Thanks for including the audio link for FDR's 3-15-1941 Lend Lease Speech. I listened to the whole thing (it's well worth the 13 minute time investment) and was stunned to see how closely his insights from 82 years ago parallel our current geopolitical situation. Soon after, history graphically demonstrated to all Americans what happens when authoritarians and dictators are let off the leash. What is past is prologue?
Ten or fifteen years ago, if someone told me that I would agree with, much less rally to, the words of Bill Kristol, I would not have believed them and probably punched them in the nose! Since writing the morning comments, he has articulated my thoughts and hopes for the country very well. Today’s post was inspiring; I hope the President takes his advice.
Bill Kristol, you might agree that it's much easier for a president to set out foreign policy principles to the public four months after he's reelected than six months before. FDR picked a good time for his speech, didn't he? The conventional wisdom, though, is that election campaigns need to be focused on domestic issues. Ukraine will be part of Biden's pitch, but not the top.
Re the cheap shot - would somebody tell me why HRC is speaking publicly about Trump? What purpose does it serve except her own needs for relevance and attention? She's not credible to the swing voters in the swing states who didn't vote for her in 2016 yet voted for Biden in 2020 and we need to vote for Biden again, so she's hurting Biden's cause. She should STFU.
There was one time she made remarks in November on The View. She rejected calls from Dem Progressives for a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war. She was quite eloquent, showing her deep understanding of Middle East history, clearly stating Hamas was a terrorist organization: https://abcnews.go.com/theview/video/hillary-clinton-explains-recent-comments-israel-hamas-war-104730226. She helped Biden here. But this is the only time I can think of.
Sandy, you are probably right--but I loved the cheap shot. Kevin's sputter in response to "Yeah, she called Donald Trump and conceded" was truly priceless.
I chuckled and lamented all at once when you wrote this bit of history and advice:
"As it happens, President Roosevelt gave this speech at the 1941 White House Correspondents Dinner, which took place four days after the Lend Lease vote. This year’s White House Correspondents Dinner is Saturday. But I wouldn’t follow FDR’s example in this respect. Biden, I suspect, should speak directly to the nation. From the Oval Office. Or perhaps from the FDR Memorial, which includes a quotation from his Lend Lease speech."
In fact, FDR was speaking to the nation when he spoke to the press at the WH Correspondents Dinner, because more people read newspapers in those days. In fact, more people probably could read back then. And radio news wasn't polluted and overrun by right wing pundits reinterpreting the meaning and parsing every clause to distort and belittle.
That's true, but it might better if he did short televised speeches on TV. Not many people are going to go to a venue. I get posts on Facebook but they are short. Sadly, he doesn't have a dedicated pack of news hounds like Trump. Biden I think, has appeared on Cobert. I don't know what he should do. When I was younger the Network channels all hosted the president's speech. You had no choice. Now people will just go to one of the millions of other channels.
This is what Trump does: He projects his ills on to his opponent. (Psychologists say this is a coping mechanism common among narcissists.) And his followers take it up. Their reasons are ridiculous, like "Democrats want to turn the US into a communist state." Please write more to counter these ridiculous views.
My friend told me her brother and her neighbors are Trump supporters. She says they are Republicans and they vote Republican. They refuse listen to critiques of Trump and believe the court cases against him are political. They are old but educated middle class and refuse listen at all.
My friend is not. As we've seen from the primary, about 20% of Republicans are not. I don't know how many of them could never vote for Biden, but that is the audience I have in mind. As to the swing voters in the swing states - Independents and Republicans - enough of them gave Biden the win. I don't know how many of them are persuaded by the Democrats are a threat to democracy. However many there are, they are also the audience.
That is up to the Biden campaign to reach them and persuade them. I think they can do it. They've been pretty strong since he changed his staff in January (Obama's idea).
"This means using this moment to broaden the anti-Trump coalition. This is the time to bring home to all Nikki Haley supporters, to all Reagan Republicans, to all those in any party who love liberty and loathe tyranny, that Trump is not with them. Indeed, that he is against them."
