February 10, 2018

"Had Fox News existed — and been essentially the state-run TV — during the Nixon era, there might not have been an impeachment of Richard Nixon."

Said Adam Schiff on Bill Maher's show last night.

212 comments:

1 – 200 of 212   Newer›   Newest»
Jay Elink said...

Somebody straighten me out: during the Obama years, was Fox News "the state-run TV"?

Rabel said...

Schiff knows his history.

tcrosse said...

Somebody straighten me out: was Nixon impeached, or did he, like, resign.

Ann Althouse said...

"Somebody straighten me out: was Nixon impeached, or did he, like, resign."

It is weird how the facts get misstated and accepted in that form, but an easy correction is to say that there was an impeachment proceeding, and Nixon would have been impeached if he hadn't resigned.

Meanwhile, Schiff is on the show to make much of the importance of accuracy re the GOP memo.

SteveR said...

That pesky 1st Amendment

Josephbleau said...

It’s great to restrict viewpoints. That way it’s easier to make sure the elite class retains control.

Molly said...

(eaglebeak)

On the other hand, we DO have CNN, darling of the anti-Trump team, and here's what THEY'RE posting:

http://www.cnn.com/2018/02/10/asia/kim-sister-olympics/index.html

Kim's little sister, director of the Propaganda and Agitation Department of the Workers' Party of Korea.

How's that for dedication to a free press?

Gahrie said...

President Nixon's forced resignation was the blueprint for the Left's attempts to destroy Trump:

A member of the deep state/permanent government was pissed at a Republican U.S. president and set out to destroy him with the help of the MSM.

How can you be pissed about 16 1/2 minutes of tape recording if you're fine with all the e-mails that were 'lost" over the last nine years?

ftv2 said...

Mr. Shiff for Brains,
unlike today, in 1974 BOTH political parties were interested in getting to the truth. You're playing politics to the detriment of our country. Shame on you!

rhhardin said...

I don't know. The price controls Nixon imposed were so stupid that Fox might have challenged him.

The US didn't start to recover until Ford came out with Whip Inflation Now buttons.

Birkel said...

Andrew McCarthy admitted he was wrong about the FISA Court.
By extension, he admits that I was correct as were many others here.

LLR Fopdoodles and Leftist Collectivists, birm, hardest hot.

Why are the elitist, arrogant insiders like McCarthy so slow to learn?

We deplorables laugh as the scales fall from eyes.

Schiff is worthless on all accounts: incompetent, petulant, and obsequiously partisan.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Most Democrats are assholes. And liars. I used to think it was just some, now it's up to most.

cronus titan said...

Proving a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then, Schiff has a point for different reasons. It's not just Fox. It is cable TV generally and the internet - information moves fast. It is also challenged more often (though not as much as it should be). Today, the concept of "Deep Throat" would last a few days before the pressure to divulge would be intense. Failure to divulge would be taken as something to hide - turns out, they did have something to hide, i.e. the lack of credibility of a disgruntled FBI agent settling a personal score and positioning himself to be Director by getting rid of leadership.

There were also plenty of holes in the story that the Post covered up with passive voice and ignored/vague details. Kind of like John Hammond used frog DNA to fill in the blanks.

More likely, with more modern media, Watergate would have developed like the Lewinsky scandal, which ended with a President diddling an intern and prejuring himself about it, but the people who exposed it ending up the bad guys.

Unknown said...

This guy has access to our most secret classified information.

YoungHegelian said...

Maybe if there had been Fox News we might have learned that Deep Throat had anything but noble motives for his release of the information.

Would it have mattered? Maybe, maybe not. But that Woodward & Bernstein so dutifully quashed that info shows to me that they didn't want any discussions of "motive" to sully their saving of the Republic.

Anonymous said...

Meaning NYT WaPo,and the alphabet TVs were useless, or Nixon's impeachment was a trump up job that would not survive on exposure.

wendybar said...

Like ALL the other channels were during the Obama era? As the book title said "They had a Slobbering Love Affair" with him. He could do not wrong...and if he did, it was not covered.

Jupiter said...

Had Schiff existed -- and been essentially a member of the House -- during the last eighteen years, we might be well on our way to becoming a third-world shithole.

Unknown said...

So he is saying that if there had been a more balanced news media, Nixon may not have been impeached by the democrat-media party. But he sees nothing wrong with him bemoaning if that occurred. Anyone see a pretty huge problem with this guy having access to classified informations?

chuck said...

So, would that have been a good or bad thing? At this distance, the Nixon "crimes" look like a big bunch of nothing much.

Fabi said...

But there wasn't an impeachment of Nixon, Shiffhead.

Etienne said...

Schiff is either retarded from birth, or his constituency was retarded at birth.

There's no other explanation, because I know the Republicans have the American interest at heart when they expose crimes against the foundations of the Republic.

I think the judges involved in this, all need to be exposed, and impeached.

I think Schiff should be run out of town. Back to Hollywood.

Fernandistein said...

Is he attempting to say that Fox News existed during the Nixon era and was State run TV? I'm pretty sure that's not right because TV hadn't been invented by then.

Etienne said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bay Area Guy said...

The "Get Nixon" Squad was a bit more crafty than the "Get Trump" Squad.

Also, in Watergate, there was, in fact, a crime (the burglary). True, nothing was stolen and nobody was hurt, but at least you had a crime committed by Nixon underlings.

Here, the "Get Trump" Squad has nothing. In fact, by lying to the FISA Court, unmasking civilian intercepts and strategically leaking private communications to the Press, one could argue that the "Get Trump" Squad is a much bigger cadre of criminals than Carter Page, Paul Manafort or Mike Flynn.

Lance said...

If there had been a Fox News in 1974, it would have been very different. For one the FCC's "Fairness Doctrine" was still very much enforced. Second, the other network news agencies weren't nearly as biased towards Democrats as they are now. Witness for example how they treated Carter.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

wow. A leftwing progressive lair stooge-bomb blaming Fox News.

Earnest Prole said...

You mean the same Richard Nixon who was the father of wage-and-price controls, guaranteed income, affirmative action, the Environmental Protection Agency, and Title IX? The Nixon who set China on a path to overtake the United States in a few short years? The Nixon whose Supreme Court justices formed the backbone of the Roe v Wade decision? Barrack Obama is green with progressive envy at that record; Noam Chomsky calls Nixon "our last liberal president.”

But Fox News and a lot of others today would still have enthusiastically supported him: he had an R following his name.

D said...

The way it is phrased, the thought that naturally springs to mind is asking as follow-up: well, which President should have been impeached, but for the media / an effective cover by the State?

Marty van Buren? /sarc (ignorant sarc - dont know much about ol MvB)

Correct me if mixing up metaphors, but really the man is saying "thank god the dogs barked with Nixon!" - ol Sherlock reminds one to also ask: "well when did the dogs not?"

Dogs should bark when there is a theat. It is when they dont that you have to ask if the dogs have lost their, um, credibility.

Can dogs change their ways? Or maybe hmm does an old dog get bitter when he sees the Master look to other dogs for warning barks?

Trumpit said...

