Clinton was talking about Trump's tweeting this (and she said this shows that "Trump is running scared):
“PELOSI STAMMERS THROUGH NEWS CONFERENCE” pic.twitter.com/1OyCyqRTuk— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 24, 2019
First, I'm tired — and was tired long ago — of the Hillary Clinton theory that every attack on a woman is "sexist." Women in high positions need to be attackable or I don't want them in high positions. So that theory will perversely push me into the sexist position that women should not hold high positions.
Second, the video Trump tweeted is not the video of Pelosi that was determined to have been "doctored."
Trump's video was not "Doctored" proof is right here.— Saladino for Congress (@JoeySalads) May 25, 2019
Frame rate of both clips are just different, off by a half frame.
Audio levels match, check next tweet. pic.twitter.com/V09fP7gQzB
Here's the WaPo article about that other video, "Faked Pelosi videos, slowed to make her appear drunk, spread across social media." There is something bad about Pelosi's real speech and slowing it down makes the badness quite obvious, but that doesn't mean there's something wrong with showing any video that focuses us on the badness, and it's certainly not sexist to mock a politician's bad speech. Of course, Trump's speech is mocked all the time. One of the points in favor of having Trump as the President is that we feel so free to mock him. To vote for someone deemed unmockable would sacrifice a highly valuable freedom — the freedom to mock the President.
USA Today bolsters its presentation of Clinton's opinion with: "Clinton was the victim of fake videos during the 2016 election, which were designed to make her seem sick while campaigning." That's one hell of a victim card. And what was the fake video? I remember this video:
And there were videos of her coughing a lot. USA Today has no link on its assertion about fake videos. We need to worry about whether there's fake news about fake news. But that's okay. Be suspicious. If there's one thing that triggers my skepticism, it's the idea that Hillary Clinton has special "victim" status making her political rhetoric especially credible.
ADDED: Here's an example of focus on Trump speaking badly:
Posts
104 comments:
On politics, the Left specializes in false charges.
1. Sexism!
2. Fake video!
Figuratively, Pelosi punched Trump (false claim of cover-up), and Trump punched back (stammering video of Nancy Pants)
So, Hillary a two-time loser just needs to shut up, and enjoy her retirement.
I’ll go Althouse one further: I’m just sick of Hillary’s act altogether. The victimhood is just the latest phony persona she’s tried wearing. Nothing fits. Her soul is too twisted to disguise with her Mao Mao mumus.
"I am woman! Hear me *cough* *cough* *hack* *glarb* *wheeze* "
I’d jail Hillary just to shut her up.
Poor Hillary. She's been through so much.
I would say its no wonder she looks like crap and doesn't make any sense, but she was always like that.
"To vote for someone deemed unmockable would sacrifice a highly valuable freedom — the freedom to mock the President."
I think there's a sly bit of sarcasm in that statement. After all, this ain't Althouse's first rodeo.
Everybody knows that two fingers means three things.
I remember the video of Trump hitting Hillary with a golf ball. Its still funny. And I've watched the NON_EDITED Pelosi video and she slurs her words. Just like Trump said. Maybe she needs to get her dentures fixed. Or maybe she's drunk or off her meds. Or maybe she's just old.
Interesting how the NYT/Wapo IMMEDIATELY rush in to do damage control for Pelosi. Who needs DNC talking points, when you got the Mainstream Media?
It was all cool when the collective left attacked Palin.
Fuck you Hillary. We cannot wait until your funeral.
Another favorite tactic of the legacy media is to assert that any editing of videos by new media/non-leftist fellow travelers must be described as "deceptive," as in "deceptively edited video." As if the litany of acronym-ed media entities don't edit videos. But after one entity calls it deceptive, then all the rest get to repeat that and it is safe for all of their believers to ignore it.
Haven't we gone down this road before? I vaguely remember the Democrats or MSM (sorry, i repeat myself) claiming some video was doctored and then Scott Adams - or someone like that - did an analysis and proved it wasn't doctored.
But that's the power of the MSM. They speak with one voice and they're willing to lie and distort. If some video or statement makes the Democrats look bad, then they'll cry that its "Doctored" Or "Edited" or "taken out of context" when it isn't.
BTW, are their any gullible boob out there who STILL think the MSM are objective? They're so laughably partisan Democrats no one but a fool would think so.
Then there was the alleged seizure video which snopes argues was done by Hillary for humorous effect. So if she didn't have a seizure on camera, why was she allowed to mock the disabled? There is not credible explanation other than snopes covering for her.
