[guest post by Dana]

Last week, President Trump spoke at the Boy Scouts of America’s National Jamboree. Traditionally, speeches made by presidents at these events are benign, non-political and focus on the values esteemed by the organization. However, after last week’s speech, the president found himself criticized for giving a political campaign speech, replete with inflammatory rhetoric and political digs. In other words, the speech was typical Trump. Sandwiched in between the sort of comments you would expect a President of the United States to make to Boy Scouts, were assorted jabs directed at President Obama, Hillary Clinton, Fake News, Fake Media, a subtle warning to Secretary Tom Price, and a pathetic rehash of his election win:

Now with that, I have to tell you our economy is doing great. Our stock market has picked up — since the election November 8th. Do we remember that date? (Applause.) Was that a beautiful date? (Applause.) What a date. Do you remember that famous night on television, November 8th, where they said — these dishonest people — where they said there is no path to victory for Donald Trump? They forgot about the forgotten people. By the way, they’re not forgetting about the forgotten people anymore. They’re going crazy trying to figure it out. But I told them, far too late. It’s far too late.

But do you remember that incredible night with the maps and the Republicans are red and the Democrats are blue, and that map was so red, it was unbelievable, and they didn’t know what to say? (Applause.)

And you know we have a tremendous disadvantage in the Electoral College — popular vote is much easier. Because New York, California, Illinois — you have to practically run the East Coast. And we did. We won Florida. We won South Carolina. We won North Carolina. We won Pennsylvania. (Applause.)

We won and won. So when they said, there is no way to victory, there is no way to 270. I went to Maine four times because it’s one vote, and we won. But we won — one vote. I went there because I kept hearing we’re at 269. But then Wisconsin came in. Many, many years — Michigan came in.

And we worked hard there. My opponent didn’t work hard there because she was told —

AUDIENCE: Booo!

THE PRESIDENT: She was told she was going to win Michigan, and I said, well, wait a minute, the car industry is moving to Mexico. Why is she going to move — she’s there. Why are they allowing it to move?

And by the way, do you see those car industry — do you see what’s happening, how they’re coming back to Michigan? They’re coming back to Ohio. They’re starting to peel back in. (Applause.)

And we go to Wisconsin — now, Wisconsin hadn’t been won in many, many years by a Republican. But we go to Wisconsin, and we had tremendous crowds. And I’d leave these massive crowds. I’d say, why are we going to lose this state?

The polls — that’s also fake news. They’re fake polls. But the polls are saying — but we won Wisconsin. (Applause.) So I have to tell you what we did, in all fairness, is an unbelievable tribute to you and all of the other millions and millions of people that came out and voted for Make America Great Again. (Applause.)

AUDIENCE: USA! USA! USA!

THE PRESIDENT: And I’ll tell you what, we are, indeed, making America great again. What’s going on is incredible. (Applause.)

It’s like the aged college quarterback who is well past his prime, and is sitting at the bar regaling the regulars with his glory day stories for the 100th time. Because that’s all he’s got.

After the speech, the Boy Scouts of America president Randall Stephenson said he wasn’t surprised by the speech:

“Anyone knows his speeches get highly political — we anticipated that this could be the case,” Stephenson said. “Do I wish the president hadn’t gone there and hadn’t been political? Of course.”

But the organization made the decision to follow tradition and invite this president – in spite of what they knew would come as a result.

And in the following days, there were complaints from parents about the president inappropriately inserting politics into the speech. As a result, the Boy Scouts of America issued an apology:

Scouts have continued to trade patches, climb rock walls, and share stories about the day’s adventures. But for our Scouting family at home not able to see these real moments of Scouting, we know the past few days have been overshadowed by the remarks offered by the President of the United States.

I want to extend my sincere apologies to those in our Scouting family who were offended by the political rhetoric that was inserted into the jamboree. That was never our intent. The invitation for the sitting U.S. President to visit the National Jamboree is a long-standing tradition that has been extended to the leader of our nation that has had a Jamboree during his term since 1937. It is in no way an endorsement of any person, party or policies. For years, people have called upon us to take a position on political issues, and we have steadfastly remained non-partisan and refused to comment on political matters. We sincerely regret that politics were inserted into the Scouting program.

Learning of the criticism, President Trump argued that the speech was not controversial and consequently, there was not a mixed reaction to it:

“And by the way, I’d be the first to admit mixed. I’m a guy that will tell you mixed. There was no mix there,” Trump said during the interview. “That was a standing ovation from the time I walked out to the time I left, and for five minutes after I had already gone. There was no mix.”

He then double-downed, saying:

And I got a call from the head of the Boy Scouts saying it was the greatest speech that was ever made to them, and they were very thankful,” Trump said. “So there was — there was no mix.”

Except, the Boy Scouts of America claim they are unaware of any such call having been made.

Look, let’s just be very clear about Trump: that he might lie about this is about as surprising as him littering a speech with boasts of his election win – even if that speech is being delivered to the Boy Scouts of America. Both behaviors are completely consistent with who we know him to be: a proven liar and a shameless braggadocio. So why on earth was anyone in the estimated audience of 40,000 surprised or taken aback by what the president said? Why would anyone expect anything different from him?