"Andrew McCarthy admitted he was wrong about the FISA Court.
By extension, he admits that I was correct as were many others here.
LLR Fopdoodles and Leftist Collectivists, birm, hardest hot.
Why are the elitist, arrogant insiders like McCarthy so slow to learn?
We deplorables laugh as the scales fall from eyes.
Schiff is worthless on all accounts: incompetent, petulant, and obsequiously partisan." -Birkel

What you wrote is unintelligible, except where you correctly call yourself, and other Trump acolytes "deplorables." The first step in recovery is to admit you're addicted to Trump, and can't help yourself. Good luck!

JPS said...

That's weird, though, because for Schiff's comment to make sense, Fox would need to be in the habit / business of squelching newsworthy information to protect those in power. I've never heard of the media doing such a thing.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Now it's the opposite. CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, NYT, Wapo, and femo-rags like Vanity Fair, are ALL in the tank for the democrat party. They are State run Media. Lil' Kim would be impressed.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Some troll named Trumpit tells us we are addicted to Trump. Is that before or after the never ending shit-show butthurt party on the left?

Lance said...

@ftv2
unlike today, in 1974 BOTH political parties were interested in getting to the truth.

In fact Congressional Republicans continued to defend Nixon from impeachment until SCOTUS forced Nixon to release the White House recordings from 1972 and 1973. Only after it was obvious that Nixon had tried to use the CIA and NSA to cover up the break-in did Republicans abandon him.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Wish-fact time travel. leftists use it often.

I'm certain if we could travel back in time to the rise of the Nazis in Germany, Schiff would have been a loyal Brownshirt.

Gahrie said...

You mean the same Richard Nixon who was the father of wage-and-price controls, guaranteed income, affirmative action, the Environmental Protection Agency, and Title IX? The Nixon who set China on a path to overtake the United States in a few short years? The Nixon whose Supreme Court justices formed the backbone of the Roe v Wade decision? Barrack Obama is green with progressive envy at that record; Noam Chomsky calls Nixon "our last liberal president.”

Add on ended the Vietnam War. Looking back, it really is hard to see the Democratic Party's beef with him..he should have been their hero. It gets weirder when you look at JFK's presidency and realize that modern Democrats would have hated it.

Unknown said...

What an asshole.

-sw

Hagar said...

If Jerry Voorhis had been a Republican, Richard Nixon would have run as a Democrat in 1946, and much of our history would have been different.

Adam Schiff is anything but stupid, but he is a shyster lawyer.

Rabel said...

Schiff on Maher's show:

"Had Fox News existed and been essentially the state-run TV during the Nixon era, there might not have been an impeachment of Richard Nixon. But there is this whole echo chamber that supports whatever the president says.”

Ben Rhodes in NY Times Magazine:

Rhodes set up a team of staffers who were focused on promoting the deal, which apparently included the feeding of talking points at useful times in the news cycle to foreign policy experts who were favorably disposed toward it. “We created an echo chamber,” he told the magazine. “They [the seemingly independent experts] were saying things that validated what we had given them to say.”

Drago said...

Had the allied Greek forces not defeated the Persians at Plataea and Mycale, history might have been quite different.

Of course, the Greeks defeating the Persians is emblematic of White Patriarchal Oppression and White Supremacy.

Naturally.

tim maguire said...


Adam Schiff provides an important reality check against optimism about human nature. Like Lord Baelish, he will burn down the country to rule over its ashes.

Jim at said...

I had no idea Fox News was more powerful than ABC, NBC, CBS, NPR, New Year Times, Washington Post, et al.

Maybe I should start watching that channel.

Jim at said...

York. Year.
Whatever.

traditionalguy said...

Interestingly, Schiff for brains is the one who is about to be arrested for high crimes and misdemeanors.

There is a State Run Media. And it is all but some of Fox News. And it has supported a Deep Police State/KGB style of governance 24/7under Obama and Jarrett's orders and nowclaims Trump is not President at all and therefore will be killed by the Deep State/KGB guys any day now.

Jim at said...

What you wrote is unintelligible - Trumpit

Presented without comment.

Sam L. said...

Republicans are always accused of things the Dems actually do.

Luke Lea said...

The whole dossier thing/Russia-probe as gotten so complicated that I can't follow it anymore. But one thing seems clear: then FBI Director Comey blatantly inserted himself into the political process both before the election (twice!) and after (when he leaked a memo of his conversation with the President to his" never-Trumper" friend with stated intention of getting an independent counsel appointed). Isn't this illegal behavior for a member of the FBI? What is the law? Can the Inspector General recommend prosecution? Indeed, what are the powers of the Inspector General? We never hear.

Bay Area Guy said...

Good rule of thumb:

If Adam Schiff is upset over something political, then something good is happening.

Lewis Wetzel said...

The time for Comey to insert himself into the democratic process, while leaving the smallest possible footprint, would have been to indict Hillary over her secret email server in January 2016, before the Hillary freight train got out of the depot. The way the Democratic Party has undemocratically rigged the primary system, it was his last chance to keep them from nominating a crook.

EDH said...

Had there been Fox News channel perhaps Nixon, who won a landslide victory in 1972 anyway, might have been so far ahead in the polls by early 1972 there might not have been a Watergate break in on June 17.

In April 1971, Nixon’s approval rating fell below 50 percent for the first time in his presidency, hovering just under that for the remainder of his presidency. His disapproval rating was also closing the gap with his approval rating.

Nixon closed out 1972 with a landslide victory in the presidential election over George McGovern, but his approval ratings didn’t necessarily reflect that electoral triumph with soaring approval numbers. Through the year, his approval rating climbed slowly but steadily back over 60 percent.


See timeline graphics: https://historyinpieces.com/research/nixon-approval-ratings

exiledonmainstreet said...

I am amazed by the huge amount of power Fox News appears to wield. The mighty Fox overshadows all those puny little liberal media outlets, not to mention Hollywood, just as Koch Brothers money is far more important than the pittances thrown around by Soros and Bloomberg. I wonder why all-powerful Fox failed to keep Obama from winning two terms.

Patrick Henry was right! said...

The irony is that, had they not gone after Nixon, they would have never had to have they lunch handed to them by Reagan.

The treatment of Nixon was a catalyst for the Conservative Revival.

EDH said...

In April 1971, Nixon’s approval rating fell below 50 percent for the first time in his presidency, hovering just under that for the remainder of his presidency. His disapproval rating was also closing the gap with his approval rating.

Looking at the graph, however, that paragraph is clearly wrong. They may have meant the remainder of 1971.

virgil xenophon said...

Earnest Prole@1:29pm/

We have Nixon to thank for our very existence as a nation. W.o him there would have been NO SALT treaty essentially freezing an arms race that a left-wing maj in congress and the nation as a whole was on the verge of ceding victory to Russia by massive gutting of our military. All of those domestic programs you cite were the price (Danegeld) he had to pay to the Donkeys to preserve the armed services. W.O Nixon the Berlin wall would never have come down and the Soviet Union been broken up. Those domestic programs were a high price to pay but the gutting of our defence at a time the SU was at high tide would have been FAR worse..

Bay Area Guy said...

Y'all should read "Silent Coup" by Len Colodny. It explains Watergate without the bogus narrative. Doesn't exonerate Nixon, just explains it.

Release the FISA warrant application!

These fuckheads at the FBI/DOJ (Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Yates, Ohr) are gonna have to defend Drunk, British ex-spy Steele, his bullshit dossier, and why it was used to support the warrant to spy on Trump during the campaign.

