to have sex with them. Kind of an extreme way to get laid. But this policy invites extreme responses.
This is what you get with identity politics. Few if any cases were brought against modern women and I can tell you that women can be just as aggressive as men.
But women is a target audience of the left and so naturally you get these refs. Sadly, the author makes zero effort to examine WHY such atrocious policies returned when the left took the WH.
A very artfully written article complaining about the acts, but spending zero time on its motivations.
Well said Rick. It's a shame that no effort was placed on explaining the root cause of these policies or why they have straddled two Democrat presidencies. Why is the left seems hellbent on destroying due process? This isn't a quirk of Biden's, this was a central tenet to the Obama presidency's Woke Inc agenda. I went back to college in my late twenties during the Obama admin and I can assure you that many young men, especially right wing young men were afraid to date women at their school.
Due process has been destroyed with the Jan 6 political prisoners. Being held for over a year, some in solitary confinement, in horrendous condition. No excuse for any of this, no one committed any crime above a misdemeanor. Some are being forced to admit to crimes far worse than they committed just to get it over with. This is not what the founding fathers wanted. This is a dicatorship.
Meanwhile, porn is more abundant than ever. Men will continue to "MGTOW" and that really isn't good for women or men.
One sad aspect of this to me is that making young people afraid of human relationships is certainly not going to make women happier.
Just googled MGTOW:
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW /ˈmɪɡtaʊ/) is an anti-feminist, misogynistic, mostly-online community advocating for men to separate themselves from women and from a society which they believe has been corrupted by feminism.
YIKES!
Google's characterization is grossly bigoted and totally lacking in empathy.
The sad irony is that this kind of definition is exactly what fuels the sentiment. Insulting them just proves their point.
How do we teach our sons to navigate this? Even a committed relationship that goes sour can land a man with a Title IX accusation?
This reframe that if a woman has a consensual sexual encounter she later regrets it’s an assault infantilizes women and hurts legitimate cases.
I have a son in college. What I have been telling him for years is to avoid casual sex- one night stands are risky. There is too much potential for things to go wrong ( including pregnancy).
On the other end of things, at the first sign of trouble, you get a lawyer for your son. That indicates to the university that you mean business, and it won't be so easy to steamroller your son.
I currently have two sons in college and an older daughter and we have had extensive conversations about this. I raised my sons to be respectful of woman, but this atmosphere is terrifying and really does make them think about what most of us consider to be normal behavior and growth. Innocent flirting, how to ask someone out, how to navigate a new relationship, the growth of a relationship, a breakup or hurt feelings. We are all human and and sometimes humans lie, have misunderstandings and yes, do things against others wishes, the worst of these being rape and of course for this, there should be consequences. However, there is a lot of gray area and mature responsibility and communication is needed. I have told my boys to not only hear the words, but ask in a text or something documented in writing, “Yes, I want to do this with you.” Not romantic, and under these regulations, may not even matter. And no, I don’t think this always happens, just my advice. I have firsthand knowledge of a consensual encounter in which a young man was accused, and during the kangaroo court, the girl broke down sobbing and admitted it was consensual. If that had not happened, the young man would’ve have been expelled. I think if there is truly a rape, which does happen, it needs to be reported to the police and go through the regular court system, not this kangaroo court in which there is no upside tor anyone, including the victim, because if a rape really occurred, the consequence should not be expulsion, but jail.
This is biggest issue I have with the whole "campus justice" thing: if she was raped, why did she not go to the police? Why was he not arrested? Why was there no rape kit?
I do not understand how a woman could expect to have any accusation of RECENT rape believed in this day and age if she did not report that rape to the police. Why would a woman not want to have evidence collected in order to make sure her rapist goes to prison? Why tell no authorities except university authorities?
I have said the same to my college aged son. But I have an ignorant SIL and her son finds himself in a very unprotected situation. She wants to keep boiling the pot and I told her she'd do so at her own peril. Her son will be the perp no matter what really happened and to leave it alone. It's best that right now he's the victim of the nastiness of two girls. Keep all of the info in case, but don't spike the ball. I worry for my son and honestly hope he engages with women after graduation!
Well advised. I like how you think. I will advise my kids the same when they go to college.
Sadly, while there are all female schools, there no all male schools. Send him to Hillsdsle, where they don’t take federal money and the refs are in applicable.
I have daughters, and one about to go to college. If she were a son, I wound strongly encourage him to avoid dating anyone attending his college. The risk is not worth the reward. The long term affect of these policies will be less men on campus and more risk for those who attend.
