Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
This Week Through Althouse Eyes
As an alternative to bickering with our insipid local stoolies, buffoons, and/or fake swing voters with the exact same comments, cut ‘n’ paste materials, and blatant advertising for rival sites yet again, I thought I would offer up some notes from my non-Ricochet online reading this week. Who knows, maybe a conversation will break out?
I found this line of commentary and posting from Ann Althouse through the week very interesting, not to mention honest and refreshing. (As if this needs to be said, I don’t always agree with her but she does often provide intellectually honest insight into other ways of seeing the world.)
From before “the vote”:
That’s what I’d like to see from the government. Stability. Good sense. Regularity.
Could you just do that, Democrats? Is that too easy for you?! Do you admire Donald Trump? Are you trying to beat him at his game? Chaos. Weirdness. You pathetic imitators! His chaotic weirdness should have kept him from getting elected in the first place, but what happened happened. And now he is President, so he’s inherently less weird and chaotic. There’s the continuing strangeness of his being President. I still fall into a reverie now and then: How the hell did that happen? On perhaps 6 occasions, I have watched video of the election night coverage — the real-time recording that goes on for hours — as if to drive it home into my resistant brain that it really did happen. It wasn’t just a crazy dream.
The people who voted for Trump are real. They are not despicable or “deplorable.” They are voters in a democracy, and democracy — crazy though it is — is our beloved system here in the United States of America. We’re wedded to it, for better or worse, and I’m trying to make the best of it. There’s some wild excitement and there’s some serious work to be done. I don’t want any more chaos than is needed to claw through the days to the next election. Let’s have an election, not a kooky congressional extravaganza. I need Pelosi and Schiff and these various Congress critters to shrink back into their place and let the presidential candidates have the stage. Let’s be normal.
… I am a true swing voter (in a swing state). All I want is a very competent, reliable, sensible, good person who can handle the presidency. I don’t want your ugliness and hysteria. I don’t want to see my fellow citizens cranked up into a frenzy. The very reasons I voted against Trump are getting cooked up into reasons to vote for him — by you, you idiots.
But this week, you have a chance to turn back from your crazy ways. It won’t take all of you. Just some of you. Please, House Democrats, please vote “no.” Stand down and let us get back to the 2020 presidential campaign. Surely, some of you still believe that elections matter and elections must be the norm in America. The rest of you seem as though you’ve already given up and ceded the 2020 election to Donald Trump. That’s how I will interpret a “yes” vote on the impeachment, a disclosure of your consciousness of 2020 loserdom.
As a side note, that bit about letting “the presidential candidates have the stage” interests me. Ann (if I may be so informal) is smart and recognizes that that is what is needed for them to cull the clown car (my words, not hers) to find the best and strongest candidate. Is part of the strategy here by the powers that be to help hide the fact that they are a bunch of clowns and there is not a winner among them? Do they acknowledge in those smoke-filled backrooms (showing my age with that reference) that the only possible path to victory is to take down Trump?
From after “the vote”:
This is not the vote the Republicans have been demanding — that is not “a formal vote to authorize the impeachment inquiry,” which is what happened in the cases of Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon. So the Democrats are doing some theater of voting out in the open today, but it’s not the vote that accords with historical practice. It’s not the vote the Republicans have been talking about. It’s a vote about what the rules will be.
Of course, the House gets to make its own rules — that’s in the Constitution — and the majority will win and get what rules they want and can get away with claiming for themselves. Apparently, the idea is to give the President’s supporters nothing until the Intelligence Committee has finished its work. The Democrats apparently want the Intelligence Committee to produce a one-sided report, with any balance on the side of the President to come only after the matter is referred to the Judiciary Committee.
So the Democrats will be out in the open today, explaining to us Americans why that is fair and why that is about getting to the truth? How will that work out? Here’s how the NYT puts it:
But Thursday’s vote indicates that Democrats, once wary of holding a vote on the issue, have now united solidly behind the idea.