Those who support "Nikki Haley [...], to all Reagan Republicans, to all those in any party who love liberty and loathe tyranny," are most likely already aware that Trump [sic] is the wrong person, period... full stop. If they don't, then I'm not so sure anything said will beat home that point. Those who fit this demographic are, imo, too lazy to educate themselves further on the catastrophe that awaits us if Trump [sic] is returned to the Oval Office [turns head and spits three times between index and middle fingers].
-----
"drink deep from that well of sludge,"
I prefer to think of it as a Kool-Aid faux crystal punchbowl with a yuge orange turd floating in it.
It would be better if Republucans who know Trump and say he is crazy and incompetent didn't then turn around and say. "yeah we're gonna vote for him anyway." Thanks for nothin'
True, that. It's almost as if they think we won't notice the blatant hypocrisy of paying lip service to one idea while planning to pull a 180 when they actually vote. If I didn't know better I'd swear that they are considerably more concerned with the future of their tribe rather than of the country.
I remember reading a profile of McCarthy that noted that he was not seen as particularly bright in his hometown, but a "nice guy". Don't know about the "nice guy", but I do agree with the not bright part.
He doesn't remember Hillary's concession speech to her supporters? There were tears from many of them. It was shown on broadcasts.
Off topic, but I’m a little sad the Bulwark hasn’t commented on what’s happening in the nation of Georgia. It looks like a big deal, and not good news for Putin.
For the last 7 days there have been protests in the streets over some new “foreign agents” bill that’s supposed to divide them from the west. Thousands in the streets apparently. I’m not getting a lot of information from the MSM, but people in my pro-Ukraine group are cheering them on. I know the Bulwark has contacts that could shed some light.
There is no way that anyone but Trump (on the defense side) wants Trump to testify at his current trial. I am sure that the prosecution would LOVE to have Trump testify. He will make their case for them, if they give him a chance, because he is actually THAT stupid.
People like to paint Trump as some sort of brilliant player of the legal system.. and he may actually have been one at one time (though I give credit to his lawyers more than him, TBH). But he isn't any more. He is far too concerned with and busy with playing to the political rather than the legal aspects of all of this... and satiating his narcissism (which isn't actually possible). It is more about finding lawyers who are willing to do stupid things and make inane/farcicial arguments and embarass themselves in public, than anything else.
At the least, I expect him to be found guilty of the lesser charge of falsifying business records. Not sure if they will manage to get him for the felony.
And I fully expect that the jury will give far more credence to Cohen's testimony than Trump's defense wants/hopes. I would tend to believe the liar that worked for the bigger liar, myself.
Trump may have actually been smart at one point. But he has decompensated to the point that he no longer is.
because he is actually THAT stupid. It's not that he's stupid, although he totally is, it's that he has never been held accountable. He a emotional child who never gets told "no!", always has to be the winner even though he never is, and thinks he should be allowed to do anything he wants. This is why there is a SC case deciding if the President is immune from any crime, because should have been immune as president. If the SC rules, Yes, the president is immune no matter what he does, Biden should have Trump kidnapped and put in a secret prison with no phone. He should strike him from the ballots or even cancel the election. He's president now and the SC said the rules just may not apply to the president.
I wonder whether there's any way aside from asking the judge to relieve them from the case en masse for Trump's lawyers to prevent him from testifying if he wants to ... and I'm guessing that after having to keep quiet for so long, he really, REALLY wants to.
Johnson admitted that it was receiving the intelligence with Biden that actually made him realize how dangerous the situation was without the reinforcements need from the US. That's what changed his mind on bringing the bill to the House. And we can thank Biden for having a number of meetings with him so that he could understand the dire situation for Ukraine. Terri Quint
Ukraine was not mentioned in Johnson's Bible, so he didn't know where it is are why it might be important. Often I look at him on TV, and I think that there is a skull there with glasses, but it is completely empty.
I read that Biden kept working with Johnson, with facts no less, to have him understand the risks of not supporting our allies. I am glad that Johnson was able to see this and made the decision he did. While I wish it was sooner, there was a fair amount of lack of knowledge and Trump bleating to overcome.
One skill that Biden honed razor-sharp during his decades in the Senate is the ability to speak to the office, not to the man or the woman holding it. It has served him in good stead as President.
