Patterico's Pontifications

2/18/2019

Patterico at PJ Media: Trump and the “Team of Vipers” Lawsuit

Filed under: General,Patterico at PJ Media — Patterico @ 11:43 am



I have a piece posted at PJ Media titled Trump Courts Streisand Effect in Legal Action Against ‘Team of Vipers’ Author Cliff Sims. Excerpt:

Trump had his lawyers go after Sims, filing an arbitration claim seeking to enforce a non-disclosure agreement. Again with the NDAs? What is it with Trump and stupidly enforcing NDAs? The last time he tried that, it started a chain of events that led to his lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen admitting that Trump had directed him to commit a felonious campaign finance violation. Trump’s like the guy in the joke who has bandages on both his ears, and explains to his co-worker that his wife was ironing when his sister-in-law called, and he accidentally picked up the iron and held it to his ear. When the co-worker asks why the bandage over the other ear, he explains: “She called back.”

Yes, Trump learns lessons slowly when he learns them at all. And he has not realized that enforcing this NDA is likely to go nowhere. While Trump might have the ability to muzzle Sims about events on the campaign trail, legal experts tend to be very skeptical about a government official trying to silence public officials about their experiences in government. For his part, Sims is now suing Trump in federal court, seeking a declaratory judgment stating that Trump cannot enforce the NDA to the extent that Sims has written about his White House experience.

I’ll probably be posting pieces there every week or so. When I do, I’ll link and excerpt them here.

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

133 Responses to “Patterico at PJ Media: Trump and the “Team of Vipers” Lawsuit”

  1. Trump isn’t all that keen on the First Amendment, not for anyone he deems “disloyal”.

    Paul Montagu (0eb929)

  2. “The last time he tried that, it started a chain of events that led to his lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen admitting that Trump had directed him to commit a felonious campaign finance violation.“

    The “chain of events” was started by Trump winning the election. Enter McCabe, prosecutorial discretion, etc., etc….

    Munroe (fba3ff)

  3. The “chain of events” was started by Trump winning the election.

    If we’re going to follow it all the way back, it was started by Trump ordering the payoff.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  4. “If we’re going to follow it all the way back, it was started by Trump ordering the payoff.”
    Patterico (115b1f) — 2/18/2019 @ 12:14 pm

    And if McCabe hadn’t lied under oath, if Clapper hadn’t lied to Congress, and if Rosenstein and Yates hadn’t signed off on bogus FISA warrants they wouldn’t all be in such dire, desperate legal jeopardy. Really.

    The “chain of events” has nothing to do with the illegal act. Never did.

    Munroe (f7c026)

  5. Was ordering the “payoff” illegal?

    Colonel Haiku (273e2b)

  6. McCabe was the second to sign the fisa warrant, knowing the source was the dossier and its dodgy representations so no.

    Narciso (e64f80)

  7. non disclosures are an establishment trick to protect the wealthy and powerful.conservatives had no problem with the corporate state using this to silence people and not allowing them freedom of speech. and you wonder why aoc will be elected president in 2024.

    lany (100e2d)

  8. Was ordering the “payoff” illegal?

    Hard to see how it wasn’t, since Cohen has been convicted of making it.

    Trump would have to argue that he had no idea that it violated campaign finance laws. But there’s a lot to show that he knew that, including his having commented on John Edwards’s similar case in the past.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  9. Thanks

    Colonel Haiku (273e2b)

  10. So as we’re told this sort of sordid thing comes up often in the “world of celebrities”, this is subject to prosecution.

    And yet, not an FEC violation?

    Colonel Haiku (273e2b)

  11. These people will do whatever they need to do to orchestrate the coup. Who reins in these people who overstep their responsibilities with selective prosecution?

    Colonel Haiku (273e2b)

  12. to be clear it looks like the lawsuit here was filed by Sims

    and President Trump simply invoked the arbitration clause of the NDA Sims signed and broke

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  13. Forest… trees… look to the field; he’s going to beat the raps and be re-elected.

    Unless Oprah runs, of course.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  14. you’d think kamala woulda kissed that ring before announcing though Mr. DCSCA

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  15. Glad you found a new outlet for your writing.

    I’d resolved not to read or respond to any of your posts regarding Trump (due to my own irritability), but I am happy you’ve put Red State in the rearview mirror and moved on to a better venue as well.

    Enjoy yourself.

    steveg (a9dcab)

  16. @14. Kammie’s quite ‘Rude-y,’ Mr. Feet; besides, she already has a car.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  17. He plead guilty hes a moron of course, but you would have to trip over the exec’s who authorized for Moonves lauer et al.

    Narciso (e64f80)

  18. Was ordering the “payoff” illegal?

    Hard to see how it wasn’t, since Cohen has been convicted of making it.

    Cohen pleaded to it but many question whether it would have held up. I suspect that the prosecutor got him to take that count in exchange for not proceeding on something else, which we may never know about and would carry more exposure. A plea usually results from each side giving up something and getting something that might not occur after trial. An example of this is Gen. Flynn settling most likely in exchange for keeping his son out of legal trouble.

