"But even if it appears to have no effect on the other person, loving transforms and frees the person who loves. It allows one to set down the exhausting weight of hatred, anger and disappointment. It is a proactive act. It means taking control of the situation. The reaction of President Trump and his supporters to love is inconsequential. By loving them—whether they accept, or reject, or mock the sentiment—the president’s opponents can move toward an agenda that they set, hopefully one that seeks to unite and serve all Americans. The Dalai Lama says that '[w]orld peace can only be based on inner peace. If we ask what destroys our inner peace, it’s not weapons and external threats, but our own inner flaws like anger. This is one of the reasons why love and compassion are important, because they strengthen us. This is a source of hope.' I write all this with significant trepidation. Several people have counseled me against publishing this, saying it is too risky in this unpredictable environment. As a result, I have sat on it for several months after completing it. I also recognize that my situation is very different from that of many others who have suffered under the president much more than I have. I was not at Charlottesville, I am not Muslim and I have not been separated from my children at the border. But I did hold a high-ranking position at the FBI—an organization that I love—and I have seen colleagues mistreated. And the president of the United States has made negative public comments about both the bureau and me. Notwithstanding all that, I am refusing to choose hate as a response. I am choosing love, even if I don’t fully understand what I mean by that right now. I am choosing that path because I think that is what is best for America."
From "Why I Do Not Hate Donald Trump" (at Lawfare) by Jim Baker, who is a contributing editor at Lawfare, the Director of the National Security and Cybersecurity Program at the R Street Institute, and the former general counsel of the FBI (and is not to be confused with the 89-year-old man who was Secretary of State under President George H. W. Bush or the 79-year-old fallen televangelist or any of the many other people named Jim Baker).
I agree about love. I love love...
All you need is love...
Love, love is the answer....
But along with your love, just give me some truth...
And that Charlottesville thing is a hoax.
७७ टिप्पण्या:
I love you Althouse.
"I'm sick and tired of hearing things/From uptight, short-sighted, narrow-minded hypocritics… I've had enough of reading things/By neurotic, psychotic, pig-headed politicians… I've had enough of watching scenes/With schizophrenic, egocentric, paranoiac, prima-donnas/All I want is the truth…"
Aww, somebody has mistreated the FBI! What's happened to my country?
Narr
I love it when agents of the state talk about how much they loves 'em some love
Apparently this Jim Baker was reassigned/demoted by Wray before he resigned, and he was deeply involved the FBI's controversial investigations of Hillary and Trump-Russia.
For that last line specifically right now.
Love your enemas as you love your politicians.
He's a "Comey guy" I guess. Some conservatives have been referring to the group as a "cabal." Baker, McCabe, Strzok and Page. Not surprising then that he found a home with Comey's BFF Benjamin Wittes.
Barr referred to them as the "some of the upper echelon" at the FBI. In the months after Comey's dismissal, Wray essentially purged the FBI's leadership, presumably with the blessing of his direct boss, DAG Rod Rosenstein.
Hate is truly a self-destructive emotion that accomplishes nothing positive. At least that has been my experience and why I absolve not to hate. I've not achieved that goal completely, there are still occasions when that emotion bubbles up, but for the most part I have successfully refocused my energies on the behavior and what can be down to counteract or counterbalance.
As for Jim Baker, I'm not getting a good feeling from reading that piece that he has fully eschewed hate.
We as a nation desperately need to get back to a point where we can have honest disagreements / debates without hating each others guts... Unfortunately, this will probably never happen because the left has jumped the shark and we on the right have finally had enough... but the sad truth is that being divided as we are strengthens our enemies... who have been fomenting discord for the last 60 years... and if we ever do descend into Civil War 2.0, you can bet that they and others will be lined-up with knives-and-forks, salivating over what remains...
I am choosing love, even if I don’t fully understand what I mean by that right now.
Not surprising because I don’t see anywhere where you define love as listing a whole bunch of unsupported reasons that the person you love is evil. If you really loved him, and us, you would make a bigger effort to understand than just ladling out Democrat talking points like home fries at Waffle House. But there is a saying, well I just saw it in a novel I am reading anyway, that “to understand is to forgive.” *Clearly*, Trump cannot be forgiven for beating Hillary, therefore any attempt to understand him is a danger to one’s eternal soul!
I am choosing that path because I think that is what is best for America."
“What’s good for the Democrats is good for America.” Why don’t these guys who held powerful and sensitive positions just shut up about their politics so that people could then live under the illusion that the power they have is OK because they are non-partisan?