Or they’ve heard enough criticism about their partisan, secretive ways and they’re yielding to pressure to legitimatize themselves. The NYT’s use of the phrase “a vote on the issue” hides the just-admitted reality that it’s not a vote on the issue the Republicans demanded — the issue of whether to authorize the impeachment inquiry. It’s a vote on procedural rules for continuing the inquiry. The difference in issues is obvious if you think of the consequences of a “no” vote. What would happen if there’s a “no” vote on these rules? Things would continue as they’ve been going, right?
They believe it adds an air of legitimacy to the inquiry and gives them practical tools they will need to effectively — and quickly — make their case to the public. It is also meant to call the bluff of Republicans who have been arguing for weeks that the process lacks legitimacy because the full House hasn’t voted on it.
But it doesn’t call the bluff because it’s not a vote on authorizing the inquiry. The Democrats are trying to get something while playing it safe. They’re trying to get our opinion of their legitimacy.
We’ll see how that works out.
ADDED: The NYT gives a lot away in saying “They believe it adds an air of legitimacy…” Democrats are only trying for an air of legitimacy, not actual legitimacy. And right now, they see themselves as lacking even an air of legitimacy.
Wrapping up the week on her blog:
“The Pelosi impeachment resolution was supposed to deprive the GOP of its complaint that the process wasn’t formal. Instead, it formalized a rigged process and gives Republicans a solid rationale for rejecting the entire proceeding. Democrats gripe that the GOP refuses to talk about the substance of the case against the president. But it is Democrats who have made that impossible, given the secrecy and one-sided approach. Due process is at the heart of America’s system of ordered liberty, and the ‘evidence’ Democrats are secretly compiling in the basement of the House is already soiled. That’s why every House Republican — even vulnerable ones — felt confident in voting ‘no’ on Thursday’s resolution. Republicans pointed out that even as Democrats were claiming the vote meant ‘transparency,’ Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff was holding another closed hearing, to which most of the House and the president’s legal counsel weren’t privy. ‘Democrats cannot fix this process,’ said House GOP Conference Chair Liz Cheney after the vote. ‘This is a process that has been fundamentally tainted.'”
Writes Kimberly Strassel in “A Partisan Impeachment Vote” (WSJ). …
Note how the fundamentally “tainted” process provides “confidence” to “every” “Republican” to reject it outright. Remember that later when we are yet again shown just how weak, spineless, pathetic, and stupid some senators really are. Yes, I’m looking at you Collins, Murkowski, ….
Have a nice day.Published in General
The fundamental problem for Democrats is that they announced their plan to impeach Trump before they had any grounds to do so. The Russia hoax began with a Hillary excuse for losing. The FBI and CIA had had the Trump team under surveillance since well before he was the nominee. They knew well that any connection was one they had created out of thin air.
Obama had them take out Flynn for several reasons. One, Obama hated him. Two, Flynn had plans to revamp the intel community and that had made him an enemy. Three, it was part of the intimidation game. “If they bring a knife, you bring a gun.” Trump, like a lot of US citizens, simply did not realize that the US government had become a criminal conspiracy. For all his years dealing with the mob in NYC, he still thought the government was honest.
I think he will survive because Trump is a boy scout compared to these people. They could not get anything on him and they tried very hard. Politicians become millionaires AFTER they take office. They had to assume he was a crooked as they are.
Thanks. I thought about referring readers to this Althouse post and I’m glad you did. I thought it was interesting from an electoral politics point of view because Ann voted Obama, and for Clinton over Trump.
Her post makes me wonder if there are a significant sliver of the population like her, who will switch to Trump if he’s running this time, over any of the Democrat crazies on offer, if the Democratic party doesn’t show at least some signs of willingness to go back on its medication.
I mean the sliver comprising left-leaning, intellectually and politically involved, upper-middle-class women who are still fundamentally wedded at some level to traditional liberal American values and institutions, and to the American nation as the exceptional best hope for the survival of those values.
“As if this needs to be said, I don’t always agree with her but she does often provide intellectually honest insight into other ways of seeing the world.”
I used to read her blog for exactly that reason, though I have slacked off lately so I can keep up with the PIT.