Hillary belongs in prison. That whole email private server-foreign donations to the Clintons (foundation) was the most corrupt pay for play scandal ever. But only didn't she get investigated, she's now the paragon of virtue.
Right now, she'd be POTUS and Bill would be getting Lewinsky's in the Oval Office, if Trump hadn't changed history.
How did a woman whose sole accomplishment was marrying well and then not leaving a serial philanderer become a feminist icon? Hillary Clinton has no accomplishments besides that.
I doubt it ever occurred to Margaret Thatcher or Golda Meir to mention their sex.
They were too busy running countries.
Women in high positions need to be attackable or I don't want them in high positions.
There exists at least one sane feminist. Or at least she's sane right now.
Hillary is the most privileged woman in America. She married Bill, got a lot of $$ because he was Governor of Arkansas. Then she was first lady. Then she got a Senate Seat gifted to her. Then Obama gave her the Secretary of State job. Then the Establishment gave her the D nomination. Now, after running the worst POTUS campaign EVER, she's Mrs. Victim and Mrs. fountain of moral virtue.
Whatever crimes she commits, whatever campaigns she loses, however unethical or stupid she is, none of it matters. She's always praised and admired. She's made of teflon.
Smear Merchant Chuck, fopdoodle extraordinaire, is not going to like this attack on Nancy Pelosi.
Not. One. Bit.
This may be worse than pointing out the lies of Dick Blumenthal.
I'm sad to see Nancy Pelosi wearing down so much. Incredibly, she's a voice of reason on the Left. Granted, she's an evil person who rode infamous coattails -- a family name and a rich husband -- to fame and power. She's a power-mad player in perhaps the most fetid swamp in America -- San Francisco -- and she cares not for innocent life. But she's saner than the Leftist Collectivists that will follow her as she slips from the scene.
RBG, on the other hand, should do us all a favor, and quickly.
Trump erased one of Pelosi's fingers! The nerve of that guy.
Who needs DNC talking points, when you got the Mainstream Media?
Who do you think works with the DNC to create Democrat talking points?
The Mainstream Media has always been biased against Republicans, libertarians and conservatives. However, they are really going overboard in the Trump era. They represent leftwing authoritarianism that is growing and hoping to control us in the near future.
The good news is that I am 66 and won't give a shit in 20 years.
How many arguments would the Left win if they didn't begin the disagreement by being offended? Is there any similar "racist, bigoted, sexist, wxyz-phobe" used by the Right?
There you go again Professora ...
How in the world did you get the idea that anyone as individual can decide what is objectionable!
And you call yourself Feminist. Shame! Shame!
a family name and a rich husband -- to fame and power.
How rich was he before her political career? The same goes for Boxer. I think there was some synergy,.
Shame that the doctored video was posted...it's unnecessary. Pelosi sounds like an addled drunk all the time. It's like she is suffering from a slow motion stroke.
What "we" the federal populace thinks of Pelosi , or does not think, is irrelevant to her position and power. Likewise, what "we" the federal populace think of Mitch McConnell is not relevant to his power. Pelosi as Speaker is not elected by the populace.
Like Mitch, she is elected by her caucus. Mitch is one of the three most powerful people in WA DC (and arguably the world). Look at his federal approval ratings. Federal "approval" and "what we think" has nothing to do with what the people of KY and his caucus decide. What "we" think, or do not think, of the video is entirely irrelevant to the workings of power nor does it "count" in any political sense of the word.
This sort of thing does not weaken her position in her district or in her caucus. It strengthens it. Her caucus will rally 'round her in response to doctored videos. Meanwhile, the majority of the population is not tuned into whatever the latest tiff is between Speaker and President. His base cares; her base cares--but the majority of the populace does not care. It's summertime, kids are going to the pool, birds are out, baseball season, flying kites and picnics and BBQs in the park and at the lake.
Yeah, that Clinton video was doctored all right- it made it look like she was tossed into that van like a sack of potatoes rather than a sack of shit.
Whys dat mean man picking on the widdle girl? Because he's a mean! Dat's why.
"Clinton was the victim of fake videos during the 2016 election..."
Journalists live in a fantasy world where all of these things are true, it is an alternate universe.
And I watched the unedited video last night of Pelosi- it really isn't any better- most of what is edited out is are the parts where she isn't talking.
Look, Pelosi is 79 years old- people that old have a hard time talking- the words they are trying to use don't come to the tongue as quickly as they do for someone who is 53 years old like me, and they don't come to me as quickly as they do for someone who is 27 years old. All in all, Pelosi is pretty well for someone that old. I think she is probably at least 20 IQ points ahead of Slow Joe.