Love always? People aren't so green. #HateLovesAbortion
A whole bunch of bureaucrats are going to get religion soon,. They are already feeling the hot breath of the AG and the DOJ IG on their backs. Time to learn to code, I guess. Maybe prison has coding classes.
When I was in my early teens, I hated Richard Nixon with a passion. My grandfather, who liked Nixon, would get upset with this and say that only dogs hate.
I celebrated the downfall of Nixon. But a few later he popped up in my dreams from time to time as someone I felt sorry for. Oliver Stone's Nixon film captured the shift of my feelings. Now I'm actually sort of fond of him. I made a point of visiting his presidential library the last time I was in the US.
Sometimes I think Trump is a world class jackass. Other times I find him amusing. But it I don't hate him or any other politician. They're all surface noise to me now and not worthy of my passion, one way or another.
Yea, I do not hate Trump but I tried my best to set him up and get rid of him.
We must not be angry with Baker and his ilk who tried to overturn an election, must maintain inner peace.
The President of the United States has made negative comments about the Bureau and me who had tried to railroad him, boooooo hoooo!
Shame on you, Althouse, for your silly, narrow, TrumpCult-blindered adherence to Scott Adams laughable contention that all criticism of Donald Trump’s rambling, reckless, sloppy series of at least four statements on the Charlottesville violence is a “hoax.”
Again I encourage your readers who are not completely addled by Trump cultism to read Robert Tracinski’s brilliant deconstruction of “the Charlottesville Hoax Hoax at the Bulwark.
Tracinski is the author whom Scott Adams will not name or link to or even acknowledge. Because that’s the kind of guy Adams is.
And of course it now seems that you won’t address it either, Althouse. You keep claiming a Hoax, but never taking on the merits of the debate. Chickenshit propaganda.
Several people have counseled me against publishing this, saying it is too risky in this unpredictable environment
Those people are worried you will be overwhelmed with the love of others no doubt.
I love productive policies.
This guy's name appears a lot in Mueller's report. Sounds like another dirty rat running from his fate. Hang this bastard too.
But sometimes there is a need for 'tough love'. And the FBI, at the top levels, stinks.
I did hold a high-ranking position at the FBI — an organization that I love — and I have seen colleagues mistreated. And the president of the United States has made negative public comments about both the bureau and me.
That is terrible!
Now I will toss and turn all night, trying to sleep.
Still, I will try to love our President Trump.
The Dalai Lama says
The Dolly Parton says "I was the first woman to burn my bra - it took the fire department four days to put it out."
Baker Testimony Reveals Concerns About FBI Probe, Pre-Election Contacts With Mother Jones Reporter, an article published by Jeff Carlson in his The Markets Work website.
The article includes the following passage
------------------------------------------
.... During testimony, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), who along with Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) had been questioning Baker, paused to outline his concerns, telling Baker, “everything about this investigation seems to have been done in an abnormal way, the way that you have gotten the information, the way that Peter Strzok got information, the way that Bruce Ohr was used, the way that Perkins Coie actually came in and gave you information.”
Meadows noted that, “with all this stuff that we are talking about…you ought to look at this with a jaundiced eye, would you agree?”
Baker responded: “I had a jaundiced eye about everything, yes. I had skepticism about all this stuff. I was concerned about all of this. This whole situation was horrible, and it was novel and we were trying to figure out what to do, and it was highly unusual.”
Baker closed his statement by noting, “I am not good enough to sort out the political implications of a lot of things.”
But for a man who claimed to not be in tune with political considerations, Baker had significant involvement in the FBI’s investigation of President Trump. Baker repeatedly met with Michael Sussmann, a partner at Perkins Coie, who shared with him information that detailed alleged communications between servers in Trump Tower and servers located in Russia at Alfa Bank—an allegation that eventually was debunked. Baker also acknowledged that he had a “personal relationship” with Sussmann, as they had previously “both worked in the criminal division together at the Department of Justice.”
Baker was also involved in the Carter Page FISA application process and read part of the initial application. And, as general counsel, Baker advised senior FBI leaders on the legal aspects of key investigations and served as the liaison with the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Baker is the subject of a criminal leak investigation being conducted by the DOJ. According to Baker’s testimony, the leak investigation remained active as of October 2018 and a Jan. 15 letter sent by Reps. Jordan and Meadows to U.S. Attorney John Durham, requesting a briefing, strongly suggests the DOJ investigation into Baker remains active. ....