It will be fun. Lying to a Federal Court to get warrant to eavesdrop is generally frowned upon by said Court.

Michael Guarino said...

Protip: blaming Fox News is how liberals admit defeat.

Trumpit said...

"Most Democrats are assholes. And liars. I used to think it was just some, now it's up to most." -exhelodrvr1

Thank you for contributing something witty & intelligent to the conversation. You would make a good tweet writer for classy President Trump.

bagoh20 said...

Schiff is great at playing the evil politician in this widely viewed mini-series we are living. I now get a visceral anger toward him immediately on sight or just the mention of his name. The writers did a really good job with his character development. They managed to develop a character with none at all. If this was a Batman movie, he'd have some strange physical anomaly central to his character. Maybe it's those unnerving Schiffty eyes. They scream out "evil". He's Sciffty Man - Lord of Lies.

Original Mike said...

Blogger Luke Lea said...”The whole dossier thing/Russia-probe as gotten so complicated that I can't follow it anymore.”

It’s been complicated, but as more things come out it’s becoming clearer. Andrew McCarthy’s latest is a good synopsis.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456287/grassley-graham-memo-affirms-nunes-memo-fisa-steele-dossier

Andrew McCarthy: “I spent many months assuring people that nothing like this could ever happen — that the FBI and Justice Department would not countenance the provision to the FISA court of uncorroborated allegations of heinous misconduct. When Trump enthusiasts accused them of rigging the process, I countered that they probably had not even used the Steele dossier. If the Justice Department had used it in writing a FISA warrant application, I insisted that the FBI would independently verify any important facts presented to the court, make any disclosures that ought in fairness be made so the judge could evaluate the credibility of the sources, and compellingly demonstrate probable cause before alleging that an American was a foreign agent.

I was wrong.”

The collusion narrative is in shambles.

This is my shocked face.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Peggy Noonan wrote today in the WSJ:
"You can't really blackmail Donald Trump on personal conduct because nothing said about him would surprise or shock."

Is this really true? Nothing is a big word.

Lewis Wetzel said...

I suppose what Schiff meant was that if Nixon had been impeached, and Fox News had existed back in 1974, than Nixon might not have been impeached.
Thank God we have "politically incorrect" entertainers like Maher who will allow Schiff to speak gibberish to power!

Lewis Wetzel said...

Maybe what Schiff meant to say that was that without FBI deputy directory Mark Felt's illegal leaks, Nixon might not have had to resign.

FIDO said...

Shiffted to Intelligability

First, assume a media outlet overly friendly to Republicans

Second, assume they are a dictatorial media monopoly ala Pravda, NoKo, or...the hold that ABC, CBS or NBC had on the media. (the only issue is that these outlets were NOT friendly to Republicans even then)

Third, assume all the Republicans who refused to cover for Nixon were partisan assholes like Schiff

And voila! Yes, Nixon wouldn't have been indicted if the Republicans and the State News covered for Nixon like Democrats and the Media covered for Clinton.

Oso Negro said...

If Nixon had been a Democrat, he would also not have been impeached.

bagoh20 said...

When I watch pundits on the non-FOX networks, they are constantly describing a Trump and an administration that I don't see even remotely close to the truth. I watch the same man and his people that they do. I hear the same words, see the same policies, and I don't know who they are describing. It's an imaginary world in the fever swap of their fear and anger.

Now FOX is clearly in the tank for Trump, but they at least describe real people, policies and motivations, even if it is a mostly biased line of support. I at least recognize the person they are talking about.

It would be nice to have an unbiased source out there, but there really isn't one. It probably wouldn't do well in the ratings anyway. I mean, who wants that?

Lewis Wetzel said...

Bagoh20 wrote:
"If this was a Batman movie, he'd have some strange physical anomaly central to his character."
Most people do not realize this, but Adam Schiff is just four feet three inches tall.

rcocean said...

Nixon lost because he was born loser & a Republican "pragmatist".

As a result, he surrounded himself with liberals like John Dean - who stabbed him the back the first chance he got. He should have pardoned everyone. Instead he sat back and let all his subordinates take the fall. He seems to have - stupidly - believed the SCOTUS was going to save him.

There were conservative news outlets in the 1970s. They had no impact on Watergate. Fox News would've had no impact.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

Had NBC, CBS, ABC, and the New York Times not existed, or not been essentially propaganda arms of the Democratic Party, there might not have been a President Barak Obama.

News of the hypothetical. Bleh.

Earnest Prole said...

We have Nixon to thank for our very existence as a nation. W.o him there would have been NO SALT treaty essentially freezing an arms race that a left-wing maj in congress and the nation as a whole was on the verge of ceding victory to Russia by massive gutting of our military.

Without the SALT treaty the Soviets would have capitulated in half the time it eventually took them to capitulate; we later realized we had grossly overestimated the size of the Soviet economy, and it had been at a tipping point for years. And there was zero chance of America's military being gutted: Military spending in those days was driven by Democrats whose overwhelming ideology was delivering jobs for their constituents. Call it a lost world.

madAsHell said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Left Bank of the Charles said...

Republcans had enough votes in the U.S. Senate to acquit Nixon on a party line basis. They lost 4 seats in the 1974 election but would have had to lose 5 more. When those terms were up in 1980, they won 12 back. So, in terms of political strategy, the resignation of Richard Nixon benefitted Republicans. If Bill Clinton had resigned, Hillary Clinton might be President today.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Fox News' highest rated program is Hannity. The show attracts a little over 3 million viewers per episode. That is about 1% of the US population.

madAsHell said...

Here's Adam Schiff when he was a member of SNL

"Yeah.....that's the ticket!"

bagoh20 said...

""You can't really blackmail Donald Trump on personal conduct because nothing said about him would surprise or shock.""

I don't think anyone really believed the pissing hooker story, although many wanted to believe it so very much.

The Left and some others can't really fathom that a villain as evil as Trump is a hard-working family man who just loves his work and his country, a very common type of man. That he doesn't get drunk, smoke, do drugs, rape, pillage, or strangle puppies seems impossible to them.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

bagoh20 said...
I don't think anyone really believed the pissing hooker story,


Let's say it was true. After Stormy Daniels I think it is fair to say that amongst his supporters no one is going to care any way and amongst his detractors it is already factored into their opinion of him. But there must be some limits. What would those limits look like?

Lewis Wetzel said...

Uh . . . you know Daniels and Trump deny the story, don't you, ARM?

Birkel said...

Trumpit,
Your inability to understand comes from an active decision to blinker yourself. I cannot help you. Help yourself.

Andrew McCarthy was wrong.
The commenters here were and are correct.
The Leftist Collectivists remain fools.

TWW said...

CNN and MSNBC exist. The Justice Department and FBI are in the tank. Will Obama cand Clinton be indicted?

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Denials with a NDA don't mean a lot.

Birkel said...

ARM,
And let us hypothetically pretend at your reasonableness.
Now what?

walter said...

Pissgate sounds like something Maher would be into.

Birkel said...

ARM,
When you assume the truth and the reason you cannot know the truth simultaneously, all things are possible.

Can you try just a little bit?

Gk1 said...