    AZ Bob (885937)

  19. And it will be great to see your posts in PJMedia, Patterico!

    Colonel Haiku (273e2b)

  20. “And if McCabe hadn’t lied under oath, if Clapper hadn’t lied to Congress, and if Rosenstein and Yates hadn’t signed off on bogus FISA warrants they wouldn’t all be in such dire, desperate legal jeopardy. Really.”

    It will remain puzzling until someone shows enough interest in explaining why this was thought acceptable and why these activities don’t deserve investigation and prosecution.

    Colonel Haiku (273e2b)

  21. I’m glad your thoughts are being picked up somewhere. You were the best writer at RedState and that place has mostly gone to hell since you were unceremoniously removed.

    Nathan (5efffe)

  22. now cohen did commit an illegal act, bank fraud, in part of the other action, but you know Robert creamer, didn’t nearly that high a sentence,

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/02/hes-back-released-from-prison-anthony-weiner-will-have-to-register-as-a-sex-offender/

    narciso (d1f714)

  23. I’m glad your thoughts are being picked up somewhere. You were the best writer at RedState and that place has mostly gone to hell since you were unceremoniously removed.

    That’s kind of you, Nathan. Judging from the comments at PJM, they really seem to like me over there!

    🙄

    Patterico (ef1d0a)

  24. That’s kind of you, Nathan. Judging from the comments at PJM, they really seem to like me over there!

    Damn. I apologize to each and every general Trump supporter here whom I thought was a bit overbearing in insisting upon full and complete submission to every single working and utterance of His Grace: Our Benevolent, Wise, and Forthright Leader. Y’all have got nothing on the Trump fans over at PJ Media!

    JVW (54fd0b)

  25. sarcasm

    that’s what that was

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  26. Pjm? That’s a surprise, but it’s good news for them to open up to a great writer, and I’m glad Patrick is reaching a few new readers.

    Dustin (6d7686)

  27. I’m going to go out on a limb here, happyfeet, and guess that even you would react to the comments over at PJ Media by saying that some of those people are maybe just a little bit too devoted to President Donald J. Trump.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  28. hrm that’s a tough one

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  29. i comment at instapundit but not at pjm very much

    i’m kinda hesitant to assume there’s a whole lot of overlap my gut says Mr. Reynolds has cultivated a more libertarian-leaning audience and PJM is more social conservative

    but President Trump is definitely aging like a fine wine and the sort of criticism that may have seemed reasonable last year is now really difficult to understand, and I imagine if we circle back on this next year we’ll have seen another such progression

    it’s an unprecedented phenomenon i guess

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  30. but they have long memories over there don’t they, if somewhat inexact ones

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  31. So Black face herring is one of the attorney generals behaving like canute.

    Narciso (c1934c)

  32. I sincerely doubt the Pjmedia commentators actually read the article, like 95% of them

    EPWJ (cdeb8f)

  33. @28. Not at all, Mr. Feet: “Is there any place more fun to be than Trump rally?!” – President Donald J. Trump

    “Hip Hooray; the American way! That’s entertainment!” – [Fred Astaire, Jack Buchanan, Nanette Fabray, Oscar Levant] ‘The Band Wagon’ 1953

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  34. ^ ‘a’

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  35. @29. ‘… aging like fine wine…’

    He doesn’t drink; more like limburger cheese, Mr. Feet.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  36. Judging from the comments at PJM, they really seem to like me over there!

    They’ve got good taste. I don’t always agree with you, but I appreciate the way you lay out your thoughts even when I don’t. It’s nice in this feverish time to be able to read something I disagree with and still respect it.

    Nathan (5efffe)

  37. Some old friends, who aren’t welcome here because they could not behave themselves properly, have come by to say hello at the PJM thread. They appear to share the general enthusiasm for my piece and for me.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  38. but they have long memories over there don’t they, if somewhat inexact ones

    Heh. Uh, yeah.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  39. Where did it began perhaps when fusion cooked up that phony Prague allegation, and fed it to first isikoff then McClatchy then Leopold,

    Narciso (c1934c)

  40. Pjm? That’s a surprise, but it’s good news for them to open up to a great writer, and I’m glad Patrick is reaching a few new readers.

    I really like the editor there. She is fantastic.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  41. @39. It’s nice to get paid for writing, isn’t it. Best of luck to you there.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  42. Well discus brings its share of nazgul, that has been true of politico and right scoop.

    Narciso (c1934c)

  43. @39. It’s nice to get paid for writing, isn’t it. Best of luck to you there.

    Well, there is that, too. Despite what know-nothings say about the folks who were fired from RedState, we generally produced there — and that meant we got paid. It’s actually nice, since I’m writing anyway, to get a small payment every so often. Helps convince the wife that the enterprise is not wholly without value.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  44. OT- What exactly is Kamella, anyway? Her tone varies with both lighting and sound on the TeeVee.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  45. But really, I keep doing this 16 years later (holy crap, I think I forgot my 16th blogiversary yesterday — *checks* — sho ‘nuf) because I like it. The money, paltry as it is, is not the real motivator here.