Yes, which is why he should be re-elected and not Trump. We can quibble on urgency, etc., but Biden has been governing rather well, finding common ground and middle ground. He has tended to not throw flames and fire at people, which is useful to get their input and cooperation. That Johnson led the House to vote on the funding tells me he can think along the same lines, albeit from the other side. I hope to see this continue, even if I might disagree with some of his views.
We should start a new categorization of politicians that have no backbone whatsoever. The Jellyfish Club. I nominate Kevin McCarthy as the first member of The Jellyfish Club. May he ever float in peace.
Following the NYT comments on the Trump trial it seems like Blanche's opening statement is weak, just making claims the Trump did nothing wrong, but not alluding to any evidence that would prove such.
Being Trump's defense attorney is one of the hardest jobs going. They all have to defend their client and their law licenses at the same time, in spite of the two being in constant conflict.
It was a big mistake for Blanche to deny the affair with Stormy. Everyone knows he slept with her, and it's not what this crime is about. Now the jury has no reason to believe another word out of his mouth.
Yeah, it seems to me Blanche's statement contained a lot of what Trump wanted him to say. That's good, Trump thinks he's the best at everything, including lawyering.
Thanks for including the audio link for FDR's 3-15-1941 Lend Lease Speech. I listened to the whole thing (it's well worth the 13 minute time investment) and was stunned to see how closely his insights from 82 years ago parallel our current geopolitical situation. Soon after, history graphically demonstrated to all Americans what happens when authoritarians and dictators are let off the leash. What is past is prologue?
Ten or fifteen years ago, if someone told me that I would agree with, much less rally to, the words of Bill Kristol, I would not have believed them and probably punched them in the nose! Since writing the morning comments, he has articulated my thoughts and hopes for the country very well. Today’s post was inspiring; I hope the President takes his advice.
Bill Kristol, you might agree that it's much easier for a president to set out foreign policy principles to the public four months after he's reelected than six months before. FDR picked a good time for his speech, didn't he? The conventional wisdom, though, is that election campaigns need to be focused on domestic issues. Ukraine will be part of Biden's pitch, but not the top.
Re the cheap shot - would somebody tell me why HRC is speaking publicly about Trump? What purpose does it serve except her own needs for relevance and attention? She's not credible to the swing voters in the swing states who didn't vote for her in 2016 yet voted for Biden in 2020 and we need to vote for Biden again, so she's hurting Biden's cause. She should STFU.
She really hasn't found a meaningful new role for herself, has she? It's kind of sad.
There was one time she made remarks in November on The View. She rejected calls from Dem Progressives for a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war. She was quite eloquent, showing her deep understanding of Middle East history, clearly stating Hamas was a terrorist organization: https://abcnews.go.com/theview/video/hillary-clinton-explains-recent-comments-israel-hamas-war-104730226. She helped Biden here. But this is the only time I can think of.
Sandy, you are probably right--but I loved the cheap shot. Kevin's sputter in response to "Yeah, she called Donald Trump and conceded" was truly priceless.
Me too. Plus it's nice when a journalist -- a Fox one, no less! actually pushes back on BS like that.
I chuckled and lamented all at once when you wrote this bit of history and advice:
"As it happens, President Roosevelt gave this speech at the 1941 White House Correspondents Dinner, which took place four days after the Lend Lease vote. This year’s White House Correspondents Dinner is Saturday. But I wouldn’t follow FDR’s example in this respect. Biden, I suspect, should speak directly to the nation. From the Oval Office. Or perhaps from the FDR Memorial, which includes a quotation from his Lend Lease speech."
In fact, FDR was speaking to the nation when he spoke to the press at the WH Correspondents Dinner, because more people read newspapers in those days. In fact, more people probably could read back then. And radio news wasn't polluted and overrun by right wing pundits reinterpreting the meaning and parsing every clause to distort and belittle.
That's true, but it might better if he did short televised speeches on TV. Not many people are going to go to a venue. I get posts on Facebook but they are short. Sadly, he doesn't have a dedicated pack of news hounds like Trump. Biden I think, has appeared on Cobert. I don't know what he should do. When I was younger the Network channels all hosted the president's speech. You had no choice. Now people will just go to one of the millions of other channels.