Andrew McCarthy admitting he was wrong

"I spent many months assuring people that nothing like this could ever happen — that the FBI and Justice Department would not countenance the provision to the FISA court of uncorroborated allegations of heinous misconduct. When Trump enthusiasts accused them of rigging the process, I countered that they probably had not even used the Steele dossier. If the Justice Department had used it in writing a FISA warrant application, I insisted that the FBI would independently verify any important facts presented to the court, make any disclosures that ought in fairness be made so the judge could evaluate the credibility of the sources, and compellingly demonstrate probable cause before alleging that an American was a foreign agent. I was wrong."

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456287/grassley-graham-memo-affirms-nunes-memo-fisa-steele-dossier

buwaya said...

I wonder.

You can call Trump a sinner, as he certainly is; you can call him a womanizer, which is well supported by his record; you can call him annoying, which he certainly can be to some people, who have a genuine nails-on-blackboard reaction to him apparently; you can call him a noveau riche boor, which is fair; you can decry his business ethics, which may be fair too.

But in the end all of these are private defects. They are not even the separate alleged crimes that the Clintons were investigated for, as these all happened while they were government officials or were implicated in government business.

He was not representing the people or conducting public business in any of his prior career. You can complain that these personal qualities should have precluded him from being hired for the job in the first place, but the time for that complaint was during the election.

The proper and legitimate area of criticism for the man, now, are his acts as a public official.

Anything else is mere propaganda.

Gk1 said...

Isn't it funny what an outsized influence "Faux news" has on liberals in this country? 1 arguably conservative channel that has the temerity to buck the liberal conventional wisdom is a threat. Its not enough they have ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN,CNBC,MSNBC, The NYT, WASHPO. Yet this one cable channel can effect the tides and could have saved Nixon had it existed in the 70's. Who knew?

TestTube said...

Good question ARM!

As a first approximation of this limit, let's use Hillary, because indeed, a lot of people who voted for Trump (including me) did so because the alternative was Hillary. Now, I know a lot of people who I respect looked at that situation and voted Hillary, but we are talking about the limit for his supporters, and me specifically.

But it is reasonable to think that Hillary was Beyond the limit. That is, there would be a hypothetical candidate slightly less awful than Hillary, that still would be less desirable than Trump. For me at least, that would be Bernie Sanders, who was somewhat more honest, ethical and scandal-free, but whose politics and executive capability still put him beyond the pale.

So, can we think of a Democratic Party candidate that Trump supporters WOULD have held their noses and voted for? For me, probably Sebelius, Schumer, O'Malley, Boxer, Feinstein, DEFINITELY Webb.

Can we cut it any finer? Bev Purdue, yes. Muriel Bowser, mmmmaybe. Nancy Pelosi, no.

One final caveat: That was Nov 2016. Now? Whole new game. I would vote for Trump instead of everyone of the above except, maybe, Jim Webb.

Francisco D said...

Schiff reeks of desperation. He's a cheesy salesman desperate to make a sale - of something, anything, any way he can.

The shit is going to hit the fan, so the leftist troops have to rally. Unfortunately for them, there are a lot of stale old plays in their playbook.

wildswan said...

The highest levels of the intelligence community colluded with Russians against the elected President of the United States because they preferred Hillary Clinton. They warned the President - we've been at this since 1908, you have only been at this for a few months. Give in. But ... the United States has been a democracy since 1781. The oldest democracy in the world elected Donald Trump. We of the democracy can spare a few high level officials whose names we don't know better than we can spare our democracy. So, give up, high officials whose names we don't know. To us you are simply an outline of a new type of abuse of power for (I feel sure in advance) the same old reasons - ambition and /or greed. It's not Top Secret or beyond that these things happen around the Clintons. The country won't fall if the truth about your ambition and greed and the use made of it by the Clintons comes out. As is happening. Suggested prison reading: The Dreyfus Case.

Michael K said...

Nixon lost because he was born loser & a Republican "pragmatist".

Nixon lost because he was, above all else, a patriot. In 1960, William Rogers told him that he had enough evidence of vote fraud by the Kennedy/Johnson team that he could have the election result challenged and probably reversed.

Nixon declined because he thought such a controversy would damage the country when the USSR was the enemy.

Teddy White explained that he thought that the Democrats would give him credit and ignore the "third rate burglary."

White was wrong the hatred was too intense.

Imagine if Nixon had won in 1960. Probably no Vietnam because Nixon was too wary to get into that swamp.

Our history would be very different.

n.n said...

JournoListic leverage? ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, PRI, NPR, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Obama spied, Clinton colluded, and the DNC denied the nomination to the Jew.

The collusion was not with Russia proper, but with anti-Putin, probably Soviet-relic factions. Obama et al hoped to force a coup in Russia, as they did in Libya, Syria, Ukraine, etc. Part of the clean, green social justice adventure that includes CAIR, trail of tears, and mass abortion fields. Disenfranchising Americans may have been a means to and end, or the twilight dream of aborting the baby and allowing her life, too.

Darkisland said...

Buwaya,

In what sense is President Trump a sinner?

We are all sinners. Is president trump more of one than the rest of us?

I think I'm missing something

John Henry

Comanche Voter said...

Sad to say I live in Adam Schiff's Congressional district. The man has an undergraduate degree from Harvard and a law degree from Stanford. He was a young and ambitious assistant US Attorney on the make for some elective office when I first ran across him at a public meeting. He is intelligent (although the slanted bafflegab and junk he comes up every day continues to amaze me). He is beloved in liberal Los Angeles---today an LA Times columnist gave him a slobbering Lewinsky in print--happens all the time.

But in pursuit of political power Schiff is simply a a snake. He'll say and do whatever it takes. Think of him as a smarter Anthony Weiner.

Michael K said...

The highest levels of the intelligence community colluded with Russians against the elected President of the United States because they preferred Hillary Clinton.

True but there is another theory that involves Brennan.

Let’s concentrate, for a moment, on the Director of the CIA, and how he spent the last half of 2016. Here’s a timeline:

• In July 2016, Brennan, according to his own testimony, initiated the Russia investigation and pushed the FBI to get on the case.

• In early August 2016, Brennan briefed Obama on Russian interference. He explained that Putin’s explicit purpose is to aid Trump. That assessment, according to the Washington Post story describing the meetings, was not yet endorsed by other intelligence agencies, including the FBI.

• In late August, Brennan briefed congressional leaders on the same topic. The briefings, according to a New York Times report, “reveal a critical split last summer between the C.I.A. and counterparts at the F.B.I., where a number of senior officials continued to believe through last fall that Russia’s cyber-attacks were aimed primarily at disrupting America’s political system, and not at getting Mr. Trump elected.


It's a long read but very interesting.

Brennan is an odd duck and probably a Saudi agent.

Mark said...

Comparing the two --

Back in the Nixon days, there was a Deep State within the government that was aligned with the MSM. Both detested the duly-elected president, blamed him for things his predecessor did wrong (e.g. Vietnam was all Nixon's fault), and sought to undermine him. When they saw an opening, they even moved to get him thrown out of office.

Nixon knew this of course. As for the break-in, the Nixon gang was a bunch of screw-ups who couldn't do anything right, much less engage in the nefarious vast right-wing conspiracy that they were accused of - a narrative made up out of whole cloth. But try explaining that to the anti-Nixoners throughout the culture, MSM, Dems, academia, etc., who were hell bent to get him.