Okay Yancey, I agree that she can spot Slow Joe 20 IQ points. That means she has an IQ of 95.
OTOH on a good day Joe can have an IQ that is equal to Nancy's age--79.
I put Nancy at about 115, Joe at 95.
"If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither on your side, pound the table."
The country is doing very well during the Trump presidency, so the left can only pound the table.
Would like to see Pelosi do a twenty or thirty minute impromptu presser like Trump does. Take any and all questions from right wingers like Tucker Carlson, Hannity, Ingragm , Limbaugh.
vote for someone deemed unmockable would sacrifice a highly valuable freedom — the freedom to mock the President.
Which is what you did, Professor, in 2008, though perhaps you didn't realize at the time the extent to which Barack Obama would be declared unmockable -- even by people whose job it was to mock people in power. There's a rodeo clown who learned that lesson the hard way.
I know many older people whose words don't come as fast and ideas don't flow as quickly as they once did. But, they are experienced,knowledgeable and respected and to be listened to because of their wisdom. Pelosi's problem is her lack of knowledge and wisdom, not that her speech doesn't flow smoothly.
Her caucus will rally 'round her in response to doctored videos.
Even if they were not doctored because the left lives in a bubble where the day's taking points are provided by some shadowy someone.
Scott Adams points out CNN failed to show the actual video along side the "fake" one to demonstrate how it was altered.
This should be standard reporting, no? Unfortunately, the non-faked one doesn't cast Pelosi in a good light. So there's that problem the network cleaned up for her.
In doing so, they cast doubt on the real video. Anything where she doesn't look good must be one of the fake ones, right?
And of course, YouTube will feel free to pull these "fake" videos down, further throwing the real story down the memory hole.
"Even if they were not doctored because the left lives in a bubble where the day's taking points are provided by some shadowy someone."
There's another strategic play that I'm not sure Trump's people "get." The women in the H & S caucuses will see it as a sexist attack. This strengthens Pelosi's negotiating position within her caucus on every issue. Less likely to see splits within the caucus. Trump's people have a hard time predicting dynamics and strategic moves within the D House & Senate caucuses & between Pelosi & Schumer.
Off by half a frame is a much classier perjoritive than one card short of a full deck.
"I swear to Alzheimer's I dont have God !!!"
Trump's people have a hard time predicting dynamics and strategic moves within the D House & Senate caucuses & between Pelosi & Schumer.
No, because they are all based on one theme. "Orange Man Bad." Some wiser Democrats are starting to see the abyss ahead. I understand that Pelosi and Schumer have been there long enough to see the danger of the lunatics but do not have enough power with the donors to get control. One reason is that donors like Steyer are themselves crazy. I have never figured out the motivations of Soros and his son. There are plenty of Democrats and donors who are simply in it for the greed. Globalism has made many people rich. As was once a common aphorism, "Even the handling of money can be profitable."
Contra wwww
Professional politicians on this level are not argued with or influenced in this way. They are where they are because they are effectively robots or AI's, they make decisions on rational, game-theory maximizing grounds, for entirely personal interests. They are very different from the rest of us. They are not moved, themselves, by emotional arguments.
They are effectively functional sociopaths. Or rather they have completely amoral and unsentimental personalities.
They are moved by their perception of the effect of such on their funders or voters. They can be scared, but only by fears of what effect whatever it is will have on their position. They can make errors in their evaluation of the effect on other players, on other factors. But that is strictly rational. Even an AI can absorb bad data, make errors, lose on a question of probability.
Steyer is an instrument.
He is acting as an agent for others.
I just get a kick out of a guy running for Congress who calls himself "Joey Salads"
Sonofabitch! Do you know who I am? I'm Joey Salads! I made my bones when you were going out with cheerleaders!
Most people, us groundlings, terribly misunderstand what goes on at this level.
These people actually playing the game never, ever argue with sincerity, as we understand it. Certainly not to each other.
They cannot be convinced, philosophically, empirically, or ethically. The subject of public policy, its effects, and etc. are just background, the narrative mcguffins.
None of this is inherently relevant in the great game of power they are playing. Anything that matters in non-political reality is just the geography of the game-board.
The media have been editing video for years to negatively portray conservatives. Also selecting photos that show the ugly side of conservatives. So the right has turned the tables and the snowflakes are bent out of shape. Offended my arse, they are pissed because they are losing control of the narrative.
wwww misses the point, as per usual.
Trump wants Pelosi strengthened. She is not destructive. As buwaya writes, she is predictable because she is self-interested.
Attacking AOC is dangerous because AOC is a fool. Pelosi is not a fool. AOC is unpredictable which is why she will be targeted in redistricting. She will lose. Elevating her is truly a bad idea. Notice that Trump often attacks those he wishes to elevate.
See, e.g. Biden, Joe.
My analysis of the strategy:
Trump is a media genius. Got people to talk about Pelosi and health issues for 24 hours. But the utility of this is limited when the federal voting populace is not relevant to Pelosi's power. Only her caucus is relevant; caucus is influenced by D base; D base is convinced this is a sexist attack; other Ds cannot attack Pelosi without looking sexist; the situation ends up strengthening Pelosi within her caucus.
Trump's a media genius, but he's not a caucus or electoral strategist like McConnell. Take someone like Warren. Warren has no chance of winning the primary. She would have been a good choice to run against, as Warren gives Trump a good chance of winning the electoral college. Strategically, it would have been better to hold fire. His tendency is to use the media to take down his opponents. He's good at doing that in the national-media. But the national populace response (of news watchers--which is not equal to populace, particularly during the summertime) is not necessarily useful in a electoral, strategic sense of the word.
tl; dr: His media talent is impressive in his ability to influence federal news and popular discussion but not necessarily strategic in increasing his ability to control or manipulate the D caucuses, or the power of Pelosi in DC.
"Trump wants Pelosi strengthened."
My POV: That's not a good idea for Trump. It unites the D caucus going into the 2020 elections. He should want AOC to attack Pelosi and try to split the D base three ways along moderate/ liberal/ AOC crazy lines.
anyways most people are too busy for the inside baseball, which makes the media stuff only useful in that it reaches the bases and misses the majority of independents who are enjoying spring/summer. But I need a Game of Thrones substitute, so their WA DC mechanisms will have to substitute until I find a better palace intrigue show.
wwww,
Now tell us all whether Trump wishes to diminish or elevate Pelosi amongst her caucus, you shortsighted, blinkered ignoramus.
You have been consistently wrong for three plus years.
Why stop to reconsider now?
Contra wwww,
Dbase is of limited relevance. Far more important are funders.
They provide all the rewards of politics. The point of a politicians life, the reason they exist.
And those people are just as AI-like, rational players as the politicians.
Both pols and funders care most about the probability of victory, of the achievement of power. That requires a broader view of the political game board.
They can make mistakes. They may have bad information or they may be bad quality AIs prone to defective calculations.
I'm always trying to figure out where Buwaya come from and what he's going on about.
So : what difference between Nancy, Chuck and Mitch?
What cursus honorum did they set out upon or get placed on? And by?
How does Trump deviate or stand out?
By Playing same game or different game or different rules or on different board/landscape or different "prizes"
Blogger NCMoss said...
Off by half a frame is a much classier perjoritive than one card short of a full deck.
No more comments needed!
That is just perfect for politicians. We can use "half a bubble out of plumb" or "2 sandwhiches short of a picnic" or a slew of other aphorisms for other people.
Let's just reserve "off by half a frame" for politicians.
John Henry
BAG,
I don't think it was the punch of the coverup that would piss off PDJT.
I think far worse is claim that he is crazy as in mentally ill and that his family needs to do an intervention.
The coverup is just politics. Stupid politics but politics.
The other is personal.
John Henry
“I remember the video of Trump hitting Hillary with a golf ball. Its still funny. And I've watched the NON_EDITED Pelosi video and she slurs her words. Just like Trump said. Maybe she needs to get her dentures fixed. Or maybe she's drunk or off her meds. Or maybe she's just old.”
It was funny.
I think that it might be age related with Nancy Palsi, but there could be something wrong with her too. My mother went at 80, and most of their friends went during their 80s. These were upper middle class people who were retired, in low stress situations, exercising 3-4 times a week, etc. My father was the oldest man in the church form 90 until his death at 94.
Palsi is in an insanely extremely stressful situation, caught between Trump on the one side, and kids in her caucus barely over 1/3 her age on the other. If AOC and her followers would just shut up, and follow the orders of their elders, Palsi would probably be just fine. She is the official leader of the #Resistance, and I don’t think that she has the strength to do the job, but is too stubborn to give up her post, probably until carted out of the Speaker’s suite on a gurney, still tightly clutching her oversized gavel. She is losing control of her caucus, with the AOC contingent demanding impeachment, that Palsi knows is electoral suicide absent prior proof of actual High Crimes and Misdemeanors (which they aren’t going to find prior to starting impeachment). Violating, of course, over two centuries of Constitutional and Congressional norms, of accepting peaceful transitions of power. Spygate is now blowing up with probably at least three DoJ investigations ongoing, and Trump authorizing AG Barr to declassify any of the wrongdoing he wants to. And last week, Trump walks out of discussions about legislation with her over the witch hunt investigations that her caucus is running, blaming her personally, before the American public, for lack of progress on important issues like pork barrel infrastructure spending, and giving her pet illegals some sort of legal status.
I challenge anyone here to find someone in their last months before 80 enduring as much stress daily as Speaker Palsi does.
Crooked Hillary was roughly a decade younger when she showed so graphically that she didn’t have the strength for a national Presidential campaign. She spent the summer of 2016 essentially hiding most of the time from the general public. While her opponent was doing 2-3 campaign events in almost any many states most weekdays, she might have had a couple of tightly scripted public events A WEEK. Of course, there was evidence that she had health issues even back in her Sec of State days. I think that the exertion and stress of her national political just made them worse.
Both women intentionally put themselves in the highly stressful positions that appear to have been so detrimental to their health. I have no real sympathy, since to be sympathetic would be to validate their overwhelming ambitions. The Iranians, the Chinese, the Russians weren’t going to treat her sympathetically and moderate their demands on a Crooked Hillary President because of her health. They would have just ratcheted up the reassure, hoping to incapacitate her, keeping the US sidelined as they pursued their own national goals. Whining about how unfair that was doesn’t change the reality that she was physically unfit for the job by the time she finally got the Dem party nomination. And blaming it on her gender just makes it less likely that a woman will be trusted with the office of President.
As pointed out last night, some intelligence cipher leaked communications that forces Jane Harman off the intelligence committee for her relatively moderate stands on israel.
Narayanan,
Your best initial source, because convenient, is actually wikipedia. Look up these people. Look at where they came from, their careers, their known contacts. Filter through your general knowledge - that is a problem, because thats a matter of years. You will very quickly start seeing patterns.
Consider also time, and changing context. For old people it matters a lot.
Also engage narciso. The world is made of connections, many being available in "open source" as intelligence gatherers would call it. Open source is what is available to even us, just not contextualized. Narciso vacuums this stuff up.
As for Trump, you will have to study history, which reveals its own patterns. Consider the "great man" theory, which is not simply handwaving. As for the connections and context of Trump, beyond what is "open source" you and I and nearly everyone else will have to wait.
Just blueskying here but something I would love to see.
1) Some of PDJT's people start putting out the word that they see California as winnable. They could hint that californians are tired of Pelosi, Waters and the other crazies. Probably not true but that doesn't matter.
2) Go to Cali and hold one or two of his monster rallies. Perhaps one in SF and another down south. Say in Mad Max's district. Make sure to get a huge black turnout. Or at least the appearance of one. Emphasize low black unemployment, reduced crime and other stuff.
3) Actively and vocally support Republican candidates in Cali. Normally they are sacrificial lambs but this would cause panic in the Dems.
4) The whole effort would draw resources from other states which would be good.
5) It would have tremendous entertainment value which is the main reason I advocate it.
John Henry
AOC is gone in 2020. She was only elected as a stooge by Amazon to "cool out the mark" after the HQ2 scam.
I don't think she realizes she was an Amazon stooge but she was. Unless you believe that Amazon ever really intended to build a 2nd HQ2 in NYC. Or anywhere else.
Or, and this is not mutually exclusive she could be both, she is a PDJT stooge. By getting her in the Democrats replaced a relatively sane, loyal soldier and fundraiser, well know, 20 years seniority and so on. Normally unbeatable by a Republican.
Now, instead, you have a weirdo who pisses everybody off. Could a Republican sneak in and beat her is 2020?
I doubt she would knowingly be a Trump stooge. Works better if she doesn't know anyway.
John Henry
California is not winnable because of officially sanctioned cheating in elections.
Best to have the DOJ sue the state under 14th Amendment disenfranchisement theories.
And monitor the polls with UN and DOJ assets.
Even the UN is less corrupt than California is presently.
Narayanan said...
"I'm always trying to figure out where Buwaya come from and what he's going on about."
From the Phillipines originally. What he's going on about is that the behavior of the dems in power is perfectly rational if you think of them as sociopaths. Their only concern is graft. Not you. Not me. Not even the legislation they foster unless it increases their take. They will lie and cheat and steal to maintain their position and the steady flow of graft. Trump has interrupted that flow. So by their logic he must be destroyed at all costs. By any means necessary.
The Washington Compost continues to inflict lies-=--Just like Democrats.
Pelosi says Trump committed impeachable crimes.
Minutes later, Trump meets with Pelosi and Schumer about a Transportation Infrastructure Bill they want passed and signed.
Pelosi meets the press after Trump meeting and says Trump blew up and stammered with anger during a private conversation, and that his family should have an intervention to discuss his mental breakdown.
Media runs with Pelosi's accounting of events.
Trumps says he calmly told Pelosi that if the Democrats continue to claim his Presidency is illegitimate and force investigations into his history; then he won't help them with legislation.
Media discusses how Pelosi is right about Trump flipping out.
Trump puts out video of Pelosi stammering through speeches that illustrate her diminished mental capacity.
Trump is blamed for being sexist for pointing this out about Pelosi, because she is a woman.
Althouse rightly notes what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
That's why I read Althouse.
The thing about Nancy Pants, is who's next? If it's Tim Ryan - then the Dems might stumble back into reality.
If it's AOC, the shit just got weirder and crazier.
Thanks Rusty,
Just a small correction - this is the nature of all politicians, not just Democrats, and all political players, whether in electoral politics or not. Government and corporate bureaucracies, mass media, office politics anywhere, etc.
Rae @ 10:15
""I am woman! Hear me *cough* *cough* *hack* *glarb* *wheeze*"
to which I'll add *shart* *cackle* *hic*
It's nice to finally have a Republican President who - to borrow a phrase - punches back twice as hard.
Is it Presidential? Not particularly.
Do I care? Nope.
I don’t think that she has the strength to do the job, but is too stubborn to give up her post, probably until carted out of the Speaker’s suite on a gurney,
I think she is the conduit between the Democrats and the SF donor class. Gavin Newsom is a Getty family creature but he would need to get to Congress to fill that role. California has 70 billionaires. Some, like Steyer are nutty but they all have serious reasons to support Democrats. With some in tech it may be H1B visas. Some want gardeners and maids. Mike Bloomberg made a gaffe by asking if we close the border, "who will rake the sand traps?"
Some of it is abortion,. Eric Schmidt once was quoted as saying his wife wanted him to support Democrats for abortion.
The Democrats are all about money. They are not alone,. The GOPe is deep in the trough, too.
The same media that used selectively edited tapes to destroy a 16 year old middle class Covington high school student is outraged by selectively edited video that illustrates the verbal tics of 79 year old multi-millionaire public figure.
Nancy is boxed in. She can’t make any move without huge repercussions for her one way or the other. She can’t make policy and she can’t impeach. She’s trying to claim Trump’s mental status is the problem so she has a way out via him resigning, but we all can see that’s just not so.
Breezy,
I believe that is correct. And I believe that is part of the reason Trump elevates Pelosi as a rival. He likes the current Democratic management for his own purposes.
What I can't believe is that Pelosi & Schumer thought that after Pelosi's "Trump needs impeaching" meeting with her Democratic cohorts that any negotiation would be possible with Trump. Would it had been possible with any president under those circumstances? Jeez, Obama would have popped a gasket, too!
I can imagine how some Democratic firebrands might have thought that doing the meetings so close together was a good move to make Trump look bad. But, it wasn't the firebrands left in front of the cameras. It was Schumer & Pelosi, neither of whom played their roles well.
This is one of those "staged" events that's meant to make Trump look bad, but, as the event ages in the mind, Pelosi & Schumer end up looking worse & worse.
President Trump doesn’t seem to be the scared one.
Ralph Northam: I apologize for being in the blackface photo. (Followed by) I wasn't in the blackface photo.
Hillary Clinton: (campaign staff) she became overheated and left the event early. (Followed by) What collapse? Trump lies!
I guess democrats talk to their fans so often that absorb the lesson that we the people are really stupid and credulous. Then in a general election they are puzzled and surprised to learn that many of us are not stupid and credulous.
And of course, YouTube will feel free to pull these "fake" videos down, further throwing the real story down the memory hole.
On my newsfeed there were two stories about Facebook refusing to take down the "doctored" Pelosi video.
Regardless of whatever spin they use, the only reason Facebook would NOT take down a "doctored" video of a liberal is if the video was NOT doctored and that could easily be proved.
Ipso facto
"To vote for someone deemed unmockable would sacrifice a highly valuable freedom — the freedom to mock the President."
Althouse must know the connection to Obama in this statement as others above pointed out. I don't get what makes her feel that any Dem woman wouldn't fill that position just as well. So, people of color and females, and gays (at least the ones with a D after their name) should not be voted into office because of the mockability standard. Got it. Sometimes cruel neutrality just won't get the job done.
I can't remember where I first heard the term, but it's been a favorite of mine for a very long time: Feminism of Convenience.
If it's convenient, the woman is strong and independent. If it's inconvenient, the woman needs protection from the normal slings and arrows of life, especially political life.
The video is petty, it is snide and disrespectable, but it is not sexist in the least. It is also honest parody, unlike the infamous "Hitler dances a Jig" propaganda film clip after the fall of France in World War II.
It's still not clear to me how the Professora's mental meandering maturate on "mockable"
Are we talking about mocker or mockee?
Whose continued existing is threatened? Who threatens?
Who in the Emperor's Entourage would have wanted to silence the child and any future children.
Also sprach the Professora :
One of the points in favor of having Trump as the President is that we feel so free to mock him...
Is that we all the people or we the "right people" ( actually statists)
I enjoy him without directing any mockery at him.
Its like Jackie Chan fight sequence ... One feels sorry for the bad guys.
"To vote for someone deemed unmockable would sacrifice a highly valuable freedom — the freedom to mock the President."
Carl Benjamin (aka Sargon of Akkad) has challenged the "that's not funny, that's (racist, sexist, nationalist, homophobic, islamophobic, insert PC boogeyman here)" brigades by openly enjoying racist jokes. In a counter-attack Sky News has tried to shame him into silence with a series of highly critical "news" items done in a style even MSNBC's producers might regard as heavy-handed. Benjamin is standing for the EU Parliament seat for SE England as a member of UKIP. If the polls are to be trusted, neither the Sky News propaganda campaign against him nor the milkshake assault has hurt his popularity.
Maybe civilization will survive.
Maybe. Be prepared for civil war, nonetheless.
"Nancy is boxed in. She can’t make any move without huge repercussions for her one way or the other. She can’t make policy and she can’t impeach. She’s trying to claim Trump’s mental status is the problem so she has a way out via him resigning, but we all can see that’s just not so."
I know this comes off as whataboutism, but If Nancy P didn't have the MSM in her corner, think what they'd do with an R in the same situation.
yes they make up situations, like this person who was rewarded for provable lies, but the daily basilisk, and new York magazine didn't care,
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/05/msnbcs-nicolle-wallace-lobs-softballs-to-beto-what-can-we-do-better/
If Carl Benjamin fails this weekend it will be to one of the ten Brexit Party candidates, so that's still a win as far as I'm concerned.
I really enjoy Sargon's YouTube channel, and I believe he'll do as much damage as can to EU as a Brussels Brexiteer, but Nigel Farage needs to be in Whitehall if the UK is to survive as a free country, and his best route there is through the prestige his Brexit Party will gain if they dominate the British delegation in the EU Parliament, thus I'm of two minds regarding Carl Benjamin.
Don't think Nancy's got all that much to worry about -- the latest at @realDonaldTrump:
North Korea fired off some small weapons, which disturbed some of my people, and others, but not me. I have confidence that Chairman Kim will keep his promise to me, & also smiled when he called Swampman Joe Bidan a low IQ individual, & worse. Perhaps that’s sending me a signal?
Lydia,
Remember 10 years ago when Democrats were ascendant?
That was before Obama got more than a thousand of them voted out.
And got Trump elected.
Your predictive powers are roughly negligible.
Gentle reminder: Hillary is still not President.
Happy Memorial Day Weekend!
Here's the WaPo article about that other video, "Faked Pelosi videos, slowed to make her appear drunk, spread across social media."
If Pelosi had an R next to her name, WaPo would be explaining the fake video was "only slightly exaggerated to draw attention to a more serious concern about her failing mental condition"
Nancy is boxed in. She can’t make any move without huge repercussions for her one way or the other. She can’t make policy and she can’t impeach.
No sympathy. Her party has created a Frankenstein Monster that's come back home.
Moar Popcorn please.
And if you are running low on popcorn, please remember to use the Althouse-Amazon portal for all your popcorn needs. First 100 orders get a complimentary dose of Liberal Tears drawn on election night 2016.
The women in the H & S caucuses will see it as a sexist attack.
They see Wednesday and bottlecaps as sexist attacks. So nothing lost.
Coming in late I have to agree with Ed Rollins. Pelosi should not be out front all the time. I assume she is doing it because if she sends anyone else out those in her own caucus will probably eat them alive. Everyone knows Nancy has the whip hand and is not afraid to use it if one of the troops attacks her. Given that, she is getting old and given the pressures that she is under it is no surprise that she has a bit of trouble keeping her mind and mouth under discipline. The "No impeachment" schtick has to be particularly wearing given some of the House members and outsiders who are pushing it so hard and so often.
Hillary who?
Buwaya - I greatly appreciate your contributions to this particular issue. Most native-born Americans who are not "politicians" (in the myriad venues of life including work, education, religion and actual politics)cannot really fathom that the sociopathic elites have only their interests at heart and couldn't care less about American history, culture, tradition and our constitutional republic. I have personally encountered these people at work, at community events, on city commissions and in local politics. I spent a career in the engineering/construction business and served many masters in the areas of petroleum refining, light-rail transportation and electrical transmission and generation. Many of those masters displayed the characteristics you've described. But it was also my honor to work alongside many Filipinos, both male and female and I found them all, to a person, to be well-educated, decent, upstanding, honest and honorable. And all of them had left the Philippines - on purpose - to better their lives and the lives of their families. I know too little of the history of the Philippines but all of those people I knew had left home during the Marcos period. Maybe you did too. That's another thing Americans don't understand. If you move from the US, I hope you stay connected to us through Althouse. It would have been great to know you personally. Paalam.
I second Sheridan's statement, in a socratic environment like the professor has set up there are many points of view, but some praised for their wisdom and sagacity you are se definetely one.
"First, I'm tired — and was tired long ago — of the Hillary Clinton theory that every attack on a woman is "sexist." Women in high positions need to be attackable or I don't want them in high positions."
You may be tired, but actual feminists are no ways tired of playing the gender card. Women are special, and they are special victims, especially when mean men are involved. You may not want them in high positions, but actual feminists will take any positions they can get by any means possible, provided of course that the position goes to a proper prog. They actually despise your sensibilities. Which is not surprising: progs aim to destroy the culture you value. It is not a pleasant realization that your sisters are, in a deep sense, your enemies, and that you have more in common with us deplorables. But it is not too late to realize it.
jimmy kimmel has a whole section on his show where he slows down trumps speeches so he sounds like he’s drunk when making the speech. But somehow trump merely posting a speech where pelosi stammers is doctoring her speech. Or is somehow off limits. Or sexist.
The hypocrisy of the MSM and the Left (who are interchangeable) is off the charts. Everyone knows that if trump had a speech where he was acting like Pelosi that everyone in the media would jump all over it as proof Thst trump wasn’t dealing with a full deck.
In fact, trump should test this by stammering at a speech just to see if the media covers it.And how they cover it. Then at the next speech he can play a video where he discusses how he’s going to pretend to stammer at his next speech just so he can see the media act like the media. Then he can laugh at the media for acting so true to form.
Want to echo the kudos for buwaya and narciso. Remarkable insights —pattern recognition, based on “outsider” experience?— and they help (re)center the conversation. Plus civility and dry humor.
You may be tired, but actual feminists are no ways tired of playing the gender card.
You mean they are, "no ways tarred"
Watching the media self destruct is amazing and, of course, sad. Just wait, though. The bias you see today is nothing compared to how reporters will cover the 2020 presidential campaign. We'll look back at this lunacy as the good ol' days.
Thanks Sheridan, Owen, Narciso,
I am not much of a Filipino in truth, other than having grown up there.
There is a lot of Filipino in me, but it comes from nurture, mainly, not nature.
I'm actually Spanish, one of the last of that tiny persistent remnant of the old colonials. We are like you, or the Canadians or Australians, in the sense of being a European settlement in a daughter-country. At one time we even had our own dialect of Spanish. But we were always far too few, and we couldnt hold the colony. So like the French-Algerian pieds-noirs, most went home.
Our remnant must be one of the worlds tiniest minorities, of which my generation is probably the last, our children being uncomplicatedly Spanish, American, Australian, Filipino, and many other things too, with no remaining sentiment as a distinct people. Its as if the English settlement of America had failed, and the children of the last American generation became English again, if not Iroquois.
Filipinos are an interesting people, or rather they are actually many different peoples, but with a curious continuity of personalities. They have their own character that is distinct indeed, and subtle. They are worth a long discussion, which they don't get very often, because they are, Filipino-wise, generally unobtrusive and unnoticed among the loud voices of the world.
Hildabeast is what I call a "credentialed" idiot. She confirms my view with every comment. No wonder Bill ditched her long ago.
Did Chuck, Inga and Pedro get the weekend off?
Lucky us.
Post a Comment