I read that, and it is clear that Baker is just flat out wrong or lying- I mean, the hate literally drips off the entire essay. Is he fooling himself here, or trying to?
Speaking of liars, I have yet to see Chuck's list of Trump sexual violence examples.
As for Robert Tracinski?
Political Party: Democrat
Big hitter that Lama...long.
The preacher was Jim Bakker.
People have already debunked that Bulwark story with a contemporary article during Charlottesville from the NYT in these comment sections Chuck.
Stop trying to make fetch happen!
What if there really was another group of protesters there that day, and that’s who Trump was referring to? Well, there’s the problem. No such group exists. This mythical second group of protesters is like the “second shooter” in conspiracy theories about the Kennedy assassination. I’ve found people who insist to me that such a group was there because the “Charlottesville Hoax” mythology requires it to exist—but I haven’t found a single shred of actual confirmation. It’s almost as if they have adopted a false memory. The Democrat Donor Funded Bulwark
The problem with that analysis is that news reports did say that there was a group of protesters there who were simply upset that these undoubtedly beautiful, if politically problematic, statues were being removed, which the Democrat Donor Funded Bulwark makes no effort to find. Maybe those news reports were wrong, I don’t know, but I do clearly remember them. The Bulwark is trying to assert a negative here.
Then look at his next paragraph:
That’s what originally set me off about this Trump claim. I live in the Charlottesville area, and I know very fine people who oppose the removal of the monuments based on high-minded notions about preserving history. I’m one of them. So I know that we weren’t there that night. Only the white nationalists were there.
So even in this “proof” that Trump was wrong to say it, he affirms Trump’s words! Then he pretends to know the whereabouts of every single like-minded soul. The worst you can say from the Bulwark article isn’t that Trump is a supporter of White Supremacism, which Trump clearly rejects in his statement, but that he mistaken about the whereabouts of the "very vine people,” one of whom was the author of the Bulwark piece.
So I know that we weren’t there that night. Only the white nationalists were there.
Doesn’t the word ‘so’ usually, in a case like this, involve some kind fo logical argument?
Jail is too good for Jim Baker and the rest of the coup plotters.
The Titty-Twister has turned his dickness up to 11. Yowzer!
Who loves love enough to love Chuck? And will Baker still be able to love Trump if Trump's admin pursues a criminal investigation of him and/or his cronies? Love him from a cell?
Yet another unsupported ‘so’:
“So when he says “very fine people” he is referring to a specific group of protesters, and not only does he keep emphasizing this, but he gets more specific about them.”
And then this:
“could have delivered an unambiguous condemnation of white nationalism and appealed to unifying American values.”
You know what? He did!
“The fact that Trump couldn’t do this implies to me that he didn’t really care all that much about the subject..”
More unsupported blather. The writer wanted his own position on the statues, one shared by many many people, to be ignored by Trump, he didn’t want to be separated from the White Supremecists because that way he gets to corncob his way to “scoring more points” against Trump,
And you, a lawyer Chuck.
What are you, a title lawyer?
Chuck apparently loves Tracinski so much he can't even the problems with that tendentious hoax hoax piece.
“Good people can go to Charlottesville,” said Michelle Piercy, a night shift worker at a Wichita, Kan., retirement home, who drove all night with a conservative group that opposed the planned removal of a statue of the Confederate general Robert E. Lee.
After listening to Mr. Trump on Tuesday, she said it was as if he had channeled her and her friends — all gun-loving defenders of free speech, she said, who had no interest in standing with Nazis or white supremacists: “It’s almost like he talked to one of our people.” - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/12/us/charlottesville-protest-white-nationalist.html
Chuck, even you should be able to understand that the Democrat Donor Funded Bulwark never looked at all of the facts....
"Trump ... hate....too..strong.... Can... not ... read... New...... York.... Times..... Fever....dreams.... intensifying.....” - Your most humble and obedient quisling, Chuck
I’ve been wanting to fisk that since I first saw how ridiculous it was. Hat tip to Scott Adams for the reference to the correct NYT article.
Chuck, I don't need Robert Tracinski to interpret for me what Trump said about Charlottesville. I'm a college educated man of some experience. I've both read the transcript of his remarks and watched the video. He very clearly said that he was NOT speaking about white supremacists when he said there were fine people on both sides. He stated he was speaking about the controversy over tearing down statutes of Confederate war heroes. Why should I yield to some 'expert's' opinion on the matter? This isn't something that requires expert analysis. It rained here yesterday. I was outside and saw and felt it for myself. An hundred experts telling me that it didn't rain won't change my view.