Nixon knew he could never explain this stupid break-in -- whatever it was really for -- and that he had nothing to do with it when he later learned about it. He reasoned -- as today's FBI, DOJ, NSA, etc. are now with their own malfeasance -- that it was better to keep it quiet in order to maintain respect for the institution, etc.

One of Nixon's problems was that, for all his personality quirks that made him come off as creepy and unlikeable, he was basically a decent guy. So instead of fighting, he fell on his sword.

bagoh20 said...

How are all these "journalists" going to deal with not only missing the biggest investigative story of their lives, but actively suppressing it? The rest of your life is a long time to be discredited, ashamed, wrong, and bad at the career you have chosen. I guess there is always Dancing with the Stars, game shows and other backup work for has-beens.

You can still do pretty well even when completely discredited in that business. Brian Williams (who might remember being beheaded by ISIS once) still had a place to go: Anchor on MSNBC. Where else, of course.

MadisonMan said...

Imagine if Nixon had won in 1960

Mary Jo Kopechne would be a doting grandmother.

Michael McNeil said...

there was an impeachment proceeding, and Nixon would have been impeached if he hadn't resigned.

Big deal! Bill Clinton was impeached. It didn’t reduce his time in office by a day.

Would Nixon have been convicted by the Senate (by a two-thirds vote!) if he had vigorously contested the charges? In retrospect it seems doubtful.

Mark said...

With Nixon you had Donald Segretti, a bunch of hapless Cubans, and a batty secretary. The Nixon side of Watergate was a joke. The DS, MSM, Dem side of it was revolutionary coup time.

Mark said...

If Nixon had been a Democrat, he would also not have been impeached.

If Nixon had been a Democrat, the Dems, MSM, etc. would have seen all this as "business as usual" and it would have never seen the light of day. Next to LBJ, Nixon was a putz.

Bruce Hayden said...

“The highest levels of the intelligence community colluded with Russians against the elected President of the United States because they preferred Hillary Clinton. ”

Not actually sure anymore that the Russians were involved at all. Looking more and more, to me, like the idea of Russian and involvement is what really mattered, and that the actual dirt came from either illegal 702 database searches and/or Crooked Hillary operatives like Darth Blumenthal. The information was then laundered through Simpson and Fusion, to make the opposition research look like an intelligence product so that it could be used for a Title I warrant.

Kansas Scout said...

The Nixon watergate event was a media driven, legal coup to oust Nixon who himself had done little more than circle the wagons. Yes he was part of a cover up of a minor breakin. This was hardly worth impeachment and think of what LBJ had done prior? Or J Edgar Hoover? Nixon was a saint compared to them.

Darrell said...

If Fox was around then, there would be no Adam Schiff.
There'd be something to watch on TV.

Howard said...

Virgil and Earnest: Both of what you guys say about Nixon I generally agree with. About SALT, it may have prolonged the cold war, but it did give the cornered rat breathing room, so we don't know if the Soviets would have lashed out if the US continued to paint them in. There's a ton of truth in Dr Strangelove and Stones' "Nixon".

Darrell said...

Russians were never involved. Beyond the normal shit that they've been doing since the end of WWII.

Mark said...

Anyone else noticing that in some of the newer documentaries that include LBJ, they have lots and lots and lots of tape recordings of him on telephone calls and conversations with people? And do you hear anyone saying, "Hey, wait a minute"?

But disclosure of the Nixon taping system ignited a furor of outrage.

Mike Smyth said...

So, Adam, how's the "let's buy dirt on Trump" effort going? How much cash have you given the Russkies?

Drago said...

That Mueller Team really seems to have interest in that Flynn guy, haven't they?

I wonder why that might be?.....

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

buwaya said...
The proper and legitimate area of criticism for the man, now, are his acts as a public official.


This is a bit of a dodge since he only just became a public official. It would be good to think about this independent of the Clintons, who have a strangely intense hold on minds here.

Noonan's claim is:
"You can't really blackmail Donald Trump on personal conduct because nothing said about him would surprise or shock."

I think this is bullshit, not just hyperbole, but actual bullshit since she seems to believe it. But it does raise the question what conduct would be too much for his supporters. There must be something.

Bay Area Guy said...

@Michael K,

"White was wrong the hatred was too intense."

And the hatred was intense, because Nixon kicked their asses, winning a 49-state epic landslide in 1972.

The Dems couldn't beat Nixon at the ballot box, so they ginned up the "lawfare" approach.

Francisco D said...

Leftists had their knives out for Nixon since the Alger Hiss trial.

Leftists had their knives out for any Republican nominee because there was a chance Hillary could lose.

Trump was not my first, second or third choice. However, I am glad that I voted for him because he fights the leftist swamp.

If he turns out to be a better than average POTUS, that will be a bonus.

Birkel said...

ARM:
Would the intelligence apparatus of the U.S. government being weaponized against an opposition political opponent be too much for you?

Why does this Trump fellow, who has a strangely intense hold on so many Leftist Collectivists, lead so many Leftist Collectivists to ignore civil rights violations?

David said...

Ridiculous comment. But par for the course.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Drudge seems to be developing some doubts. After playing up the stock market dips he now links to this article by Maureen Dowd.

Dowd's column does answer Noonan's question but it doesn't mean much since she was never a supporter.


FIDO said...

When your first assumption is a state controlled media (and the concurrent dictatorship necessary for said controlled media) you are already in territory which is intellectually ridiculous. Of course a dictator wouldn't be ousted by Watergate: he's a dictator!

But will Maher actually make a salient or intellectually vigorous point? Has he recently?

FIDO said...

The average POTUS is already pretty bad, so that bar isn't particularly high.

Birkel said...

ARM thanks independent thinking from news aggregators is a bad thing.

He doesn't have to worry about Leftists in the MSM developing that habit.

Hari said...

Translation: Trump will not be impeached because of Fox News. It's not like congress makes these decisions based on evidence.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Leftist believe what they want to believe. It's a hivemind.

Hooker pee story is true, because wishes. It just makes SOOOO much sense. I mean really, come on! The gorilla show, Story Daniels, Trump is having an affair with Nicki Hailey. It's all true and the entire debunked dossier is true too - especially the hooker pee story.

Wishfacts is realz.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

It's instructive that the Republican Anti-Fact Squad assembled here today react so angrily and without any substantive counter-argument. They are the foot soldiers of visceral hatred and falsehood who apparently found no other purpose than to swear absolute loyalty and aid and comfort to the most obvious tyrant and traitor in office since Andrew Johnson.

Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said...

ABT: But it does raise the question what conduct would be too much for his supporters. There must be something.

This is a meaningful question only if you're operating from the same bullshit, not hyperbolic, premise as Noonan. There is nothing uniquely awful or corrupt about Trump, relative to any other American politician, not in degree, and certainly not in kind.

No law against trying to persuade yourself of your own bullshit articles of faith, ABT, but please, that's between you and your god. It's a bit embarrassing watching you air your anguished delusions in public.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Sometimes Dowd is unreadable.

Dowd did not like or trust Hillary. But now she's playing blame the deplorables.

Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said...

Birkel: ARM thanks independent thinking from news aggregators is a bad thing.

More like ARM thinking news aggregators aggregating news is a bad thing.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Translation: Trump needs to let Brownshirt peons like schiffty-D take him down using lies and democrat party corruption.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

President Trump is merely a costume away from resembling a full-fledged dictator following reports of his planned military parade, comedian Bill Maher quipped during Friday’s episode of his weekly HBO program.