Althouse is first thing I read in the morning. She also has a lot of great non-political posts. A very quirky and contrarian personality (in fact, she would probably take issue with me saying that!).
A woman begging her serially abusive husband to just be nice. That way, all will be well.
This is the path trod by many who never thought about Donald Trump as POTUS until he began to show some strength in the 2016 Republican primaries. It was a slow and deliberate process for me as I became a reluctant Trump supporter early enough to cast my vote for him with the prayer that we would avoid getting her. I suspect this was the case for many. His life experience revealed character flaws, acknowledged by many of his supporters as not very different from their own behaviors that had been abandoned over time, I viewed as far less troubling than what I had witnessed with long-established elected politicians. The crookedness of the Establishment politicians increases by leaps and bounds AFTER they take office. President Trump has been in office almost three years now and the progressive Democrats still must fabricate the allegations of crimes by him and they do this by committing crimes never thought to have been possible by servants of the people in our country. Trump has been elevated by the Democrats and the MSM performing in the dumpster. He just looks better as time goes by.
Yeah, I read her everyday as well.
I read Althouse a lot, and I like her comment section but I don’t comment there myself. Incidentally I recognized one comment the other day that I first read here.
The Democrats aren’t really crazy, they are power-mad. And it’s even harder for them to deal because this guy Trump is impervious to their array of weapons. Now they are reduced throwing rocks at Godzilla, or like in the western TV show when the villain fires all six shots and misses, then throws the gun itself in frustration.
Because they’ve been protected by the media for so long, they’ve gotten weak and flabby. Hence their lame Presidential candidates, their unhinged representatives from solid blue districts continually getting encouragement and trophies from “respected” people and institutions, unable to connect once they have to court a wider audience. Maxine Waters, Shiff, Beto… the list is too long.
So now we are seeing them fail iteratively and publicly. They deserve it.
I drive to California every month or two to see grandkids. We listen to audio books on the 6 or 7 hour drive. This time we listened to Kim Strassel’s new book, “resistance at all costs.”
Coming back we listened to Lee Smith’s “The Plot Against the President.”
Both highly recommended. The Smith book resembles Andy McCarthy’s book, “Ball of Collusion” in being extremely detailed.
Shame on you. From page 4 of the Ricochet handbook, under the section titled “Little Known Codicils”, immediately preceding part 4. Double Secret Probation, it clearly states “a member in good standing will, upon awaking consult http://www.lileks.com, The Bleat and/or any successor (as determined by a court of law)….”
This is all failure theatre. The House will impeach. The Senate will acquit. During the next several months there will be lots of press conferences where Democrats will talk about how badly Trump has behaved and lots of press conferences where Republicans will talk about how ruthless the Democrats are acting.
Lots of sound and fury signifying . . . . . . . the warm up to the 2020 presidential election.
In the United Kingdom, however, they have some real issues on their plate. Will Brexit finally happen? Will Northern Ireland end up detached from the United Kingdom and eventually get invited into the Republic of Ireland?
Will Scotland demand independence (again)? Will the anti-Semite and Marxist Labour leader end up being the reason why Brexit finally succeeds? Will Nigel Farage be an ally instead of a saboteur?
Meanwhile we are stuck in a contest of meaningless press conference and show votes.
Only if you are content to be ruled by the Intelligence Community.
The feature at this theatre may change significantly if and when there are indictments made public from the Durham investigation of 2016 election meddling.
I’m sure someone has mentioned the irony of the condemnations of critics of Vindemann who (they say) should not be criticized as a military officer, and the attacks on Michael Flynn??
No irony there as one is ‘deep state’ intelligence community friendly and the other is not. Get used to this new logical form.
Completely different cases. Vindaman didn’t like Trump’s foreign policy so he is a patriot. Flynn didn’t like Obama’s foreign policy so he is a traitor and criminal.