    But again: nice to get paid for what you’re doing anyway.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  46. @42. Keeps the skill honed, too- [which BTW enhances the fun for me here to which I’m genuinely appreciative.]

    Gigs never last forever so enjoy the ride!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  47. Good post, Patterico. I could have done without the comments, and will do so in the future. Nice to see that papertiger is still alive and kicking, though.

    nk (dbc370)

  48. The comments at Instapundit are wonderful.

    They make the PJM comments look like the comments here.

    I think I have a big future ahead of me in conservative punditry, if this is the audience I am targeting!

    Patterico (115b1f)

  49. A much bigger team of vipers……

    CBS’s Lara Logan Calls Media ‘Mostly Liberal’ in Scorched Earth Interview: I’m Committing ‘Professional Suicide’

    “As she argued that media sources on the left and right regularly push their preferred narratives and “do terrible things,” Logan determined that the weight of the liberal media overwhelms “the other side” unless people actively seek outlets like Breitbart.

    The discussion continued with Logan trashing news reports based on single, anonymous government sources, calling it an abandonment of journalistic standards.

    “That’s not journalism, that’s horsesh**,” Logan said. “Responsibility for fake news begins with us. We bear some responsibility for that, and we’re not taking ownership of that and addressing it. We just want to blame it all on somebody else.”

    Towards the end of the interview, Logan seemed to acknowledge that some will see her remarks as controversial, saying “this interview is professional suicide for me.””

    https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/scott-whitlock/2019/02/18/cbss-lara-logan-goes-nuclear-horsest-propagandist-press

    As of right now on Google, nothing from the msm news sources. Only from what most would call conservative media.

    Kind of strange that a reporter acknowledging the obvious would be a big deal….aint it?

    harkin (b5e7fd)

  50. No really speaking truth to power, wasnt it avenatti who was pushing that trollop to the front, the one that CNN pretends didnt happen.

    Narciso (c1934c)

  51. As of right now on Google, nothing from the msm news sources. Only from what most would call conservative media.

    Kind of strange that a reporter acknowledging the obvious would be a big deal….aint it?

    Unlike libruls, conservatives always closely scrutinize stories that would make them happy if true.

    I’m excited to learn what you found when you donned your Sherlock Holmes cap and went investigating.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  52. From the linked article, a comment by “happyfeet47”:

    is it surprising that the imprint this anti-trump screed got published on is under the same corporate umbrella as rabid sjw “science fiction” imprint Tor?

    this is deeply not surprising to me on some level

    I find it interesting that happyfeet didn’t publish this comment over here. Perhaps he had questions about whether it would violate the “no personal attacks” rule?

    Demosthenes (7fae81)

  53. Ah whatever happened to science fiction, it got woke and it went broke, which seems to be where brie Larson is steering marvel.

    Narciso (c1934c)

  54. I find it interesting that happyfeet didn’t publish this comment over here. Perhaps he had questions about whether it would violate the “no personal attacks” rule?

    Why don’t we do without happyfeet for a month? I have people who tell me he is the primary barrier to their commenting here. Why don’t we see whether those people come back and whether things are better without him.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  55. Oh: starting …. now.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  56. Just personal attacks agai st the president like every other publication are not only accepted but solicited is that right?

    Narciso (c1934c)

  57. Just personal attacks agai st the president like every other publication are not only accepted but solicited is that right?

    Wrong as usual.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  58. The comments at Instapundit are wonderful.

    Well now. Reading that bilge did not do anything to cure me of my latent misanthropy.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  59. Wait a minute, Patterico! I don’t see that alleged comment by happyfeet at either PJMedia or Instapundit. Maybe Demosthenes could link it?

    And, in any event, it sounds to me like it was about the book’s imprint, not you or PJMedia.

    nk (dbc370)

  60. Watching happyfeet join the mob mocking me elsewhere made me wonder why I stubbornly refuse constant entreaties from many, many people (everyone’s saying it) to dump him. According to them, he ruins the commenting experience here.

    Maybe it’s time I test out that theory. I guess I felt some weird sense of loyalty but it’s clear that runs only one direction.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  61. As you wish, nk:

    http://disq.us/p/1zu2kut

    Demosthenes (7fae81)

  62. And, in any event, it sounds to me like it was about the book’s imprint, not you or PJMedia.

    I may have misinterpreted “anti-Trump screed” to refer to my post and not the book.

    And this comment — “i think the whole loyalist part was just an excuse to bring up the billy bush tape” — to refer to me and not to the book.

    That said, I sense that the loyalty I have shown to happyfeet has not been reciprocated by him saying “gee I think you’re being unfair to Patterico” or anything like that. Why should loyalty run only one way? If I have a gang of people saying the blog would be better without him, and he has no loyalty to me anyway but only loyalty to Trump — so why shouldn’t I heed this advice and at least give the experiment a chance?