“We put together a ‘dictator checklist’ last year right around this time,” Mr. Maher said during Friday’s broadcast. “It’s pretty scary. And now with the military parades, he had 8 out of 10. Now he he’s gonna have 9 out of 10.”

The “Real Time with Bill Maher” host went on to rattle off a list of qualities Mr. Trump shares with foreign dictators.

“You’re a narcissist who likes to put your name or face on buildings; appoint family members to positions of power; rallies — who has rallies after the election is over?” Mr. Maher said.

“You hate the press and use your own propaganda outlet — Fox, ‘state TV,’ I call it,” Mr. Maher continued. “Missile parades; you use your office for you own personal financial gain; align with other dictators and strongmen; claim minorities are the cause of problems in this country; and you lie so freely that people don’t know what the truth is anymore.”

“The last one, the one he hasn’t done: military costume,” Mr. Maher concluded.

Rabel said...

"With Nixon you had Donald Segretti, a bunch of hapless Cubans, and a batty secretary."

There was nothing "batty" about Rose Mary Woods.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Sometimes Dowd is unreadable.

Dowd did not like or trust Hillary.


The single, two-dimensional criterion you have for deciding anything to do with anyone's value or character in life.

Sounds pretty limiting. Good thing you're not very interested in any facts beyond whatever political tribe you belong to and fixate on figuring out how you will advance it in every minute of every day.

Trump loyalists seriously need a fucking rabies shot. They are foaming at the mouth.

Francisco D said...

"Drudge seems to be developing some doubts. "

Drudge gets a lot of hits because he goes with the current gossip.

It's a business.


Is Ritmo awake? Don't let him hijack the thread.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

TTR - You sort of shot your own point when you said "Trump loyalists"

I'm not a Trump loyalist.

The hivemind left have yet to purge the corrupt Hillary from the ranks. Until you do, you own her.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

North Korea is a cruel tin-pot leftwing hell hole.

NBC trying hard to sweep that fact under the rug for the Olympics.

Drago said...

When I want to demonstrate my deep intellectual and philosophical bona fides I always reach into my bag and pull out the most persuasive Bill Maher quote I can find.

After all, he's a comedian. On HBO. Not Starz or Showtime. HBO

Drago said...

ARM: "After playing up the stock market dips he now links to this article by Maureen Dowd."

Drudge has only been linking to pretty much every established news organization for 23 years along with their columnists.

But it's only been 23 years, so I can understand your confusion.

Curious George said...

"Gk1 said...
Andrew McCarthy admitting he was wrong"

Yeah, and while being wrong our resident dullard, #IngaKnew, copy and pasted his articles over and over and over. Do you think she will post this mea culpa? The over/under is "no fucking way."

Browndog said...

Kim Jung Un's sister is stealing the show at the Winter Olympics. N. Korea's Ivanka, says CNN.

I wonder how Bill Maher sees it. Any quotes?

Oso Negro said...

At just this moment, a lady reporter/opinion leader/Democrat plant on Fox News went nuts because Trump didn't denounce violence against women, the most important issue ever.

PackerBronco said...

And if Nixon had been a Democrat, nothing would have been done because the media would've ignored the story and the Dems would've protected the potus if the story had come out.

Michael K said...

A nice essay by John Updike on why he supported the Vietnam War but did not expect to have his opinion on the front page of the NY Times.

The protest, from my perspective, was in large part a snobbish dismissal of Johnson by the Eastern establishment; Cambridge professors and Manhattan lawyers and their guitar-strumming children thought they could run the country and the world better than this lugubrious bohunk from Texas. These privileged members of a privileged nation believed that their pleasant position could be maintained without anything visibly ugly happening in the world. They were full of aesthetic disdain for their own defenders, the business-suited hirelings drearily pondering geopolitics and its bloody necessities down in Washington. The protesters were spitting on the cops who were trying to keep their property—the USA and its many amenities—intact. A common report in this riotous era was of slum-dwellers throwing rocks and bottles at the firemen come to put out fires; the peace marchers, the upper-middle-class housewives pushing baby carriages along in candlelit processions, seemed to me to be behaving identically, without the excuse of being slum-dwellers.

Sound familiar ? It does to me.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

North Korea is a cruel tin-pot leftwing hell hole.

You got that right. And if you'd said "shithole," you'd've gotten it righter.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I'm not a Trump loyalist.

The hivemind left...


Let me know what you disagree with/oppose him on whenever you're ready.

Bay Area Guy said...

Funny, you don't hear too many folks defending the bullshit Steele Dossier these days.....

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

They are not defending it, but deep down they know it's true. Katy Turd wish-facts and feelz.

Bay Area Guy said...

I mean here's the problem. If the Steele Dossier is composed of 3rd party hearsay from anonymous Russia sources that existed primarily in in the head of highly paid, drunk, British ex-spy Christopher Steele, and then you use such "salacious and unverified" Dossier to con a judge into issuing a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign, you may have a problem.

Just sayin'

Sebastian said...

I understand anything goes in progland. But even by prog "standards," you'd think Schiff word be slightly embarrassing. I know, I know, any prog starts salivating at the mere mention of Faux News, but still.

But the fact that someone like Schiff gets all this airtime gives me perverse hope and pleasure. With opponents like that, we've always got a chance.

Lem said...

This is his way of saying 'impeach trump' without saying 'impeach trump'.

Lem said...

Nixon was not impeached btw.

Carol said...

I keep looking for real overarching motives. It seemed at the time that underneath it all, Watergate was ultimately a way to end the war in Vietnam by other means. Granted, they hated Nixon anyway.

Overall, the effort to get rid of Trump is, what exactly? A way to get balls-to-the-wall immigration? I can't believe they care that much about it. What is the real goal?

Is it still all about protecting Roe v Wade?

Browndog said...

Bay Area Guy said...

...you may have a problem.


It hasn't been thus far. Between the MSM and an impotent Attorney General, I don't see that changing.

Unknown said...

> might not have been an impeachment

you say that like its a bad thing

Browndog said...

Carol said...

I keep looking for real overarching motives. It seemed at the time that underneath it all, Watergate was ultimately a way to end the war in Vietnam by other means.


Nixon had already ended the war. Thinking the left wanted the war over is your first mistake.

Telling millions of energetic young people their highly effective social movement is now over--put away your signs and your anger and go about your lives is not what they had in mind; still isn't.

MikeR said...

"Had CNN existed — and been essentially the state-run TV — during the Clinton era, there might not have been an successful impeachment of Bill Clinton."

wildswan said...

It's my opinion that before and after the election "The highest levels of the intelligence community colluded with Russians against the elected President of the United States because they preferred Hillary Clinton." Some would argue that the highest levels of the intelligence community did not collude with "Russians" but with Sid Vicious because they preferred Hillary Clinton. Just wondering which is worse to think happened: colluding with Sid or with "Russians." The Russian Connection would be treason but at least there is an idea there. Colluding with Sid suggests quid pro quo's, the only reason for action he knows.

Bay Area Guy said...


"Nixon had already ended the war. Thinking the left wanted the war over is your first mistake"

The Left was particularly pissed that we bombed the North and Cambodia as tactics to end the war. So, to the Left, anything short of our unilateral withdrawal, was not cause for celebration.

