"The Syrian government had been almost entirely absent from the northeast since it withdrew or was chased out by armed rebels."

"The Syrian Democratic Forces, a Kurdish-led militia that worked with the United States to fight the Islamic State, soon became the region’s overarching political force. Although the Syrian Kurds did not declare Mr. Assad’s government an enemy, Mr. Assad distrusted their efforts to establish self rule and vowed to retake all of Syria’s territory. But he had no way to do so, especially as American troops remained in the area. President Trump’s decision last week to move those troops out of the way of a Turkish incursion gave Mr. Assad an opening, and his forces began to fill it on Monday. In some towns, they were welcomed by locals who chanted nationalistic slogans and carried Mr. Assad’s photograph. In other areas, trucks drove large numbers of Syrian soldiers into the area to take up positions."

From "Syria Live Updates: Assad’s Forces Move Into Area Hit by Turkey" (NYT).

I'm also seeing there that the European Union countries have unanimously agreed to stop selling arm to Turkey, even though "Like most European Union nations, Turkey is a NATO member."

"[S]ingling out Trump for the turmoil engulfing the country is possible only if you disregard the No. 1 contributor: the refusal of Democrats and most of the media to accept the results of the 2016 election...."

"That refusal has become, among many on the left, borderline psychotic. Nothing else compares to the damage it is doing to our ­nation’s fabric and global image. Trump’s irritating foibles and unorthodox ways pale in comparison. The continuing challenge to his legitimacy is a cancer on the republic."

Writes Michael Goodwin in "Madness of leftist zealots" (NY Post). I strongly agree with that opinion.  I am not a Trump supporter, but I have stood firm since the election on this point: Trump won, his supporters prevailed, and they are entitled to what they won. That's why we go to so much trouble over the election.

We're currently troubling ourselves endlessly over the 2020 election, but why should we if the new game is to destroy whatever victory is achieved? Do Democrats think they can sell the idea that when they win, they get to keep what they won, but if the other party wins, it's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham?

I don't accept it, and I'm a moderate swing voter in a swing state.

"The 90-degree day did not appear to slow Warren: She bounded up the steps to the stage and gave a kinetic, full-body wave to the crowd."

"Without saying a word, the 70-year-old presidential candidate sent a message: Her physical stamina belies her age."

From "Elizabeth Warren, 70, flaunts her fitness as Democratic candidates’ health becomes a debate issue" (L.A. Times).

Impeachable!

He's trying to rig the vote on "Dancing with the Stars":

Vote for good guy @seanspicer tonight on Dancing With The Stars. He has always been there for us!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 14, 2019

How about waiting until we've seen the actual dancing so you can at least pretend it's a judgment on the merits?

So unprincipled.

Somehow this made me think: I'd like to see Adam Schiff on "Dancing with the Stars."

"Turkey is an ally, the Free Syrian Army was an ally for seven years, and the Kurds have been allies in Syria, so it's a very complicated, messy situation."

"But I think a lot of people are not acknowledging that Turkey was coming in one way or another and 50 soldiers would simply be in the way, and be a tripwire to a much worse outcome. And so I think the president was right in moving 50 soldiers out of the way of an onslaught of tens of thousands of Turkish troops.... And the president made a judgment that I think most military commanders would agree with that you don't have 50 soldiers -- you don't go to war with 50 soldiers.... Once the Turks said they were coming, it would have been foolish to leave 50 soldiers in the wake of tens of thousands of people coming across the border.... Realize the president is asking is it in our national security interest to somehow figure out how the Kurds can live with the Turks? The other interesting thing that people don't mention is all the Kurds aren't the same. The Iraqi Kurds actually are cooperating with Turkey to turn in Kurdish Workers Party officials that they see as terrorists. So the Iraqi Kurds are actually turning over some of these Kurds that allied with the Syrians. So, realize that all the Kurds aren't the same on every side of every border.... [A]s we've gotten stability in Iraq and as the Kurds have a lot of self-control in governing sort of like a province, there is actually 1,800 Turkish businesses doing business in that part of Iraq that is controlled by the Kurds. It's a prosperous oil region, and there is back and forth between the Turks and the Kurds and it actually works pretty well. But these Kurds don't actually get along with the Syrian Kurds so well. And many of the Syrian Kurds have been trying to break off part of Turkey into an independent country. It's been going on for really close to 100 years. Many of the Kurds in Syria actually were expelled or exiled from Turkey back in the 1920s, '30s, and '40s. So there is this long history. And the question we have to ask is, and I have to ask, am I going to send the sons and daughters of America and mothers and fathers, and I'm to send them there to die to try to figure out how the Kurds and the Turks can get along? And I don't see that in our national interest. And we should vote on it. We should vote on it in Congress and declare war if that's what people want.... [M]y oath is to the constitution. My oath isn't as to some promise that somebody thinks we made for a Kurdish homeland. We should vote. And here's the reason why we won't vote, they don't know who to declare war on... And ultimately it's probably in the Kurds' best interests to be aligned with Assad. But as long as we continue to say Assad has to go, we're never getting to a peaceful situation. Assad is staying. And if Assad were aligned with the Kurds and the Kurds were given some semi-autonomy in their region, it could develop the way it is in Iraq currently....."

Said Rand Paul on "Meet the Press" yesterday (text with video at link).

It's like Trump's "perfect" phone call.

"Why Democrats are sure Adam Schiff is the perfect person to take on Trump" (NBC).

Apparently, "perfect" has become a perfectly silly word.

From the silly puff piece:

Schiff's style — so measured in tone that his partisan edges can be missed as easily as his dry humor — provides the kind of contrast fellow Democrats hope make the 59-year-old father of two [a] tough... match for Trump...

"He's a methodical, boring guy, but that's what you need," said one House colleague who spoke on the condition of anonymity to give a candid assessment of Schiff without fear of harming their relationship....

So Schiff is scary enough to intimidate a colleague who only wants to compliment him, where the compliment includes the iffy item "boring."

"He will be regarded as a generational leader when our national security and nothing less than the republic was on the line," [Eric Swalwell, D-Calif.] told NBC news....

"Schiff has become part celebrity and part political powerhouse — holding the keys to unlock the vindication box that Democrats and everyday Americans have been salivating for," said Dave Jacobson, a Democratic strategist in Southern California. "Given that California is a bastion of deep-blue progressivism, there is only an upside to this impeachment effort for Schiff."

Are you salivating for the vindication box? Here's Schiff! He's holding the keys!

The Queen gave her speech to her admiring crowd.

“Right, you shouty cunts, listen up.

One was planning to spend the morning in one’s onesie eating Revels and watching This Morning, but now I have to tit about reading this bollocks that will be rejected in its entirety.

I should fucking behead the lot of you.”#QueensSpeech pic.twitter.com/ZGa4skdJbC

— 🏳️‍🌈 Max 🏳️‍🌈 (@SpillerOfTea) October 14, 2019

The moon at sunrise.

Lady Liberty, Hong Kong.

On Sunday morning, Lady Liberty Hong Kong stood on top of Lion Rock. Despite the heavy rain and thunder storm, 26 Hongkongers moved the 4-meter tall, 80kg Lady Liberty up to Lion Rock overnight. #HongKongProtests #LadyLibertyHK pic.twitter.com/1IIfS9zrLJ

— RTHK's The Pulse (@thepulse_rthk) October 13, 2019

I'd like to see that "Macabre Video of Fake Trump Shooting Media and Critics" that was "Shown at His Resort."

According to the NYT. But the Times, understandably, doesn't want to promote it... though they obviously must know that talking about it while making it hard to get is a special sort of promotion. It intensifies the reader's desire to get to the thing that is withheld. Would it not be better to satisfy the piddling desire than to create it and then deny it?

A video depicting a macabre scene of a fake President Trump shooting, stabbing and brutally assaulting members of the news media and his political opponents was shown at a conference for his supporters at his Miami resort last week, according to footage obtained by The New York Times.

This sounds like that old video showing Trump in a boxing ring fighting an opponent that had the CNN logo for a head. But that was silly, not "macabre," and boxing is a controlled form of violence, unlike the "shooting, stabbing and brutally assaulting" (described in more detail after the jump).

Who ran this conference? It wasn't the Trump campaign. It was a group called American Priority. But...

The organizer of the event said in a statement on Sunday that the clip had been played at the conference, saying it was part of a “meme exhibit.” He denounced the video and said his organization was looking into how it was shown at the event.

I see there were some high level Trumpsters "scheduled to speak at the three-day conference": Donald Trump Jr., Sarah Huckabee Sanders, and Ron DeSantis. But there's no evidence that they had anything to do with the video or that they got a look at the "meme exhibit."

That said, it really is ridiculously violent (judging from the text, which eliminates any comic spirit that might be present in the original):

The video, which includes the logo for Mr. Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign, comprises a series of internet memes. The most violent clip shows Mr. Trump’s head superimposed on the body of a man opening fire inside the “Church of Fake News” on parishioners who have the faces of his critics or the logos of media organizations superimposed on their bodies. It appears to be an edited scene of a church massacre from the 2014 dark comedy film “Kingsman: The Secret Service.”...

Mr. Trump stops in the middle of the church, pulls a gun out of his suit jacket pocket and begins a graphic rampage. As the parishioners try to flee, the president fires at them. He shoots Black Lives Matter in the head, and also shoots Vice News.... He wrestles a parishioner with a Vice News logo as a face to the ground and then shoots the person at point blank range. In the background, the former F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, is seen trying to get away....

He strikes the late Arizona senator John McCain in the back of the neck. He hits the television personality Rosie O’Donnell in the face and then stabs her in the head. He strikes Representative Maxine Waters, Democrat of California. He lights the head of Senator Bernie Sanders, a Democratic presidential rival, on fire. He takes Senator Mitt Romney, Republican of Utah, hostage before throwing him to the ground. Then he strikes former President Barack Obama in the back and throws him against a wall.

Others shown in the video include Mika Brzezinski of MSNBC; former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; former President Bill Clinton; the film producer Harvey Weinstein; and Representative Adam B. Schiff, the California Democrat who as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee is overseeing an impeachment inquiry of Mr. Trump.

The clip ends with Mr. Trump putting a stake into the head of a person with a CNN logo for a face. Mr. Trump then stands on the altar, admiring his rampage, and smiles.

Possible arguments in favor the video: 1. It's so extreme that the comedy is obvious (and you'd see that if you could actually watch it rather than read a description of it), 2. Trump has been so viciously pummeled throughout his presidency that he's entitled to a fantasy of fighting back, 3. Our movies are so chock full of violence like this that it's part of American culture and we know how to consume it and enjoy it while still remaining good, decent people who know right from wrong.

I'm not actually making those arguments. I have no position without seeing the actual video and understanding the context in which it was presented. I'm just sketching out the arguments because I can see them, and that's something I would do even if my goal was to make arguments against the video. That's how you develop good arguments.

Also: I defended Kathy Griffin when she did that severed head photograph.

ADDED: Here's a tweet with the video. I've now seen it. I expect the videos to get taken down systematically, but the hashtag — #TrumpVideo — will effectively get you to another tweet that has it.

This video depicting a macabre scene of a fake President Trump shooting, stabbing & assaulting members of the news media & his political opponents was shown at a conference for his supporters at his Miami resort.

Despicable.#TrumpVideopic.twitter.com/4Qjk1zt9aG

— The Hummingbird 🐦 (@SaysHummingbird) October 14, 2019

AND:

Re: the video played over the weekend: The @POTUS @realDonaldTrump has not yet seen the video, he will see it shortly, but based upon everything he has heard, he strongly condemns this video.

— Stephanie Grisham (@PressSec) October 14, 2019

"It bothers me to not be able to say the thing I want to say that they really agree with but because they're out in public, they have to be oh, we're good people, we can't laugh at that, or we have to groan to show that we're good people. That shit pisses me off."

Bill Maher said talking to Howard Stern:



Howard Stern gets to do his show without seeing or hearing the audience. Maher says he's jealous. Not only is Howard spared the inhibition of the phony "good people" in the audience, he has fantastically loyal fans and is able to say whatever he wants, and they never reject him.

I've clipped out the segment, but the whole interview is great, so scroll back to the beginning. Stern challenges Maher over why he doesn't have a marriage. There's also a nice section about Stern's hatred of travel. He likes home.

ADDED: Here's the travel part:



He has so much anxiety about packing (me too!), and he likes the comfort of his own studio (in his house). I've set up that clip so that it ends with Maher challenging him about not getting to be in front of an audience (the very point that is refuted in the bit at the end of the show that I put in my first clip).

I used to have a list of selected tags in the sidebar.

I happened to notice that as I was retroactively adding a new tag today. Back in 2008, when I thought it would be interesting to point you toward some tags of the kind I especially like, the selected tags were:

annoyingness
aphorism
clear speech
hunger
like
marginalia
narcissism
nice
normal
nothing
nuance
nudging
paying attention
religion substitutes
seen and unseen
sleep
solitude
survival
unsaid things
unwritten books

If you click on them now, they'll take you to all the posts with that tag, including the many posts after 2008.

Sunday morning skyline.

Okay, everybody lean back, stretch out your neck, and push your chin up toward the sky.

That's the pose of the moment:



What does it mean — for Judy, for the Joker, and for all us?



It means: I don't know what the hell is going on in this crazy world and I've got my problems but — damn you all — I am here and I am moving forward! I turn my face toward the heavens and I soak up  inspiration! Energy! Lunacy!

Or something.

Try it, when you're running low. You can do it Judy-style, with fingers splayed across your clavicle, as if to pledge allegiance to your own ego. Or you can do it Joker-style with fists flung sideways as if to say "O, universe! Take me! I'm yours!"

"Of all the things Trump’s done, why pick on the Zelensky call? It’s as if Trump’s sins had been inscribed on ping pong balls and placed in a big tumbler..."

"... like the kind used to pick lottery numbers. 'And the winner is, "Zelensky phone call on July 25."'OK! Democrats and the press then all agree to get very worked up over the 'systematic attack on American democracy.' I still don’t believe what Trump did is a 'high crime' — that’s my story, and I’m sticking to it. I can think of 10 things he’s done that are worse, including firing Comey. And hiring Priebus. (And, yes, putting the children of families separated at the border into foster care—that was too harsh.) None of these justify removing Trump under the Constitution, or else every president in my lifetime would have been the subject of ongoing impeachment proceedings—which may be where we’re headed. Always Be Impeaching."

So begins Mickey Kaus in "Best Thing I've Read on Impeachment/It's way more complicated than the huffed-up MSM would have it." Much more at the link. I especially like the last 2 sentences (which are based on the observation that the Zelensky phone call issue turns on Trump's intent

Evolution has built our brains to conflate self-interest and justice. A good con man believes his own con. If “intent” is what counts, that might make Trump unimpeachable.

That "best thing" he's read is "Is It Ever OK for a President to Ask a Foreign Country to Investigate a Political Rival?/Sometimes, yes—which is why Donald Trump’s potential impeachment hinges on his motive in doing so" by lawprof Edward B. Foley (Politico). Excerpt:

This still doesn't answer the question — wafted at the recent Trump rallies — "Where's Hunter?"

I'm reading "Hunter Biden to Leave Chinese Company Board, His Lawyer Says/He plans to resign from the BHR board of directors on or by Oct. 31, his lawyer said in a statement" (NYT).

That only tells where he will not be at some slightly precise point in the future — "on or by Oct. 31" — and only if he follows through with his "plan."

An elusive character, that Hunter.

It's a written statement and it's not written by him but by his lawyer, George Mesires.

I've read the entire text of the lawyer's statement, which I reprint in full after the jump. My comments are minimal because I'm seeing things I would pursue if I were doing a serious investigation, but that's not what this post can possibly do.

I must say that I can understand why Hunter Biden doesn't make himself available for interviews. It strikes me as similar to why Trump doesn't want to hand over all his old tax forms. It's complicated, and he has enemies. Anything he puts out there will be used against him, and he'll get twisted up trying to offer comprehensible explanations.