    Patterico (115b1f)

  63. Thank you, Demosthenes. I did not “Load More Comments”.

    Still, it does sound like he’s talking about the book, not Patterico or PJMedia. McMillan which owns Tor, does not own PJMedia, I don’t think, and definitely not Patterico.

    nk (dbc370)

  64. We cross-posted, Patterico. I type slow.

    nk (dbc370)

  65. As a principle NDA seem to find by the wayside with agee and snepp Snowden and manning, heck we had an Iranian agent in the air force who slipped the country for 6 years and no one spoke a word about it, one interesting element was one of her correspondent was that reporter in Tennessee that al Jazeera was all in arms about

    Narciso (c1934c)

  66. Happy doesn’t care about anything but exotic pastries, so were informed hes been vicious total sorts of women candidates but particularly center right ones for at least a decade, folks who had substantial arguments like shipwrecked well they merited banishment and there are a host of others who rarely deign to show up any more.

    Narciso (c1934c)

  67. And for the record, my question was genuine…and very much mistaken. I initially thought that the “screed” bit of the comment might be directed at Patterico’s article (which was the tenor of the comment section as a whole) — and that happyfeet hadn’t posted the comment over here because he was afraid of getting pinged for attacking Patterico. Had I known Sims’s book was published under a St. Martin’s imprint, I would have looked at the comment in a different light.

    If my comment was the reason happyfeet got banned here, then I ask that the ban be rescinded. I don’t like happyfeet, and I’ve made no secret of that. But he shouldn’t get banned because I misread a comment.

    Demosthenes (7fae81)

  68. It was better than Christie’s book, but then so is a scholastic reader, it was short of any real policy details I know a communications guy should be well versed but he somewhat informed of the relevance.

    Narciso (c1934c)

  69. olks who had substantial arguments like shipwrecked well they merited banishment

    narciso, swc was banned because he persisted in dishonest argumentation.

    and there are a host of others who rarely deign to show up any more

    Yup, and the ones I care about, don’t show up because of happyfeet.

    The ones I don’t care about, I don’t care about. Plenty of them were in evidence at PJM and Instapundit.

    Demosthenes is right — I misinterpreted “anti-Trump screed” as directed at me. In part because the whole point I was making about the book was that it was anything but. happyfeet displayed utter contempt for that opinion by not even addressing my arguments, but simply labeling something I said was NOT an anti-Trump screed as something that WAS. We were naturally confused.

    But it led me to wonder just what he offers here, other than driving away everyone I like.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  70. As far as I am concerned, much of the right has gone utterly insane. Many were my friends but it’s quite clear they aren’t anymore. So I choose to concentrate on my friends. The few I have left are special to me. And my friends are sick of happyfeet’s drivel.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  71. Man, looking at the comments over there is…disheartening. It’s loony, the crying shame is that there is probably 70% overlap in general conservative principles, but that 30%, hoo-boy that is some serious dementia. I’m not sure it’s worse than streifstate, it’s less well articulated for sure, but that might make it better actually, er, less worse.

    And the hate on the book you’re talking about, with literally no one actually having bothered to read it, and people actively against reading/learning/knowing, just in general.

    If an NDA is completely invalid on its face, why in the world would you limit your options to take care of your family after the people with the fake NDA dump you?

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c)

  72. That 30%, is aware of the real threat, a prairie fire that threatens to burn the last sanctuary the west has, against the pla Maduro salafis the mullahs that has actual traitors by word and deed Like miss Omar, numbskulls like Cortez, all of these backed by army if nonprofits journolist past and future govt officials.

    Narciso (c1934c)

  73. Roy Cohn type NDAs, and I mean that literally, Trump is doubtlessly still using the one Roy Cohn first drafted for him, operate in terrorem. They frighten people with 1) draconian liquidated damages clauses and 2) with just the plain threat of lawfare.

    Beldar has indicated in the past that he could tell us more about genuine and valid NDAS, which are common, usual and enforceable.

    nk (dbc370)

  74. So what, I want to know who else has a nda, apparently the Washington post serves the same purpose, did I imagine we have two black faced public officials and a potential rapist,

    Narciso (c1934c)

  75. “Why don’t we do without happyfeet for a month?”

    Three cheers! The “performance art” (or never-ending psychological warfare?) has been growing a bit stale….I mean McCain is dead and buried, right? And Ryan, Sessions, and Mattis are gone, no?…..And blanket insults against the military and FBI seem a bit misplaced and exaggerated, yes? Whatever the “art” is/was….I don’t see how it makes this site more interesting and engaging for new readers. It’s like a pop-up add that simply won’t go away…unless one runs special software (really!). I view visiting someone’s site like coming to a party at their house. You can disagree, but not be disagreeable. Engage as if you were face to face at the party…meaning, don’t be a jack@ss. Persistently peeing on the geraniums does not make for an acceptable house guest…IMO

    AJ_Liberty (165d19)

  76. That 30%, is aware of the real threat, a prairie fire that threatens to burn the last sanctuary the west has, against the pla Maduro salafis the mullahs that has actual traitors by word and deed Like miss Omar, numbskulls like Cortez, all of these backed by army if nonprofits journolist past and future govt officials.