Molly said...

I realize that I'm so far down the comment chain, most people will never read this. But in the comments here (and generally in internet comments on these issues) there is a "which side are you on" mentality. And that is ridiculous. You don't have to choose between being "Pro trump" and "anti-nixon". In my opinion, Nixon should have been removed from office because he used (or attempting to use) the power of the federal government to influence the outcome of an election. And Obama should have been removed from office (or his historical reputation should be devastated) because he used (or attempted to use) the power of the federal government to influence the outcome of an election. And (though this is yet to be proven) Trump perhaps should be removed from office if it is shown that he used or attempted to use the power of a foreign (enemy) government to influence the outcome of an election. And (if anyone still wants to go here) Hillary Clinton should have her historical reputation devoted because she attempted to use (or have others in her sphere of influence use) both the federal government and the power of a foreign government to influence the outcome of an election.

My point is: this is not a Dems-right/Reps-wrong or Reps-right/Dems-wrong discussion. We need to condemn all attempts to undermine the constitutional process.

Molly said...

"historical reputation devastated" not "historical reputation devoted" (damn you spell check)

Unknown said...

> without FBI deputy directory Mark Felt's illegal leaks, Nixon might not have had to resign.

This is the apt analogy...

Embedded spies working their interests

The real news is that secret court judges are rubber stamps

Browndog said...

The real news is that secret court judges are rubber stamps

Not really news. No one cared; FISC was a tool to take down foreign terrorists, they said.

Using it to take down a sitting President is.....news.

Char Char Binks said...

Is Russia our enemy? Just since the collapse of the Soviet Union, or have we always been at war with Eurasia?

Darkisland said...

Carol,

It's not about immigration, foreign policy, fiscal issues or anything like that.

The get President Trump out exercise is about keeping the gravy train on the tracks.

Everybody has a share. Teachers, college administrators, politicians, politicians helpers and aids, regulators, city state and federal employees, crony capitalists...

The list goes on forever. President Trump represents a serious threat to the gravy.

THAT'S why they are so desperate.

John Henry

bolivar di griz said...

I think the democrats used a disgruntled bureaucrat like felt, to overturn an election, and this had a number of spillover effects, because Nixon was weak, sadat pushed further toward Israel, the response created the Arab lilshock, which created an irrational exuberance in both the kingdom and Iran, this led to the mahdist movement in the former and the ayatollah pushing for the latter. Would the push to dismantle our security services have had lesser impact, perhaps no fisa. The soviet's Dont move on Afghanistan, bin laden stays at the family firm.

Unknown said...

Schiff would prefer that only Democratic-supporting media exist. He is a totalitarian at heart.

bolivar di griz said...

Those are just some of the butterfly effects.

richard mcenroe said...

That statement says more about Schiff, Democrats and the "mainstream" media than it says about Fox or Nixon.

Browndog said...

Char Char Binks said...

Is Russia our enemy? Just since the collapse of the Soviet Union, or have we always been at war with Eurasia?


The war is between collectivism/subjugate vs individualism/liberty.

The names and locations change, the struggle remains the same.

Mark said...

I keep looking for real overarching motives.

Sometimes leftist revolutionaries looking to overthrow the existing order are simply doing things for revolutionary purposes to overthrow the existing order. The motive behind it all is that Nixon was in power and they were not.

Mark said...

Nixon should have been removed from office because he used (or attempting to use) the power of the federal government to influence the outcome of an election.

Except that it is nearly universally accepted that he did not because he did not need to because he was certain to crush McGovern and because nearly everyone accepts that he didn't know anything about the break-in until after it happened. And exactly what was the reason behind the break-in is still a matter of dispute.

Richard Dillman said...

The North Koreans have somehow managed to cure obesity.

walter said...

Carol said...Overall, the effort to get rid of Trump is, what exactly? A way to get balls-to-the-wall immigration? I can't believe they care that much about it. What is the real goal?
--
They care about their votes..

MaxedOutMama said...

Do they really want to convince people of that? That it was all about image?

Because I remember watching the Congressional hearings regarding the break-in and the WH/admin response. Everyone did. I'm sure if it happened today we'd be watching a lot them on Fox News.

Not only do I think the claim is false, I think it is bizarre for someone arguing against Trump's presidency and for the Democratic position (Trump is evil and kills people while committing treason) to be making a statement that implies Nixon's impeachment was about the OPTICS rather than deeds.

Browndog said...

-Nixon ordered the break in of Watergate because he was afraid of losing the election.

-Yea, but Nixon would have won that election handily.

-Just goes to show he was a manic paranoid, unfit for office.

-Yea, but he didn't, and didn't even know about it.

-Dosens't matter. Nixon was a manic paranoid, unfit for office. Impeach him.

PB said...

How could there not have been massive laughter?

Bob said...

Michael McNeil said,

"Would Nixon have been convicted by the Senate (by a two-thirds vote!) if he had vigorously contested the charges? In retrospect it seems doubtful."

Are you kidding? As impeachment proceedings advanced in the House, and the "smoking gun" tape became public, Nixon's support among Republican senators went down the tubes. Barry Goldwater was among a handful of Republicans who went to see Nixon and told President he had almost no support and Goldwater himself would probably vote to convict on abuse of power. Nixon's only remaining supporters were basically his daughters. Nixon resigned because he was sure to be removed from office.

Fritz said...

Today Nixon would just get a FISA warrant on the DNC. Why use amateur spies when you can use the real thing?

Michael K said...

"-Nixon ordered the break in of Watergate because he was afraid of losing the election."

This is nonsense. I doubt he had any idea of it being done. One pretty good theory is that it was John Dean who set it up because he was concerned about his wife, Maureen's History of being an "escort" in DC.

Nixon's mistake was loyalty to underlings who did not deserve it. The Clintons or Obama would never have made such a mistake as they have zero loyalty to underlings.

narciso said...

The problem with Nixon is he wasn't paranoid enough, the Pentagon spy ring, as well as felt, the first because of detente the second because of anger at being overlooked (I've noted the irony about felt)

PackerBronco said...

If it wasn't for Drudge, the Monica Lewinsky story would never have been printed and Clinton would never had been impeached.

eddie willers said...

Nixon's mistake was loyalty to underlings who did not deserve it.

If it hadn't crossed the street and reached into John Mitchell's office, he would have left them to fend for themselves.

Birkel said...

ARM c!aims the non-Leftists make no argument. Projection is the best tool Leftists have. It is so preposterous, so brazen.

Not a single Leftist appears ready to admit the Obama Administration likely used the intelligence apparatus of the U.S.government to spy on an opposition party candidate. Not one seems willing to consider the possibility. Not one concedes that if a small portion of what is alleged is true, that this is a scandal unequaled in American history.

The Left cares only about power. That proposition explains the entirety of the reaction to the Dossier/FBI lying scandal.

Clyde said...

*facepalm*

Shifty Schiff must have flunked his college school history course. There WAS NO impeachment of Nixon! He resigned from office before he could be impeached. Schiff really has no excuse, because he's the same age that I am and was in junior high school during Watergate, and thus was old enough to know what was going on.

Clyde said...

And liberal, please! Give me a break! In Shifty Schiff's counterfactual of having Fox News defending Nixon, there would have been CNN, MSNBC, and all of the networks still going after him. If anything, Nixon would have been even more besieged by the enemy media than he was if the current media environment had existed in 1974.