But's that what's so sad. My daughter, soon a college senior, has had difficulty finding a great guy. Thankfully that just changed. The Biden admin and the one he left 8 years ago is masterful at instilling terror into children's/young adults' lives. I thank God that I can have open conversations with my son and daughter to help them balance the ideals of loving, respectful, kind and generous relationships with the realities of cultural/political retaliation on seemingly every front. Back in the day, once we were adults, our parents could relax their parenting. Not anymore!
It seems these policies are more about employing lawyers and DEI personnel than solving interpersonal disputes.
Bingo! I’m guessing these folks, especially the DEI crowd, all went to school and received degrees that would not allow them to get an actual job so we had to create an office in every school and corporation that is populated by partisan democrats with dubious education in pseudo science, and those people now have a say in all university and corporate policies.
My understanding is that most-a them are women. Or, rather, womxn, if that's how it goes now. DEI and HR.
YES! 100%! I am teaching my kids to be part of the "producing" class where they develop marketable skills and work for a living, ideally in their own business, but now, if they want to go into public policy or run for office, as a voice of moderation to turn this ship around, I'm all for it.
Yes, and like all bureaucratic positions, once they are established it is extremely hard to get rid of them.
I find this to be a perfect example of the the hypocrisy of modern feminism.
On the one hand they stand up and talk about women's agency and about how women are tough and smart and just as capable as men.
BUT...then they turn around and talk about how they are all victims who need special protections.
AND.....despite their rejection of the idea, popular in earlier ages, that women need to be protected and that they are wholesome, innocent and should be put on pedestals, they somehow manage to act as though women are incapable of immoral, destructive, selfish behavior. Further, they will readily talk about how women are suffering all kinds of mental issues today but then refuse to consider that those issues could translate into cruel or anti-social behavior, such as falsely claiming that they are victims of sexual harassment or rape.
The problem I see is that modern feminism wants it ALL. All the privileges, but none of the responsibilities or downsides.
As a result, women can wear whatever hat serves them best at the moment. If they want to be seen as powerful, they wear that hat. If they want to be seen as victims, they wear the other hat.
The feminist denial of the fact that women are, in fact, quite capable of lying--about rape, about being on birth control, about anything else--does a great deal of harm, not only to the feminist movement, but to all women.
Women, in general, are now LESS trusted. Men do not want to mentor them. More and more men are less willing to enter relationships with women. Men are now placed in the position of every interaction with a female being a calculated risk.
You are not wrong.
Every interaction I have with a woman, at work or in relationships, is fraught with risks.
It only take ONE misinterpretation or one woman with a grudge or just a nutcase to ruin your entire life.
At work, I keep all women at bay. I never ever talk to a woman, other than my boss, alone. I always make sure that there is another person, preferably in management and preferably a woman, present. Even with Zoom calls, I now record them if it is just me and a woman. Not that I go out of my way to deny them opportunities or support them in their careers, but I am never, ever, going to have or allow the kind of casual, personal conversations that I might have with other men.
Does this have an impact? Well, I had to take a business trip to Hawaii to meet with a client. It was 4 days and I met with some potential partners and multiple potential clients. I wanted someone from BD to go with me but the only person available to go was this very attractive blonde in her early 30's. There was NO WAY IN HELL I was going to take her with me. NO WAY. There was no winning in that scenario for me. Even asking her to go was risky, just from the potential appearance. Heck, I would have questioned that if the trip had been to Omaha. But a romantic scene like Hawaii? NO WAY. Even if it had been Omaha, where I do go now and again, I would have taken different flights and booked different hotels. I would have had lunch with her but never dinner. Whereas with a guy I might have flown with him and worked on the flight. Probably would crash at the same hotel so we could meet early for breakfast and probably would work over dinner. I might even have asked him if he wanted to take a walk around and see the sights since I had never been there. BUT NO WAY would I ever ever do that with a woman.
Did that hinder her career? Possibly. I met with some great connections that might have served her well. There were a couple of potential deals she maybe could have worked on. But the risk was JUST untenable for me.
My dad had a practice of keeping his office door always open so he had total transparency.
The policy came in handy when he was targeted by a female grifter who tried to accuse him of misbehavior. His secretary testified the door was always open, and nothing the accuser described had happened.
She never got consequences for her lies, no, she moved up the executive line eventually.
That is something that really bothers me: these women experience ZERO consequences for lying.