Oh my goodness! What was I thinking?! Thank you for setting me straight, @gumbymark! ;-)
I am certainly not the arbiter of the definitions of modern made up terms but this really doesn’t fall under the meaning as I saw it perfected by the congressional Republicans during the Obama years as they orchestrated Potemkin resistance to the greater Ruling Class wishes (primarily for fund raising purposes) only to capitulate per the script.
This is really little more than the ultimate corruption of elected offices to abuse / bastardize campaign finance beyond repair. Every main stream media story about Trump and impeachment that isn’t tagged with “I’m Nancy Pelosi and I approve this message” should be yet another exhibit for the prosecution.
We live in the most unserious of times…
I haven’t done deep research on this but my thoughts about it have been that General Michael Flynn delivered a military intelligence assessment to the Obama White House that indicated Obama policy toward Iran was flawed insofar as U.S. national interests were concerned.. Usually, in recent times when this happens, the intelligence officials are turned away from their assessment and then fabricate a supportive assessment. Or better yet, if the right people are in place, the intelligence assessment will reflect the known White House views. To my knowledge, this has been the pattern for more than two decades. Am I wrong?
This was the point Marco Rubio made against Donald Trump in one of those GOP debates back in the 2015-2016 campaign cycle.
Trump endorsed getting rid of Super PACs. Then when Rubio had a chance to speak, Rubio pointed out that the Democrats have their Super PAC of unliminted campaign money: The Mainstream Media. Then Rubio went on to talk about how the media was covering for Hillary Clinton.
But Trump loved him some good old campaign finance reform.
I know. It’s against our religion to say anything critical of our sky God Donald Trump.
Not to mention intelligence agencies, congressional committees with staffs and investigative services (and script writers), etc., etc., etc., …
That’s cute, but you were saying something about theatre, earlier? Melodramatic doesn’t make for good theatre.
Also: I’m not sure what you mean by “our religion”, since, as this thread demonstrates, at least in terms of Ricochet, opinions are all over the map. On everything.
Trump thought he had dealt with the toughest as a builder in NYC thinking those experiences prepared him for his entry into politics. Little did he know the mob bosses and unions were angels compared to the greed and corruption in D.C. politics. We sent a citizen to clean up the swamp, and while he hasn’t cleaned it up yet, he has most certainly exposed it. And, yes they do make him look increasingly like a boy scout.
Twice in the last six weeks, individuals approached me while I was out shopping, and begged me to listen to them. And to perhaps offer an explanation?
“Why – if you can tell me – are newly arrived immigrants being offered housing vouchers, food stamps, free med insurance and med care, AFDC checks and more, while the struggling people like Me are offered nothing?”
Both individuals were women who came here between 28 and 35 years ago, from south of the border. They are now realizing how they are not now able to keep up with the high prices of rent, fuel, food, et al here in Calif.
Both have worked since teenagers. They make “okay money” but have no concept of what their future will be. Except they find it frightening.
Yes indeed the future here is frightening. In a state where there is only a 1% rental vacancy (except I presume in places like Death Valley) my little neck of the woods now has studio apartments for $ 750 a month. And we are miles from the areas of the SF Bay region or Sacramento where the good jobs are.
But again and again the point is hammered at by the New Leftie’s Party leaders: “The crying baby at the border is the single most important issue of the universe!”
Some further info on Ann’s voting: Gore in 2000, Bush in 2004, Obama in 08, Romney in 12.
That’s exactly why I don’t participate in the PIT. It’s a chronophage.
Quite true. But it is a funny way to use my free time.😁 For me, althouse.blogspot.com in not nearly as entertaining.😕
Her pattern over the past two decades seems to have been believe the media portrayal of the presidential candidates when the contest is for an open seat, and then vote Republican after the person elected the last time around’s had four years in office to prove themselves (I suppose Ann could vote for wacky-but-lovable Uncle Joe in 2020 — lots of #NeverTrump people seem to be hoping that’s the binary choice they get — but even if Biden does hold off the field, it’s hard to see how he doesn’t end up with a significant portion of the Sanders/Warren platform).
Althouse hints back at this point this week:
A deliberate strategy?
[EDIT: Added link]