Roy Lofquist said...

Blogger Char Char Binks said...

Is Russia our enemy? Just since the collapse of the Soviet Union, or have we always been at war with Eurasia?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4EkQfXtheg

"I’ve learned to hate Russians
All through my whole life
If another war starts
It’s them we must fight
To hate them and fear them
To run and to hide
And accept it all bravely
With God on my side

Bob Dylan, "With God on Our Side", 1964

Guildofcannonballs said...

Did a search for "PBS" and found this:

"JournoListic leverage? ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, PRI, NPR, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera."

The way I see it, n.n is more close to God than I.

I don't know what Althouse has that has attracted this, and I don't want any of that attractiveness appropriated to me for various reasons, one of which is that I am a man.

PBS can say no such thing, as the United States fundy-runned, much-not-needed-federal-funding-compared-to-any-other-existing-or-potentially-existing-dingus'-dingussing money that ought be spent on woke tranny racially-NOT-WHITE-(or-Asian-wink-wink) sexually new personages.

GRW3 said...

After all the nefarious doings in the Clinton and Obama years there is a word for the Republicans that did the right thing with Nixon. The word is Rubes.

n.n said...

n.n is more close to God than I

If only, and perhaps I am, but that knowledge is not forthcoming. I'm trying to keep it logical and rational, and reconciling imperatives to reach a conclusion that is internally, externally, and mutually consistent. An approach that seems to work inside the limited frame of reference, or, specifically, a separation of logical domains, constructed for the purpose.

n.n said...

Is Russia our enemy? Just since the collapse of the Soviet Union

A conflation of principals that is derivative of Soviet-era relics.

Russia is a competing interest in the sense of "50 state laboratories", or it could be. There is a principled alignment with Western civilization.

n.n said...

The Left cares only about power

In the American framework, they care about consolidating capital and control, wealth and power. In short: leverage to defeat or manage competing interests. Case in point: color diversity, political congruence, stoking sex conflicts, witch trials, redistributive change, excessive immigration, Establishment of Church (i.e. Pro-Choice and twilight fringe), and monopolies and practices (e.g. single-payer, [national] leverage schemes).

Guildofcannonballs said...

TOO MANY WHITES AT PBS FOR THE HYPOCRISY TO WITHSTAND SCRUTINY; PURGE NOW!

BURN THE DATA, DOUSE THE DATA, EAT ALL THAT DATA, SHOVE IT IN DEEP HOLES LIKE IN A MINE OR SOMETHING (i don't know nothin' 'bout no minin'), MUSK IT TO SPACE, WHIRLI BYRD IT, TIZE MO' HIP IT, SCRIPTED DRIFT FLIP IT: just get the whites out please?

It is too visible to be fair, all those whites with all those perks.

How can the government fund a racist, white-dominated group like PBS/NPR and WHY DON'T YOU RACIST FUCK's HERE CARE????????

?!?!/!

Yancey Ward said...

This sort thing is what is killing satire and parody. It is literally impossible to parody someone like Schiff.

Guildofcannonballs said...

My math says that if it isn't eliminated, that for the next 200 years, plus 378 years of interest built-up, means that in approximately 578 years another white can work at PBS/NPR.

They all gotta go. Now. Justice has been delayed for TWO/TOO many centuries. It has been denied. No longer. NO WHITES AT PUBLIC BROADCASTING OR NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO OR ANY LOCAL AFFILIATES.

For 578 years, because you know why. You know.

chickelit said...

Because CNN existed — and was essentially the state-run TV especially overseas — during the Obama era, there was no impeachment of Barack Obama.





chickelit said...

Was Nixon's demise -- and Althouse's obvious relish in bringing him down -- just baby boomers' posturing and lashing out at the 1950s?

chickelit said...

I was born in 1960. Althouse has, elsewhere, excluded my cohort (and younger ones) from the vaunted title of "baby boomer" -- or at least authentic "baby boomer." This used to offend me. But now she can have her incredibly shrinking cohort title until death do we part.

Breezy said...

What’s the score now? How many fbi/doj demoted or gone for their involvement in this fake scandal scandal vs how many Trump surrogates in jeopardy for something related to actual Russian collusion in the election?

Seems Mueller is doing a fine job cleaning house at fbi/Doj. If only he would indict them as well.

Kevin said...

Fox News never has to advertise. Liberals everywhere can't stop talking about it.

Whatever they don't like that is happening in the world, Fox News is at the center.

It's so much shorter than saying "vast right-wing conspiracy".

Oso Negro said...

@chickelit - Don't feel bad. I was born in 1957 and never felt much like a Baby Boomer. First, the construct that you can easily define individuals by the twenty year span in which they were born is utterly preposterous. By this light, a person born in 1944 would have less in common with a person born in 1946, than a person born in 1946 would have with a person born in 1964. Ridiculous. Second, eligibility of oneself or one's classmates for draft service in Vietnam was a very sharp breaking point in terms of life experience. Being an 18-year old in 1969 was very different from the same experience in 1973.

donald said...

The reason was a coverup of the fact that John Dean’s wife was a call girl and O’brien Had the goods.

Michael K said...

Not a single Leftist appears ready to admit the Obama Administration likely used the intelligence apparatus of the U.S.government to spy on an opposition party candidate.

44% of Democrats agree that they did use intel agencies to surveil Trump.

iowan2 said...

Carol said...
I keep looking for real overarching motives. It seemed at the time that underneath it all, Watergate was ultimately a way to end the war in Vietnam by other means. Granted, they hated Nixon anyway.

Overall, the effort to get rid of Trump is, what exactly? A way to get balls-to-the-wall immigration? I can't believe they care that much about it. What is the real goal?

Is it still all about protecting Roe v Wade?


The most consistent logic for me is two fold.
1. Clinton's wife lost an election by a wide enough margin, even ballot stuffing wouldn't/couldn't help, plausible deniability must be invented
2. (this explains all the help from the GOP e) This is a warning shot to any other non-politician from attempting to enter DC. All the smears were leveled during the campaign as examples of the treatment that outsiders will endure. The Deep State involvement after is just a ramping up of the earlier knee capping.

Michael K said...

"The Deep State involvement after is just a ramping up of the earlier knee capping. "

I agree and I'm not sure Trump can pull this off. He is very isolated with McConnell a very reluctant ally. Ryan is not much better.

Perot would have had a similar problem if he had not blown up his campaign in 1992 but the Deep State has had decades more to entrench itself.

A major factor has been McCain-Feingold which has gutted the Congress and turned members of Congress into 24/7 fund raisers with their staffs writing the legislation.

This is still the Flight 93 Election aftermath.

Matthew Sablan said...

Fox News which includes several liberal voices and never Trumpets is state run propaganda? So... What are CNN and NPR? Bill Maher is not very smart.

robother said...

Interesting that the people on the Right Side of History can never tolerate even one media voice in opposition.

Birkel said...

Michael K:
I discriminate between Leftists and Democrats. There is overlap between the two groups, perhaps. But Democrat is a much broader category than is Leftist. Democrats might know there was something rotten in Obama's Denmark.

Breezy:
I believe we are at 17 demotions/retirements/quitters.

Seventeen seems like too many for random chance.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 212   Newer› Newest»