No consequences for misbehavior is empowering!
Power power power!
Not in this life, anyway.
Great comment, and I completely get it. My husband and I own a business and he is a great boss and mentor. He has an amazing personality in which people, including some of his employees open up to him and tell him personal things and he has gone out of his way to help them. On occasion, in certain situations with certain employees, I have warned him that although this is a wonderful quality, it could backfire on him. I have asked him to to be careful, because if he needs to fire any of these people, especially young woman, everything is open to interpretation. From my own perspective, I have noticed after all the “me too” ridiculousness, some men being less friendly to me, or going out of their way to make sure they are not alone with me. I get it. All of this is kind of sad really.
I'll give you an example from yesterday how just talking with a woman casually can create havoc.
SO....I took my fiance to a winery. We were sitting outside looking over the mountains and just enjoying the day. She asked me to go inside and grab her another glass of wine. SO...I did.
I got to the bar, ordered her wine and a flight of beer for me. One of the women working behind the bar had a cool tattoo on her upper arm. I casually said that I thought that was a great tattoo. She then proceeded to give me the whole history of it. I thought that was interesting. Come to find out there was a connection to some art work that my grandmother had done and I mentioned it. Just chit chat.
As soon as the beers showed up I went back outside. Not 5 minutes later, that woman with the tattoo, who turned out to be the manager, came outside and pulled up a chair at our table and tried to strike up a longer conversation.
Well, ultimately the woman walked away and my fiance and I left to go to a flea market but I could tell my fiance was pissed off. She finally said to me that she was angry about it. She also said that it was because I had flirted. I told her that all I had done was comment on a tattoo and chatted while waiting for my beer. How was I supposed to know that she would take that as license to come over and sit down?
So I asked my fiance what she would have had me do? Be rude and ask the woman, who happens to be the manager and who theoretically could just be doing a table visit, to leave? My fiance responded "no" that would be rude. But she was still pissed.
So, you see the risk. A simple, casual, in passing conversation, with a woman, that would have meant NOTHING had it been a guy, creates chaos.
SO, what have I learned from this? I am going to keep any conversation with any woman not a family member or my fiance to nothing but business. I will even be rude if that is what it takes to assure that there is nothing that can be interpreted as flirting. No longer will I have even the most innocuous conversation but will proactively assert that I have no interest.
Now imagine that situation at work. Jesus Christ.
Sad. As someone who has been married to a friendly guy for 27 years - It didn’t have to be that way. You could have gotten a good laugh together or made a new friend.
Fiancé? You've been warned.
I live near Napa Valley. Its commonplace for winery staff to occasionally join couples/small groups for conversation. It adds to the winetasting experience, and it's part of their job to sell wine and wine club memberships to the tsting room guests.
If my husband of 25 years couldn't carry on a conversation with a bar tender/winery manager, I'd be annoyed and actually find it disrespectful. Insecurity is a real thing, and therefore, so is a sense of security. Wishing you the best.
Great comment. These are very real world issues and I applaud your honesty. But get ready for the old (regardless of your age) white man attack.
Thank you for describing, in detail, how this new threat has affected you and the women whose careers you might otherwise have been able to further.
Have you read Suzi Wiess Commn Sense piece on David Sabatini? It is the most gobsmacking, horrific example of what you've outlined. We all lose because David Sabatini is side lined.
That was a smart decision, my man
When I was getting out of the Marines in 2019, I told the Marines that had just hit the Fleet to avoid female Marines like the plague.
OMG so true. All those opportunities to work with smart men they could learn from—gone. How do they expect to get noticed and promoted? Oh silly me, they just deserve promotions because ya know, equity.
I don't see it as hypocritical. Their language has always been about "empowerment" being a feminist virtue. There's a lot of power in victimization - look at Jussie Smollett.
Being assertive and confident one day and then a helpless victim the next is potent emotional manipulation. It's empowering!
You're not wrong. It's a twisted way of looking at the world. But it is unfortunately the Progressive way of looking at the world.
Excellent comment. Spot on.
It's like the trans thing. Gender is fluid, it doesn't matter! But call me by the wrong pronouns and I'll label you a mouth-breathing bigot.
Imagine what Camille Paglia would say about all this.
Women wanted liberation, equal rights, free sexuality. Of course that meant risk, hurt feelings, rejection, hook ups that didn’t go well. But they were free, and freedom doesn’t guarantee nice.
Now we have a generation of helicopter kids. They can’t tolerate freedom, risk, hurt. They need nanny to swoop in and make it all better. And our Leviathan progressives want to do that.
To today’s young women—-prepare to be lonely.
Young men too.
I miss Camille Paglia. We need her voice now more than ever.
"(A)n immoral administration doing the moral thing."
Trump is bad! Bad, bad, bad! But considering the Democratic Party is in favor of abortion to the moment of birth, providing hormone treatment to children, an open border, a weak foreign policy that led to the collapse of Afghanistan and war in Ukraine, high gas prices, and inflation... how immoral was his administration compared to the current one?
I think Victor Davis Hanson's assessment of Trump is the most accurate. His accomplishments will never be appreciated because of how he has been popularly characterized.
Donald Trump is John Wayne from "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance."
I believe Trumps reputation amongst independents has only grown over the last 18 months as voters witness how awful Biden is by comparison. The media and Democrat elected officials have gone the other way as their credibility is going south for demonizing one of the most effective Presidents of my lifetime, and they seek to try and maintain whatever remains of their reputations. That's exactly what the 1/6 hearings are about. The media, elected officials and hardcore left look at it as a way of validating their mischaracterizations of the Trump administrations many, many positive accomplishments. My regrets of those years was that he was such an awful figurehead. Imagine what more he might have accomplished, and still be accomplishing, if he could of even kept half of his thoughts to himself?
Exactly. You could say that that was his tragic flaw.
"My regrets of those years was that he was such an awful figurehead. Imagine what more he might have accomplished, and still be accomplishing, if he could of even kept half of his thoughts to himself?"
And if he hadn't spent so much time accumulating scorn and adoration on Twitter at all hours of the day and night.
Trumps Twitter habits were just awful. And it was a constant reminder to myself how incredibly immature I am still, in my 40s, because I would occasionally giggle at the stupidity before remembering that this is the president of the US. Not one of the Plastics from the movie Mean Girls.
Imagine what he could have accomplished if not for a baseless investigation run by James Comey, Andrew McCabe and passed off to Robert Mueller. They prevented the peaceful transition to a new President for the first time ion history, aided by their media accomplices. The FBI lied about Page to get FISA warrants, lied to Congress about Steele’s sources, used outside law firms to actively monitor FBI databases to track Trump communications, etc. If that’s not Treason and Sedition, I’m not sure what is. Imagine where we would be now - no Russian invasion, no dollar on the precipice due to the BRICs, energy independence, etc.
First of all the facts: That was bad what they did, but they in *no* way prevented a peaceful transition, right? Trump was already in power, right? Treason?
What would-a happened if Trump was in power? He PRAISED Putin for invading, right? Just as likely Putin would-a have overrun Ukraine and the tiny NATO countries and be pushing up against Germany and France right now.
The grass is *always* greener on the other side-a the fence. THere's nobody on this planet with a crystal ball as to what WOULD-a happened IF... That's why I don't spend mental energy on those kinds-a things, myself.
President Trump was hamstrung throughout his Presidency due to the fraudulent investigation. His DOJ was being run by Rosenstein, who abdicated all responsibility to Weissman during the Mueller investigation. His communications were being monitored by Joffe and the FBI as seen in the Sussman trial.
OTOH, the U.S. had no wars for four years. Trump had bombed Russian forces in Syria, was pulling us out of Afghanistan, we had a secure border and were reorienting the predatory trade practices of China. You don't have to guess what would -a happened if Trump was in power, you already know.
You can *pretend* to know all You want. But glad You brought that up. Trump, "the MASTER NEGOTIATOR?" Negotiated with the TALIBAN to get us outta Afghanistan. How'd that work out for the Afgan women? I know.. I know.. Trump can do no wrong. I get it. It's all of no importance.
You mean when Trump told the Taliban leaders that we were tracking them and their families and would bomb them if they didn't adhere to the agreement or when Biden decided to ignore the timeline that was agreed to, went against the military recommendation to keep Bagram Air Base open to provide air cover for an orderly departure, gave the Taliban a list of people who worked with us, left $80 billion in weapons and got 13 troops killed?
It seems to me that over the past 20 years, there was only one president that didn't oversee Putin invading another country. Russia invaded Georgia under Bush, Crimea under Obama (I refer you to the notorious hot-mic of Obama asking Medvedev to give him breathing-room until after the 2012 election), and now Ukraine under Biden. I wonder who the exception was?