    The America you live in must be a horrible place. Mine is full of generally great people, friendly to excess, with open hearts and minds. A place where cousin Sandy and cousin Omar can express their silly opinions openly and folks don’t automatically want to murder them for it.

    The green new deal sounds exactly like the kind of happy thing a very very junior 29 year old first time professional would support. Lot’s of neat theories that don’t work without a post-scarcity economy or $70 Trillion to spend from the couch cushions.

    Of course, Trump believes that debt doesn’t matter, tariffs are paid by the other end of the supply chain, the Constitution is a needless bother, but he’s not a 29 year old, and the things he says ostensibly matter.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c)

  77. Someone other than Happyfeet is the reason I don’t come here much anymore.

    Dave (in MA) (bd958b)

  78. Someone other than Happyfeet is the reason I don’t come here much anymore.

    OK. Thanks for the helpful comment.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  79. “Ah whatever happened to science fiction, it got woke and it went broke, which seems to be where brie Larson is steering marvel.”

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamrowe1/2018/06/19/science-fiction-and-fantasy-book-sales-have-doubled-since-2010

    Vox Day is an idiot.

    Davethulhu (e458f4)

  80. Read the article, not the clickbait.

    After 2009, print book sales in science fiction and fantasy (or SF&F, for short) dropped more than twice as much as most other genres: Print sales across all genres fell 23% since 2009, hitting a low in 2012 before recovering 12% as of 2017. SF&F print sales, however, dropped a full 50% since 2009, and have recovered 0% since. At least, according to the publishing industry’s sales tracker, Nielson. The data-cruncher behind Author Earnings believes nontraditionally published authors have slipped under the radar, massively skewing the public’s understanding of the SF&F market.

    Since 2010, unit sales of self-published and Amazon-published ebooks have grown, and in 2017, they constitute a full 48% of all SF&F sales across print, digital, and audio.

    nk (dbc370)

  81. But, yes, Vox Day is an idiot.

    As for Tor, SJW is not how I would describe them. Sick, disgusting, annoying, boring, weird, perverted, degenerate are more suitable descriptions of the crap they publish these days.

    Science fiction and fantasy always had more than its share of perverts, weirdos, and outright nutjobs, but the editors kept them under control. Marion Zimmer Bradley, Fritz Leiber, and Philip K. Dick, respectively, for examples. Starting at around the mid-80s, however, the editors themselves went perverted and weird and, these days, actively solicit weird and perverted crap. Tor, I would say, primarily bedroom role play fantasies for the Nielsen-Haydens.

    nk (dbc370)

  82. I read the article. What’s your argument? Is an ebook sale not a real sale?

    Davethulhu (e458f4)

  83. It’s the best sale. A great sale. A huge sale. But of “unit sales of self-published and Amazon-published ebooks”. Not publishing house imprints.

    nk (dbc370)

  84. Hello the Hugo’s and other awards, there is some good stuff out there, as for marvel comics as opposed to studios cleanup on aisle 12.

    Narciso (82a663)

  85. Sorry if I come off as over aggressive, but Vox Day and his legion of nit-wits gets my goat. In any event, to me the most likely answer isn’t “Get Woke, go Broke”. I’d expect science fiction authors and consumers are more technically inclined than most, and are therefore more likely to be using cutting edge platforms.

    Davethulhu (e458f4)

  86. There hasn’t been anything good since Terry Pratchett’s last book, and no more than twenty good books for the twenty years before that.

    nk (dbc370)

  87. trump is not perfect. the only perfect person so upset conservatives that they crucified him. was obama or bush better? the clintons?

    lany (241352)

  88. Vox Day and his (very small) legion of nitwits (did you know Milo Yiannopoulos is one of them?) (I mean one of Vox Day’s legion of nitwits, not one of “Them”) also get my goat.

    nk (dbc370)

  89. @71. “… much of the right has gone utterly insane.”

    Likely it may be more a ‘fear’ or a ‘terror’ than ‘insanity.’

    The influence has waned; the message isn’t resonating, particularly w/t young, anymore. Shout ‘Reagan,’ they’ll shrug. Say ‘Goldwater,’ they’ll get you a walker. Trickle down has been trickled on to ’em. TWS has gone away.

    It’s been a long cycle since ’64 and being on the outs, at the bottom of the deck, in an unfamiliar hand to play to the 50 and under crowd. Trump is a transient; a bridge to something different. It’ll cycle around again w/fresh faces and new voices– in a decade or two… perhaps much less in this media-saturated universe.
    _______

    Like Mr. Trump, Mr. Feet does pitch some entertainingly fat ones across the plate to swing at; he was fun to play with if you don’t take the game too seriously. But the obsession w/digging at the late Mr. McCain went to a dark place. Why keep soiling a man buried six months ago. Because when Mr. Feet’s Mr. Trump finally visits Vietnam this month, it’s a cinch he won’t be staying in the same Hanoi Hilton John McCain did.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  90. ocasio-cortez is the future reagan’s idea of tax cuts for the rich instead of low cost collage education starting when he was governor of california has saddle millennials with staggering debt and see no way out of debt under the ayn randist libertarian free trade capitalism. your lucky there democratic socialists and not communists!

    lany (241352)

  91. DCSCA- The Hanoi Hilton is looking for a door man.

    mg (8cbc69)

  92. This may get me banned but I suggest reading VDH’s new book “The Case for Trump”.

    mg (8cbc69)

  93. So are people now being banned from here for things that other people misrepresented that they said somewhere else? Asking for a friend.