Given what he explicitly said, the question of whether Trump praised Nazis at the Charlottesville protest is not even a close call. He didn't. Anyone claiming otherwise is blinded by hate (you seem to fall into that category), deliberately distorting and misrepresenting his remarks, or simply parroting what others have said.
Perhaps, you might criticize Trump for the wording of his remarks. However, traditionally we are charitable when judging extemporaneous remarks -- particularly when the speaker is responding to questions, being constantly interrupted, and is speaking soon after a tragedy when emotions are running high. We should grant Trump the same amount of grace we would any other speaker in a similar situation. You are NOT doing that. You're judging Trump's words as if they had been part of a statement that took months to prepare. In this, you're not just wrong on the substance, you're being manifestly unfair.
Jim Baker: "I am choosing love, even if I don’t fully understand what I mean by that right now."
Nobody: Not surprising because I don’t see anywhere where you define love as listing a whole bunch of unsupported reasons that the person you love is evil. If you really loved him, and us, you would make a bigger effort to understand than just ladling out Democrat talking points like home fries at Waffle House.
This is such a nice feeling. I'm still mainlining coffee, I'm off my game today, but I log in and see I don't really need to come in. Nobody has it covered. Nicely done. :)
OK, Mr. Baker. This is the last question on your job interview. What do you consider your greatest weakness?
I love too much. I even love you, you corporate toady, as you squeeze the life-blood out of the down trodden working man.
"In this, you're not just wrong on the substance, you're being manifestly unfair."
As Chuck has told us explicitly, he is not interested in fair. He is interested in smearing Trump.
Love was the reason why James Baker approved a FISA warrant that said Carter Page was a witting agent of Russian Intelligence.
Baker - "I tried to kill the king and failed. Let me now seize the moral high ground and hope to rise above the gallows."
Mike
Baker: So I know that we weren’t there that night. Only the white nationalists were there.
I was there. And I don't recall seeing you. So how could you possibly know?
I think "white nationalism" is a joke. And I'm a mutt, mixed breed, race-traitor (lol).
So you're a liar. Falsely accusing people you've never even bothered to meet as racist. Were they wearing MAGA hats carrying around a bottle of bleach and a noose at 3am, Mr Smollett? What a sick and twisted character you must have. And I bet you are completely noseblind to it.
I think Micheal K upthread has the gist of this: "A whole bunch of bureaucrats are going to get religion soon,. They are already feeling the hot breath of the AG and the DOJ IG on their backs." Baker is posing Forgiveness because he has done some very wicked things and knows they are coming for him, and he has determined his best play is to prompt them for Mercy because "that's what I have done". It's a ploy from a corrupt little child who has been caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
Reason is the first victim of strong emotion (Herbert). So I say this a stone-cold Marine: I hope they give it to you good and hard. You deserve to be hanged.
“Good people can go to Charlottesville,” said Michelle Piercy, a night shift worker at a Wichita, Kan., retirement home, who drove all night with a conservative group that opposed the planned removal of a statue of the Confederate general Robert E. Lee.
Note how Ahab Chuck throws his own people under the bus, good Americans like Michelle Piercy, in his pursuit of his Great Orange Whale.
How can someone like that expect anyone to find him credible? Chuck? Why do you even come here? What motive do you have? All you accomplish is to rally people around Trump in response to your drek and immunize Trump against legitimate criticism. Is that your goal?
Someone upthread said Hate is self-destructive. I bet if we got a look at you we would see it wrinkled in your face, eyes glassy with madness. I bet the wife has been calling around to her friends asking what she should do about your obsession.
As Chuck has told us explicitly, he is not interested in fair. He is interested in smearing Trump.
True. But, this is how you get more Trump. You'd think someone as bright as he undoubtedly is would recognize that his whole approach to Trump is counterproductive. Althouse is not predisposed to support Trump. Yet, her basic sense of fairness causes her to feel sympathy for Trump when people such as Chuck make demonstrably unjust claims about him. Her reaction to Biden's announcement video is a great example of how sensitive she's become to such claims.
To win, Democrats NEED voters like Althouse to come back home. I guess Republicans should thank Chuck and others like him for making it more difficult for 'Althouse voters' to return!