Bill, my conservative friend who voted for Haley already knows Trump is a danger. But in order to keep his conscience clear after supporting him in 2020, he needs to tell himself - and his gurus in right-wing talk radio provide all the talking points he needs - that Biden is the greater danger. A recent AP-NORC Center poll found that Trump supporters are now saying the Democrats are a threat to Democracy (https://apnews.com/article/democracy-2024-election-trump-biden-poll-39309519c8473175c25ab5a305e629ba?link_id=1&can_id=58852f62e041d5b01a86985c4a51df6b&source=email-three-ways-to-diffuse-the-tension-8&email_referrer=email_2287612&email_subject=can-we-reduce-our-fear-around-the-election).
This is what Trump does: He projects his ills on to his opponent. (Psychologists say this is a coping mechanism common among narcissists.) And his followers take it up. Their reasons are ridiculous, like "Democrats want to turn the US into a communist state." Please write more to counter these ridiculous views.
My friend told me her brother and her neighbors are Trump supporters. She says they are Republicans and they vote Republican. They refuse listen to critiques of Trump and believe the court cases against him are political. They are old but educated middle class and refuse listen at all.
My friend is not. As we've seen from the primary, about 20% of Republicans are not. I don't know how many of them could never vote for Biden, but that is the audience I have in mind. As to the swing voters in the swing states - Independents and Republicans - enough of them gave Biden the win. I don't know how many of them are persuaded by the Democrats are a threat to democracy. However many there are, they are also the audience.
My friend and her husband voted for Biden, and from what you are saying, hopefully enough Republicans will vote for Biden too.
That is up to the Biden campaign to reach them and persuade them. I think they can do it. They've been pretty strong since he changed his staff in January (Obama's idea).
I had to look up "polycule" to fully appreciate Tim's piece on Mike Johnson this morning. Totally worth the trouble!
Lots of “Cheap Shots” material for today. I particularly liked Matt Taibbi’s meltdown. He did not have a good weekend.
"This means using this moment to broaden the anti-Trump coalition. This is the time to bring home to all Nikki Haley supporters, to all Reagan Republicans, to all those in any party who love liberty and loathe tyranny, that Trump is not with them. Indeed, that he is against them."
Those who support "Nikki Haley [...], to all Reagan Republicans, to all those in any party who love liberty and loathe tyranny," are most likely already aware that Trump [sic] is the wrong person, period... full stop. If they don't, then I'm not so sure anything said will beat home that point. Those who fit this demographic are, imo, too lazy to educate themselves further on the catastrophe that awaits us if Trump [sic] is returned to the Oval Office [turns head and spits three times between index and middle fingers].
-----
"drink deep from that well of sludge,"
I prefer to think of it as a Kool-Aid faux crystal punchbowl with a yuge orange turd floating in it.
fnord
It would be better if Republucans who know Trump and say he is crazy and incompetent didn't then turn around and say. "yeah we're gonna vote for him anyway." Thanks for nothin'
True, that. It's almost as if they think we won't notice the blatant hypocrisy of paying lip service to one idea while planning to pull a 180 when they actually vote. If I didn't know better I'd swear that they are considerably more concerned with the future of their tribe rather than of the country.
fnord
Kevin McCarthy, providing validity to the theorem that a creature that walks, talks, and looks like a duck is in fact a duck.
I remember reading a profile of McCarthy that noted that he was not seen as particularly bright in his hometown, but a "nice guy". Don't know about the "nice guy", but I do agree with the not bright part.
He doesn't remember Hillary's concession speech to her supporters? There were tears from many of them. It was shown on broadcasts.
A very large number of Americans seem to think that "nice" is a synonym for "affable". It is not, and McCarthy is only the latest obvious example.
Off topic, but I’m a little sad the Bulwark hasn’t commented on what’s happening in the nation of Georgia. It looks like a big deal, and not good news for Putin.
Whats happening in GA?
For the last 7 days there have been protests in the streets over some new “foreign agents” bill that’s supposed to divide them from the west. Thousands in the streets apparently. I’m not getting a lot of information from the MSM, but people in my pro-Ukraine group are cheering them on. I know the Bulwark has contacts that could shed some light.
WRT Wehle's article:
There is no way that anyone but Trump (on the defense side) wants Trump to testify at his current trial. I am sure that the prosecution would LOVE to have Trump testify. He will make their case for them, if they give him a chance, because he is actually THAT stupid.
People like to paint Trump as some sort of brilliant player of the legal system.. and he may actually have been one at one time (though I give credit to his lawyers more than him, TBH). But he isn't any more. He is far too concerned with and busy with playing to the political rather than the legal aspects of all of this... and satiating his narcissism (which isn't actually possible). It is more about finding lawyers who are willing to do stupid things and make inane/farcicial arguments and embarass themselves in public, than anything else.
At the least, I expect him to be found guilty of the lesser charge of falsifying business records. Not sure if they will manage to get him for the felony.
And I fully expect that the jury will give far more credence to Cohen's testimony than Trump's defense wants/hopes. I would tend to believe the liar that worked for the bigger liar, myself.
Trump may have actually been smart at one point. But he has decompensated to the point that he no longer is.
because he is actually THAT stupid. It's not that he's stupid, although he totally is, it's that he has never been held accountable. He a emotional child who never gets told "no!", always has to be the winner even though he never is, and thinks he should be allowed to do anything he wants. This is why there is a SC case deciding if the President is immune from any crime, because should have been immune as president. If the SC rules, Yes, the president is immune no matter what he does, Biden should have Trump kidnapped and put in a secret prison with no phone. He should strike him from the ballots or even cancel the election. He's president now and the SC said the rules just may not apply to the president.
I wonder whether there's any way aside from asking the judge to relieve them from the case en masse for Trump's lawyers to prevent him from testifying if he wants to ... and I'm guessing that after having to keep quiet for so long, he really, REALLY wants to.
I doubt that they will ask to be relieved or, if they do, the judge will grant it.
I don't see the judge granting it, either. It would leave their client without representation.
Johnson admitted that it was receiving the intelligence with Biden that actually made him realize how dangerous the situation was without the reinforcements need from the US. That's what changed his mind on bringing the bill to the House. And we can thank Biden for having a number of meetings with him so that he could understand the dire situation for Ukraine. Terri Quint
Ukraine was not mentioned in Johnson's Bible, so he didn't know where it is are why it might be important. Often I look at him on TV, and I think that there is a skull there with glasses, but it is completely empty.
I read that Biden kept working with Johnson, with facts no less, to have him understand the risks of not supporting our allies. I am glad that Johnson was able to see this and made the decision he did. While I wish it was sooner, there was a fair amount of lack of knowledge and Trump bleating to overcome.
One skill that Biden honed razor-sharp during his decades in the Senate is the ability to speak to the office, not to the man or the woman holding it. It has served him in good stead as President.
Yes, which is why he should be re-elected and not Trump. We can quibble on urgency, etc., but Biden has been governing rather well, finding common ground and middle ground. He has tended to not throw flames and fire at people, which is useful to get their input and cooperation. That Johnson led the House to vote on the funding tells me he can think along the same lines, albeit from the other side. I hope to see this continue, even if I might disagree with some of his views.
We should start a new categorization of politicians that have no backbone whatsoever. The Jellyfish Club. I nominate Kevin McCarthy as the first member of The Jellyfish Club. May he ever float in peace.
What do you have against jelly fish? They are beautiful creatures. The only thing they have in common with McCarthy is no backbone and no brain.
Another one would be former Tennessee Senator Robert Corker, who always meekishly objected to Trump but always folded.
Following the NYT comments on the Trump trial it seems like Blanche's opening statement is weak, just making claims the Trump did nothing wrong, but not alluding to any evidence that would prove such.
Being Trump's defense attorney is one of the hardest jobs going. They all have to defend their client and their law licenses at the same time, in spite of the two being in constant conflict.
It was a big mistake for Blanche to deny the affair with Stormy. Everyone knows he slept with her, and it's not what this crime is about. Now the jury has no reason to believe another word out of his mouth.
Yeah, it seems to me Blanche's statement contained a lot of what Trump wanted him to say. That's good, Trump thinks he's the best at everything, including lawyering.