    JSkorcher (222d4a)

  94. @#93, The Amazon ad for the “The Case for Trump” finishes with the bold assertion that “America needs the outsider Trump to do what normal politicians would not and could not do.” What of Trump’s first two years has staying power similar to Reagan’s lowering of the tax rates and USSR challenge? It’s unclear whether tariffs are the way forward. The renegotiated NAFTA doesn’t look that different except for some protectionism nuggets. China has filled in the gap of leaving behind TPP. Executive branch de-regulation goes as far as when the next Democrat occupies the office — with some of that de-regulation achieved at the cost of consumer protection. Tax restructuring was not exactly led by Trump….and a broad-based middle class tax cut ballooned the deficit to near $1T. We saw a jump in military spending with no offsetting spending cuts…or even proposals for spending cuts. The GOP has no credibility on deficits.

    We defunded Obamacare but failed to offer any incremental solutions to address the market problems….if 2018 was a referendum on the GOP’s health insurance reforms….we see the outcome. Trump was essentially a non-factor in formulating a solution or moving public opinion.

    The corporate tax cut and regulatory reform have created good economic conditions….but that has not translated into much benefit for the GOP who lost the House and barely held the Senate despite having many more Democrat incumbents facing re-election. It’s not good news that the GOP is hemorrhaging white suburban women….and losing the swing states that Trump had supposedly mastered.

    Moving the Israel capitol is gutsy but largely symbolic. Taking us out of the Paris Accords was also largely symbolic. It is unclear at this point the value of cutting from the Iran deal or engaging with Kim and North Korea. Rattling NATO and slapping tariffs on our allies seems counter-productive. The Russia saga continues….I see nothing gained by not labeling Putin the thug that he is. I trust Mattis more than Trump on Syria.

    Trump waited to play hardball on the wall until he lost the House. Generous offers from the DEMs have dwindled to peanuts….Trump looks like he is losing….and his move to declare an emergency is very unpopular. Fixation on the wall has distracted from broader-based solutions. Trump’s language is open to the charge of xenophobia….which hurts with winning back those suburban women.

    Yes, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are successes but neither guarantees some conservative wave that turns back gay marriage or abortion precedents. These are serious jurists who won’t legislate their own opinions. Holding the line is good but the GOP still needs to change hearts and turn public opinion. Trumps clanky rhetoric hardly helps here.

    With divided government and a horde of Democrat challengers gathering, I am not hopeful that much will change over these next two years. We will have a referendum on Trump in 2020. Will he be perceived as an effective leader….a visionary…..a bold policy innovator….or as a self-promoter? These are tough political times but we can do better…

    AJ_Liberty (165d19)

  95. If Mhitt Rhomney wasn’t behind this I’ll be a monkied unkle.

    JRH (fe281f)

  96. @95. “GOP still needs to change hearts and turn public opinion.”

    On a serious note. Thats a very good point and I think it applies to both parties. Does anyone really know what either party stands for anymore? People are fleeing both parties in droves as we descend into identity and outrage politics fueled by twitter pwnage, and yeah the media. NBC created Trump, after all.

    I will vote for whatever moderate Dem or Republican can rise above the Bullsh*t to claim the mantle of being the adult in the room. If it’s possible.

    JRH (fe281f)

  97. “So are people now being banned from here for things that other people misrepresented that they said somewhere else?”

    I think Patterico explained himself sufficiently in #71. If you are behaving in a way that drives off more substantive and thoughtful commenters, you may no longer be welcome. Why is this confusing? If happyfeet is your ideal guest, then maybe you should consider hosting your own blog!

    AJ_Liberty (165d19)

  98. Patterico, I’m glad you have found another venue to post your thoughts.

    What I have found over the years, is that when I disagree with you, I learn more about what *I* think while I consider the issue. Too often, people are reflexive, snarky, and dismissive as we retreat into our little boxes of “samethink.”

    So I am happy when I read things with which I agree from you, and also when I disagree.

    Simon Jester (548267)

  99. This may get me banned but I suggest reading VDH’s new book “The Case for Trump”.

    Why might that get you banned?

    Patterico (b274da)

  100. So are people now being banned from here for things that other people misrepresented that they said somewhere else? Asking for a friend.

    No, people are being given a vacation to see if good people would return to the site if it lacked their yammering insults to all manner of good people. I recognize that the comments elsewhere were not directed at me but that’s not the point. The point is that the incessant nonsense seems to add nothing but detracts a lot.

    Patterico (b274da)

  101. Happyfeet is like a cup of crazy to start your day.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  102. “There were a number of things that caused us to believe that we had adequate predication or adequate reason and facts, to open the investigation. The president had been speaking in a derogatory way about our investigative efforts for weeks, describing it as a witch hunt… publicly undermining the effort of the investigation.”

    — Andrew McCabe

    Can’t have that now…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  103. “The illegal effort to destroy the 2016 Trump campaign by Hillary Clinton campaign’s use of funds to create, disseminate among court media, and then salt among high Obama administration officials, a fabricated, opposition smear dossier failed.

    So has the second special prosecutor phase of the coup to abort the Trump presidency failed. There are many elements to what in time likely will become recognized as the greatest scandal in American political history, marking the first occasion in which U.S. government bureaucrats sought to overturn an election and to remove a sitting U.S. president.

    Preparing the Battlefield
    No palace coup can take place without the perception of popular anger at a president.

    The deep state is by nature cowardly. It does not move unless it feels it can disguise its subterranean efforts or that, if revealed, those efforts will be seen as popular and necessary—as expressed in tell-all book titles such as fired FBI Directors James Comey’s Higher Loyalty or in disgraced Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe’s psychodramatic The Threat.

    In candidate and President Trump’s case that prepping of the battlefield translated into a coordinated effort among the media, political progressives and celebrities to so demonize Trump that his imminent removal likely would appear a relief to the people. Anything was justified that led to that end.

    All through the 2016 campaign and during the first two years of the Trump presidency the media’s treatment, according to liberal adjudicators of press coverage, ran about 90 percent negative toward Trump—a landmark bias that continues today.

    Journalists themselves consulted with the Clinton campaign to coordinate attacks. From the Wikileaks trove, journalistic grandees such as John Harwood, Mark Leibovich, Dana Milbank, and Glenn Thrush often communicated (and even post factum were unapologetic about doing so) with John Podesta’s staff to construct various anti-Trump themes and have the Clinton campaign review or even audit them in advance.

    Some contract “journalists” apparently were paid directly by Fusion GPS—created by former reporters Glen Simpson of the Wall Street Journal and Susan Schmidt of the Washington Post—to spread lurid stories from the dossier. Others more refined like Christiane Amanpour and James Rutenberg had argued for a new journalistic ethos that partisan coverage was certainly justified in the age of Trump, given his assumed existential threat to The Truth. Or as Rutenberg put it in 2016: “If you view a Trump presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that. You would move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional. That’s uncomfortable and uncharted territory for every mainstream, non-opinion journalist I’ve ever known, and by normal standards, untenable. But the question that everyone is grappling with is: Do normal standards apply? And if they don’t, what should take their place?”

    https://amgreatness.com/2019/02/17/autopsy-of-a-dead-coup/

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  104. Vox Day is for sure an idiot.

    The market analysis for Sci Fi doesn’t address the huge proliferation of substitute goods such comic books, Movies, high quality Sci Fi TV and streaming, and most importantly video games.

    When it comes to entertainment media the real limiting factor for is time. I could find a good book to read this saturday night, or i could watch a few more episodes of the Punisher or the Umbrella factory. If my kids are up we could watch Solo. I won’t be able to do all of them. I don’t have the time. That’s what Sci-Fi books are competing with.

    Time123 (b53270)

  105. I don’t think HappyFeet should be banned for his comment elsewhere. I think he should be held to the same standard anyone would be if their comments

    -insulted the military.
    -insulted LEO.
    -accused others of sex crimes.
    -made jokes about sex crimes against children.
    -made crude biological jokes.
    -insulted veterans/the deceased.

    did all of that in least civil way possible many times in EVERY thread.

    and by least civil way possible I mean HF is frequently told to dial it back a little, or watch this or that word, but he maintains his comments just across the line of acceptability.

    That said I’ve learned to just skip his comments if i don’t run the script, but i don’t see what he adds to the conversation.

    Time123 (b53270)

  106. but i don’t see what he adds to the conversation.

    There are none so blind as he who will not see.

    I appreciate that you have the intestinal fortitude to scroll past his comments. And if some feel they need a safe space for their …issues…whatever. But you at least owe it to yourselves to admit that you are letting someone else’s, let’s face it fairly benign in the grand scheme of things, expressions cause you an unreasonable amount of consternation. I don’t care for some of his extreme statements but whatever. The people and institutions that he does attack have become sacred cows. I expect such entities to be strong enough to stand up against such criticism. It’s what makes them stronger…if they are right. If not, they need to change.

    JSkorcher (222d4a)

  107. Well, it’s interesting. He doesn’t post as vulgarly on PJ Media. I wonder why?

    It’s Patterico’s blog. He makes the rules. Not us.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  108. Not a coup. As defined, a coup involves a change of government illegally or by force. Trying to persuade a VP and a majority of the cabinet to legally and constitutionally remove a president doesn’t meet the threshold of a coup.

    Paul Montagu (0eb929)

  109. He doesn’t post as vulgarly on PJ Media. I wonder why?

    It’s Patterico’s blog. He makes the rules. Not us.

    Perhaps you answered your own question. I don’t know about his PJM posts but it has long been my observation about blogs in general that the blog owner sets the tone. I know of blogs where discussions get very heated. But they at least remain somewhat civil because the OP does not start our by insulting half the readers or resort to name calling or suggestions that certain people have “punchable faces”. Just a thought as to why people may behave differently under different circumstances.