A whole bunch of bureaucrats are going to get religion soon,. They are already feeling the hot breath of the AG and the DOJ IG on their backs
I hope this is correct but until there's some fire it should be lumped into the poop or off the pot pile.
"All day long. He never stops. Trump this and Trump that. Even over dinner. He missed our anniversary watching Rachel Maddow. And last night I walked down to the basement and found a sex doll with Robert Mueller's picture taped over the face. I don't know what to do Marcy!"
The smart thing for Jim Baker and the rest of his coup plotters to do would be to plea out and apologize. Most of these republicans are pussies and would let them off with a year or two at most in jail. I would guess most of these scum bags wouldn't even have to apologize much less go to jail.
Their efforts have already caused a constitutional crisis. Republicans by and large don't want to use those words or say what has happened honestly because that would require them to back up their attested beliefs.
These swamp weasels deserve to hang. There are hundreds of them if not thousands. It should be done publicly and proudly.
If they keep pushing this shit and there is a full blown constitutional crisis they will will get what they deserve.
"I have seen colleagues mistreated"
Sure, ordinary agents have been mistreated by the politicos who weaponized the FBI against civilians and against Trump and his campaign.
That's what he meant, right? He didn't mean Comey and McCabe and Strzok had been mistreated, did he? I mean, no one could be that much of a clueless a**hole.
Chuck: at the Bulwark.
Are you being paid to pimp links for the Bulwark? Lefty billionaire dollars?
Because I would be surprised to find ONE person here who considers them a credible source. If they said something good, I would try to find a secondary source to link from instead, that's how little credibility they have. Just the mention of the name makes people flip the channel.
How do you not see this?
Mike Sylwester said...
Love was the reason why James Baker approved a FISA warrant that said Carter Page was a witting agent of Russian Intelligence.
I really want to see that 3rd application for extension.
I want to see the justification they used to upgrade Page from a level VII asset to a level I asset.
I want to see the list of people they scraped communications from using the justification that Page was an active agent willfully collaborating with Russia thus allowing them to collect communications from anyone Page talked to and anyone those people talked to.
2 hops pretty much gives you everyone in DC.
Far Left and Racist Poster Chuck continues to promote the far left ranting of far left commentators published at far left websites which are funded by far left billionaires.
Because that is what "conservatives" do...
DKWalser: "You'd think someone as bright as he undoubtedly is would recognize that his whole approach to Trump is counterproductive"
On the contrary, leftists (and those even further to the left than a Durbin/Schiff like LLR Chuck and ritmo and Inga), have no capacity to absorb feedback and adapt accordingly.
This is one of 2 key reasons why Trump continually flummoxes and frustrates them:
1) Trump has been the most conservative President in 50 years (LLR Chuck hates that)
2) Trump continuously and cleverly adapts to the environment while keeping his long range objectives targeted, thus his many many conservative accomplishments (which pro-open borders/pro-late term abortion/pro-antifa types like Chuck hate)
Imagine how much better the world would be if everyone were as kind and decent and wise and humble as me. Well, one of the great things about me is I can value all those crappy people anyway and maybe my goodness will rub off and they'll become better.
--Shorter Jim Baker
I believe in love too.... Hate will eat you up and prevent you from maximizing the Gift of Life and figuring out how you can best contribute..
But I also believe in accountability. Baker was in a critical position in enforcing, and more importantly, protecting the Rule of Law. In that he failed miserably. Contrasting the treatment of Hillary and Trump shows the disparity in treatlment and the asymmetry of treatment. Baker was critical to making sure that rules are applied fairly.
As the FBI guy says in "National Treasure" when the Declaration of Independence is stolen for good reasons.."Somebody's got to go to jail"
When you look at the immunity handed out like candy to Hillary and Cheryl Mllls and Lois Lerner, and the unfair and heavy-handed usage of the letter of the law to kneecap Gen Flynn and Trump's first term then I truly believe that some people, some IMPORATANT people, must go to jail or this sham will happen again..
Funny how Baker believes in Love now that his neck is on the line. Hopefully he will have lots of time in prison to contemplate his sins and emerge and make a sizable love-based contribution to society in his last 20 years of life
I got your Love right here, Baker.
What could be creepier than an operative of a powerful Secret Agency proclaiming his love for an enemy? As Baker admits "It is a proactive act. It means taking control of the situation." Big Brother Loves You. Yeah, right.
Drago says: "On the contrary, leftists (and those even further to the left than a Durbin/Schiff like LLR Chuck and ritmo and Inga), have no capacity to absorb feedback and adapt accordingly."