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

More #FAKENEWS!! from the leftists at . . . Sports Illustrated?

During election season, Bedminster morphed into a kind of permanent campaign rally site. Trump posters and bumper stickers were plastered across the property, and an anti-Hillary shrine was built in a bar in the men’s locker room. The club held a Ryder Cup–style competition in which the teams wore either red or black Make America Great Again hats. At most other golf courses in America the TV is tuned to Golf Channel, on mute, but throughout last summer and fall, the television in Trump Bedminster’s shop was on Fox News, with the sound blaring. As President, Trump has already made four visits to the club. He has his own cottage adjacent to the pool; it was recently given a secure perimeter by the Secret Service, leading to the inevitable joke that it’s the only wall Trump has successfully built. Chatting with some members before a recent round of golf, he explained his frequent appearances: “That White House is a real dump.” (A White House spokesperson denies this occurred.) Trump is often at his most unguarded among the people who pay for their proximity to him. Last November, the President-elect hosted a cocktail reception and dinner at Bedminster on the same weekend that he was holding interviews at the club with candidates for his Cabinet. At the dinner, Trump addressed the members of the club by saying, “This is my real group. You are the special people. I see all of you. I recognize, like, 100% of you, just about.” Then he issued an open invitation to drop in on his Cabinet interviews the next day.

My lede was partially ironic but I don’t follow sports journalism, so others will have to educate me as to whether SI is a hotbed of #FAKENEWS commies. Evaluating the article on its face, we don’t know who is claiming Trump said this. Ergo, the story may well be garbage, regardless of the source.

The best evidence it’s true is probably the denial from the White House. If each time the White House made an assertion, you bet five bucks that the assertion was false, you’d probably win as much money as Trump inherited from Fred.

So I can’t assume this actually happened. But he sure does spend a lot of time away from the White House, and it’s not like it sounds out of character.

If Trump said this, it’s hardly the most outrageous thing he has ever said. But as Allahpundit noted on Twitter: “We would have had a sweet week of rage in conservative media if Obama had said that.”

Yup. But hypocrisy means never having to say you’re sorry.

I’m still more mad about the failure to repeal ObamaCare than this. But, as a taxpayer, I wish he would stay home at the “dump” a little more often.

And if it turns out that he does want to leave . . . nobody’s stopping him.

[Cross-posted at RedState.]

[guest post by JVW]

Here is a story that will be all-too-familiar in this day and age of Aggravated Gender Conflict on our college campuses. It’s fitting that it takes place here in Los Angeles, at a campus from which the Hollywood sign on Mount Lee is visible on a moderately clear day. The story has all of the makings of movie on the Lifetime channel: a male athlete from what is likely a privileged background now playing for a prestigious football program, a plucky coed studying to be a veterinarian while playing for the varsity tennis team, a campus Title IX tribunal with lots of power, very little accountability, and staffed almost exclusively with female administrators. Here’s how the Daily Breeze relates the story:

Matt Boermeester, the USC placekicker who made the winning field goal in the Rose Bowl last January is not permitted to return to the university, his attorney, Mark Schamel, said Sunday night.

The school discipline followed from an investigation led by USC’s Title IX Office, said Zoe Katz, Boermeester’s girlfriend, in a statement provided to the Southern California News Group.

USC began a Title IX investigation in late January after an allegation that Boermeester pushed Katz in the driveway of her home near the University Park campus, Schamel said.

Pretty straightforward thus far, right? Entitled football jock assaults (however mildly) our female lead causing the social justice crusaders on campus to rush to her defense and neutralize the threat to all female students. But hold on, it starts to get complicated with the plot twists:

Boermeester and Katz denied [the shoving incident]. Katz said the allegation was made by a “third party.”

Katz, 22 and a senior, was an all-conference player on USC’s women’s tennis team. She is expected to graduate this fall and issued the statement which called the investigation “unfair” and “biased” and that Boermeester, 23, “has been falsely accused of conduct involving me.”

Well now, how about that? Apparently not only did Ms. Katz not originate the charges against Mr. Boermeester but she has also denied that they so much as took place. So how did this all end up with the Title IX office? If you are familiar with the Star Chamber characteristics of modern campus bias complaints, you can probably guess:

Title IX investigators contacted Katz three days after the alleged incident occurred on Jan. 20, according to her attorney, Kerry Steigerwalt.

Steigerwalt said a complaint was first made to the Title IX Office by a men’s tennis coach at the university. A player on the team, who was also a neighbor of Katz, told the coach he witnessed an incident between her and Boermeester.

In her statement, Katz said she was told by the investigators that she was in an abusive relationship and was “told that I must be afraid of Matt.”

“I was stereotyped and was told I must be a ‘battered’ woman, and that made me feel demeaned and absurdly profiled,” Katz said in a statement. “I understand that domestic violence is a terrible problem, but in no way does that apply to Matt and me.”