Interesting to explore how our “hair sniffer” in chief got to be associated with such deeply psychopathic prurient involvement in “due-process.” Seen this issue as a long history with deviance a la Harvard, universities, Epstein, Gates, Clinton, Biden and company. Kind of forget but it wasn’t long ago that Biden tweeted that it wasn’t unusual for good folks to get caught with pictures of unmentionables on their phones. This guy and all his associates are certifiable. No contest.
So good—thank you!
I was tangentially connected to someone who went through the nightmare of the campus sex police. He was a Black guy who was the first person in his family in generations to to college. He had sex with a well-to-do white girl who later decided she hadn’t really wanted to do it. He was expelled, sued, and won a big court verdict. The jury was out I think less than 15 minutes. There was video—which I don’t think he got a chance to see or argue during the University investigation—that made it clear as day that the girl had not been blackout drunk as she claimed.
The courts can fix a wrongful expulsion on paper, but unfortunately they can’t come close to making a wrongfully expelled student whole. Missing a year or more of college, having your friends graduate without you, the nightmare of a false investigation (which in his case was probably a classic example of racially motivated sex accusations, one of the uglier parts of Jim Crow that is resurgent under the Obama Title IX regs), having a gap in your resume you have to explain for your next ten years of job interviews, the stigma of being expelled for sexual misconduct… nothing a court can do can fix that.
Hopefully universities will wake up to the legal liability they face for wrongful expulsions and will voluntarily keep more robust protections for the accused than the regulations require.
The fact that the men who were charged under the Obama guidance were disproportionally Black was memory-holed.
Interesting. But that’s of a piece with the democrat party. They use blacks and then spit them out when not needed for votes anymore. They promise the world to get those votes and then never deliver.
Hispanics are learning fast. Blacks need to wake up too.
Yeah. 100%. But it's not *only* that. What it indicates is the hierarchy of oppression. White women are higher. When it comes to oppression, a black *man* gets sacrificed. Funny that.
Yeah. Funny that.
If the Trump regs were an example of an immoral administration doing the moral thing, what would you call the BIden example on Title IX?
Also, just curious, since we're assigning modifiers to each administration, but what would $2/gal gas, low inflation, wages outpacing inflation for blue and brown collar workers, and a (relatively speaking, anyway) secure border be an example of: a moral or immoral administration? And what would the opposite or diametrically opposed outcomes be an example of? Moral? Immoral? Super moral?
Or, as anyone with a brain can infer, doesn't matter because the author's north star is her "feelings" and one President makes her "feel" bad for reasons no sane person can articulate, but another President makes her "feel" good for reasons that are completely belied by reality - like the reality of the article she just authored.
Stop printing embarrassing drivel, Bari.
As a parent of two boys and one girl I cannot imagine just believing everything my daughter says and affirming it as truth while then presuming that my boys are guilty just because some girl said so. We live in a time where people think "words are violence" and we cannot define "woman" and a person is "offended" if we don't call them by their proper pronouns. I have instructed my boys that if anyone ever threatens them with sexual misconduct allegations to stop talking to anyone and immediately seek council. It used to be a fundamental principal that one was innocent until proven guilty. Sadly, now one is guilty because a female, (often a consenting adult) claims "victim" and is reaffirmed. Have we learned nothing from the ESPN "30 for 30" on the Duke Lacrosse team (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.espn.com/30for30/film/_/page/fantasticlies&ved=2ahUKEwjq5vvpws34AhW2IUQIHSY2DFAQFnoECC4QAQ&usg=AOvVaw0lmKRk_i2-TLcIrPMhdBM2) or several of.the articles posted here on "Common Sense" about Joshua Katz (https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/what-princeton-did-to-my-husband) David Sabatini (https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/he-was-a-world-renowned-cancer-researcher) or Roland Fryer? (https://glennloury.substack.com/p/the-truth-about-roland-fryer). Woman absolutely can be victims but they can also LIE and Manipulate.
My boys should not have to live in fear of everything they say and do. They have a responsibility to treat "women" (which really means anyone) with respect but should not have to walk on eggshells to do so. In my opinion, the REAL victims of sexual assault will be undermined by a whole lot of "guilty by affirmation" rather than an appropriate trial. It serves neither the real victims nor the young men who are found "guilty" because a school administrator says so.
This is NOT okay!
Heather MacDonald does a great job of exposing this insanity in her book "The Diversity Delusion".
Yes! I love Heather MacDonald and have her book!
Completely agree!