Indeed. I was recently in an online debate elsewhere with someone as dumb as Inga but who managed to conceal whatever mental problems she may be having better than Ritmo. Whenever I asked her for a logical argument to support what she was saying, she would slip into the Shifting Sands mode of argument (in my experience a favorite of "liberal" females) and just accuse me of being a hater. (Although she clearly hates liberty.) I finally gave up--which of course he interpreted as a victory--and thought of what Lincoln said about how, if a man wanted to insist that two-plus-two equals five, there was no logical argument he knew of that would convince the man otherwise.
Voltaire called it "invincible stupidity."
Tell you what, James Baker. Let's test your "love y'all, really" approach. Admit to your illegal actions, dime-out those people who you know or even suspected took actions that permanently damaged the country, suffer the humiliation of going to prison (for collusion and obstruction) and come out of that experience still filled with love for all of us deplorables whos first choice would be to see you dangle from a gibbet. Love me then, James you sinner you and I'll work to love you back. Hey, if Chuck Colson of Watergate infamy can do that, certainly you can too. Until you do that we won't believe a word you say in your defense. You very likely still see yourself as an indispensable part of the "elite" that runs this country and the little people who happen to live here. Give that up too, James. Recant all your sins.
"Liberals" (by which I mean of course "tax-happy, coercion-addicted, power-tripping government humpers and State fellators") like to tell the gullible, and themselves, that they represent "love"--while hating liberty. The unspoken premise seems to be "Statism=Love." How Orwellian.
Love, as practiced by the elite is like that John Cena commercial about patriotism. Love of country isn't enough for Cena, we all gotta love all the people (not just tolerate but LOVE) who live in the country. Uh, no, just no. But that's how the elite thinks.
Love is like oxygen. Love is a many splendored thing. Love lifts us up where we belong. All you need is love!
I was really hoping that Chuck would come back and give me what for! Show me all of the weaknesses in my arguments!
“The FBI’s decision to investigate the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia “was not about Donald Trump but was about Russia.” That’s how Jim Baker, the bureau’s former general counsel, described the beginning of one of the most consequential probes in the law enforcement agency’s history.
Baker’s views on Russia, President Donald Trump, and his last several years in the spotlight were the subject of a piece he published Friday in Lawfare, a news site dedicated to national security. The FBI’s investigation was not “an effort to undermine or discredit President Trump,” but a step in a “decades-long effort” to combat Russian intelligence operations.
“It was always about Russia,” he wrote. “It was about what Russia was, and is, doing and planning.””
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/05/the-fbis-former-top-lawyer-says-the-russia-probe-was-not-about-trump/?fbclid=IwAR2sbAg9Ihs4A2FiITG-WmW7THkTme6MhfnZoh8g26Yrm9jD2I_gOsI9H3k
Nobody who knows anything actually believes it was ever about Russia.
Maybe if the FBI, CIA, et al had spent more time over the last 10 years worrying about China instead of RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA, the USA might be better off right about now.
“Nobody who knows anything actually believes it was ever about Russia.”
Trump Cultists who only know what Trump tells them.
Inga only knows what liar-hack Maddow tells her.
Nobody, uh oh. Chuck is, right now, writing a strongly worded e-mail to Althouse!
Chuck is out there pushing the Charlottesville hoax hoax hoax.
He's a liar. There too many lies in there for any of it to be trusted
Until recently I've had some confidence that the long arc of history will bring us to the truth (Eisenhower and Truman were not weak ineffectual Presidents, we now know. JFK was not as impactful as we once thought.) So (I would have thought until recently) in 20 years or so, people will realize the truth of the Charlottesville comment.
But now I see Anita Hill (what is it?) 20-30 years on still saying to great acclaim what has been repeatedly and unassailably proven to be untrue.
Journalism may be the first draft of history; but it now appears to me that the first draft will be re-written and edited and re-written "until it comes out the way we want it to". (Thanks Sen. Feingold for that insight into the rhetoric of liberalism.)
You put up an image of Charlie Chaplin with a reference to "Limelight," among all the posts about Hippie Era music, and, for some reason, this comes to mind. Thank you for the earworm.
https://youtu.be/lOmKy6ANmyM
Trump is the most loving President in American history as far as I can tell. People who disagree with him can't out love him. They're just fucked. Nevertheless, they should still love their neighbors.
Trump is the most loving President in American history as far as I can tell
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा