Bad night, but…
1 Straight to the top of the charts…When we put together the definitive list of President Trump’s Top Ten (Top 100? Top 1000?) stupid, undignified and self-wounding tweets, yesterday’s sequence of unsubstantiated videos–from a radical right wing British group— of alleged violence by Muslims has to be on the list. I could counter that the eruption of indignation by the vast majority of people who can comprehend what’s wrong with this is a bit annoying from the progressive side—the official Obama Administration position that Islam is a lovely religion of rainbows and unicorns and that Muhammad doesn’t instruct his followers from the grave that infidels are scum and deserve to die is far more dangerous than Trump’s hate-tweets—but that would obscure the key point. Trump’s retweeting is ugly, unnecessary, undignified, looks bigoted, and plays into the hands of the worst of his enemies, who express themselves like this.
Now we have to listen to that dishonest and contrived 25th Amendment garbage again, which never quite stopped anyway. Once again, the President has blown more wind into the sails of anti-democratic hypocrites like Ezra Klein, who argues for a Constitution and Separation of Powers-wrecking version of impeachment to get rid of Trump. No, Trump hasn’t gone crazy: he’s exactly the man we elected, and exactly as able to do his job as he ever was. Tweeting irresponsibly is not a high crime and misdemeanor. Being Donald Trump is not a high crime and misdemeanor.
But the President is playing with fire by encouraging the large political movement that would criminalize not agreeing with their world view. That’s as indefensible as it is idiotic.
2. This much is clear. It is now clear that NBC only fired Matt Lauer because an explosive Variety exposé was on the way, and it was a close call at that. It is pretty clear that the mystery of why NBC rejected journalist Ronan Farrow’s investigative reporting on Harvey Weinstein has been solved: NBC had its own lurking sexual misconduct cover-up to worry about. It is, or should be clear from Variety’s reporting that the astounding brazenness of Lauer’s conduct had to be common knowledge among Lauer’s colleagues and NBC executives, and that they unethically applied The King’s Pass, deliberately allowing Lauer to abuse and terrorize female employees, some of whom played along to get along. TMZ uncovered an old interview in which Katie Couric happily revealed that one consequence of working with Matt was that she got her butt pinched a lot. Nobody paid attention, in part because our pathetic news media buried it.
It is thus clear that all the tears and shock expressed yesterday by the likes of Savannah Guthrie were pure, dishonest, phony cover. They knew. They had to know. They had to know just like all those grandstanding virtue-signalling Hollywood stars–Meryl, Angelina, Gwyneth—and all those greedy, hypocritical, “feminist” pols—Hillary, Obama, Pelosi—knew about Weinstein.
It is clear that we are fools to trust these people.
ADDENDUM: This. Ugh.
Yesterday, while making public statements to the contrary, Clyburn flippantly suggested to reporters that sexual harassment standards were different for elected officials like his good friend Rep. Conyers. In one respect he’s correct: when the allegations are known to the electorate before an election, then the voters have ratified the official, warts and all. This principle does not apply to Conyers, just as it did not apply to Bill Clinton. Clyburn also, according to sources, stunk up a closed door meeting about Conyers by comparing Conyers’ accusers to Susan Smith, South Carolina’s child murderer. Like her, the accusers are white, you see.
Reporter Robert Draper tweeted, “James Clyburn compared Conyers’ accusers to the child murderer Susan Smith, who initially claimed a black man had abducted her kids. Clyburn said, these are all white women who’ve made these charges against Conyers. When asked if that comment was true, Draper said he verified it through two sources, adding “Clyburn has used the Susan Smith parallel more than once, to members & staffers.”
4. Watch out for those Ethics Train Wrecks…Greg Schiano just got run down by one from 2011! Last week, Ohio State football squad defensive coordinator Greg Schiano was about to be named the new football head coach at the University of Tennessee. The decision leaked before it was announced, and a protest on campus and on social media turned into a wave, based on the allegation that Schiano had failed to report a sexual assault by child molester Jerry Sandusky when Schiano was an assistant coach at Penn State under Joe Paterno.
“SCHIANO COVERED UP CHILD RAPE AT PENN STATE,” was painted on The Rock, a campus landmark and a sort of predigital town square.
The accusation was based on double hearsay in a deposition (someone heard someone say that they heard…) and thus completely unreliable and inadmissible as evidence. Double hearsay is no more than rumor. Never mind: Tennessee’s craven leaders retracted the job offer (it’s a million dollar job) , even after saying that the attacks on Schiano were unfair. A New York Times sports reporter believes that the Penn State Ethics Train Wreck was diverted to take out Sciano because of his so-so coaching record, not because he could be fairly implicated in the Sandusky-Paterno fiasco. John Ziegler at Mediate convincingly debunks the attack on Schiano, and writes,
“The bottom line of this situation is that an obviously innocent man may very well lose a very significant job (and never get hired as a head coach again) based on nothing more than the grossly ignorant “virtue signaling” of the Twitter mob. This is no better (in some ways it is worse) than what they did during the Salem Witch Trials. This is wrong. It is happening far too often in this strange new era. And, it must stop.”
Now that’s fair.
5. Old Lives Matter. Ann Althouse, commenting on the Angela Lansbury gaffe regarding women sharing the blame for their own sexual harassment, opined that mentioning the actress’s age (92) as a mitigation is patronizing and “ageism.” I mentioned her age in my commentary on the matter, and Ann’s just wrong. Lansbury’s age doesn’t make her comment any better, but it does explain a lot about her point of view and the generational nature of opinions regarding gender roles and social norms.