During the investigation, Katz said the university issued a no-contact order against Boermeester, preventing him from communicating with her. As he was suspended from the football team, he was also prohibited from using its facilities to rehab a knee injury, she said. He underwent surgery after the Rose Bowl.

Let me issue this caveat: I obviously wasn’t there to witness whatever went on with the two students, nor am I privy in any way to the deliberations of the Title IX committee or the evidence that they considered. It could be that the tennis player who claims to have witnessed what went on between the two really did see an actual assault, and it could be that Mr. Boermeester is physically abusive and that Ms. Katz is sadly delusional with respect to her boyfriend’s actions.

But ever since the Obama Justice Department issued its infamous 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter, higher education has interpreted their role in these matters largely as being that of avenging angels, meting justice to victims in cases where our silly legal system with its archaic burdens of proof and reasonable doubt would otherwise fail entire classes of the perpetually aggrieved. USC would appear to have wholly discounted the testimony and statements of the alleged victim, and placed a great deal of their faith in an unnamed witness who could conceivably have self-interested reasons to bring forth these types of accusations. Naturally we don’t know the full story, but that being the case shouldn’t we put extra consideration on the alleged victim’s denial of the events? The use of kangaroo courts to judge these matters and hand out discipline has started to come back to haunt many universities (the blog Outlawyered has a number of links to excellent posts on the Volokh Conspiracy blog guest written by K.C. Johnson and Stuart Taylor who have worked tirelessly to expose the problems with Title IX investigations), and with the new Secretary of Education perhaps somewhat leery of the overwhelming activism that drives Title IX policy at the expense of common sense and fair play, perhaps this is the opportune moment to reevaluate what role the campus has in overseeing campus romances and hookups.

There is no such thing as the right to play football at USC, and if the team decides that Mr. Boermeester’s conduct disqualifies him from participation then so be it. But should the school decide to interrupt his education for at least a year through the suspension and expulsion process, it had better be ready to defend its actions in a real deal court of law, not one dominated by advocates for the lack of due process which has come to define today’s Title IX inquisitions.

– JVW

Well, that’s just swell.

Senate Republican leaders signaled Monday that they intend to move on from health care to other legislative priorities, even as President Trump continued to pressure lawmakers to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act.

The discord comes amid uncertainty in the insurance industry and on Capitol Hill about what will come next after last week’s dramatic collapse of the GOP’s effort to scrap the seven-year-old landmark law. Trump on Monday threatened to end subsidies to insurers and also took aim at coverage for members of ­Congress.

But the White House insistence appears to have done little to convince congressional GOP leaders to keep trying. . . .

. . . .

McConnell did not address health care in his remarks opening Senate business on Monday afternoon. His top deputy, Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.), brushed back comments White House budget director Mick Mulvaney made on CNN on Sunday urging Republicans not to vote on anything else until voting on health care again.

“I don’t think [Mulvaney’s] got much experience in the Senate, as I recall,” said Cornyn as he made his way into the Senate chamber. “And he’s got a big job. He ought to do that job and let us do our job.”

Here’s the problem, Senator: you’re not doing your job.

The arrogance that drips from Cornyn’s statement betrays a failure to understand how important this is to people. Leadership is eager to “move on dot org” from health care. One suspects that their primary concern is that their vaunted August recess might be in danger. Well, the American people would like to “move on dot org” from the rising premiums and degraded service that ObamaCare has brought them. Joe Cato would like to move on from the law that caused him to lose a low-cost and effective plan, replacing it with one that costs four times as much but won’t address his main health issue. But, you see, Senator Cornyn, the victims of ObamaCare can’t move on. They don’t get a nice long cushy August recess. They’re slogging through this misery every day, paying higher premiums every month, even as you check to make sure your plane reservations are in order.

Meanwhile, what is leadership doing to the turncoat Republicans (Murkowski, Portman, Heller, McCain, Alexander, and Capito) who voted for a quasi-repeal bill in 2015 — but voted against it in 2017m once it looked like it might get signed?

Nothing, that’s what. Lisa Murkowski is the chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and Senate Appropriations Interior and Environment Subcommittee. That’s a very important position for her. McConnell has not taken it away.

Is McConnell scared she is going to switch parties if he imposes the slightest consequence on her? Well, then, he has no power. He is weak. He should get out.

Lamar Alexander is Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee. Maybe even more important to him is his position as Chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees energy and water appropriations. That’s an important position for a senator from Tennessee, home of the Tennessee Valley.

Rob Portman is the Chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Shelley Moore Capito is Chairman of the Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety. I could go on, but you get the point. Nothing is being done to these people.

The reaction from leadership is a giant shrug of the shoulders. Oh well. We promised this for seven years, but there’s tax reform and trips home to worry about. Sorry about that. Listen, I’d like to talk about this further, but my plane’s here. Gotta go!

Meanwhile, you, the American citizen struggling with the problems of ObamaCare, are left holding the bag.

Remind me why people hate government again?

[Cross-posted at RedState and The Jury Talks Back.]