    JSkorcher (222d4a)

  110. I’m excited to learn what you found when you donned your Sherlock Holmes cap and went investigating.

    It’s called a deerstalker and you forgot the calabash.

    harkin (b5e7fd)

  111. JSkorcher, indeed that was my point. The person is perfectly capable of discussing issues without being a raging jackwagon…but chooses to do so here. And when told to lighten up, generally does not do so. Or retreats and come right back.

    As you suggest above that folks should not be insulted by the offensive commentary (as opposed, again, to commentary lacking that kind of nonsense–which no one at all would object to), I would counter why one person gets to set a tone for the threads?

    I can understand Patterico’s frustration; standing up for a person who respects that act so little. What I cannot understand is why the person, knowing all of this, could not help but continue to act in that fashion. Even after direct comments from Patterico that it should stop.

    My best guess is that he childishly enjoys urinating in someone else’s punchbowl. You might be okay with that in your home. Other people don’t feel that way.

    It would have cost him nothing to post as he does at PJM. Same points. Some beliefs. Less offensive vulgarity (example: directly accusing people of crimes against children, repeatedly).

    His choice. So Patterico made his.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  112. “Not a coup. As defined, a coup involves a change of government illegally or by force. Trying to persuade a VP and a majority of the cabinet to legally and constitutionally remove a president doesn’t meet the threshold of a coup”

    Dershowitz is correct, people – bureaucrats – who think like this and act on it have no place in government.

    Colonel Haiku (273e2b)

  113. JSkorcher, indeed that was my point. The person is perfectly capable of discussing issues without being a raging jackwagon…but chooses to do so…I would counter why one person gets to set a tone for the threads?

    Yeah…I think while your point and my point may be the same they refer to two different people. I don’t think you read the rest of my post. You usually post very reasonably here. One person is most definitely entitled to set a tone for the threads. I’m not saying that others don’t have responsibility to maintain, but combine a belligerent tone in the OP with a thin skin when met with similar in response, and one is almost begging for a combative response.

    My best guess is that he childishly enjoys urinating in someone else’s punchbowl

    Some people like urinating in their own punchbowls. Then they complain about the taste.

    To be fair, or perhaps just ignorant as I don’t stop by here very often…mostly due to the tiresome belligerent leftism on display from some quarters that seems to float by without much consideration by the house, I have noticed a bit of a pull back in animosity in the OP’s. But don’t quote me on that. It’s not a scientific observation.

    JSkorcher (222d4a)

  114. I’d break bread with happyfeet anytime.

    mg (8cbc69)

  115. “NPR’s Morning Edition on Monday split its Andrew McCabe interview into two segments. On the home page they were promoting Russiagate: “Andrew McCabe, Ex-FBI Deputy, Describes ‘Remarkable’ Number Of Trump-Russia Contacts.” On air, that segment never mentioned his lying under oath to the FBI. There was a second segment simply titled “Andrew McCabe Discusses His Firing.” McCabe’s answers were often refusals to answer, which Inskeep spun as “exceptionally careful.” Kudos to NPR for trying to explore it, briefly.

    STEVE INSKEEP: At what point did it become apparent to you that you were under investigation?

    MCCABE: That’s a really complicated question, Steve. And I’m afraid it’s one that I’m not going to be able to answer for you because of the current legal matters that are still underway.

    INSKEEP: You’re not going to give me a date. I guess we can note there is an inspector general’s report that said that in 2017, people within the bureau began asking questions of you about your interactions with the media, what disclosures of information you would authorize to The Wall Street Journal.

    MCCABE: Yeah.

    INSKEEP: What can you say about the questions you were asked and the answers you gave?

    MCCABE: I have many things that I would like to say about the conclusions and the recommendations of the IG report. And I can’t go through each one of those points with you today because of the current ongoing legal issues and the civil lawsuit that I will be bringing against the Department of Justice. But I will say this. I, at no time, ever intentionally misled the FBI Inspection Division, the Office of Inspector General or – ever – any director of the FBI – not ever. This is not an investigative report like any I have ever seen. An investigative report is a clear and unbiased presentation of all the evidence, and this is none of that.

    INSKEEP: You think it was biased.

    MCCABE: I do. I do.

    INSKEEP: Why would it be biased against you?

    MCCABE: I do. Well, I think that’s pretty clear, Steve. I think the president has a long and well-established history of attacking the people who say things he doesn’t like.

    INSKEEP: But this was an independent inspector general, right?

    MCCABE: It’s supposed to be. It’s supposed to be. I don’t believe they were independent or fair in the process of this investigation or in its result.

    Later in the interview McCabe really laid into inspector general Michael Horowitz as a cog in a Trump conspiracy: “I completely disagree with the conclusions in the assessments in that report. It’s part, I think, of a larger strategy on the part of the president to save himself by attacking those people around him who present him with the truth that he does not like.”

    Inskeep could have mentioned Horowitz was appointed by Obama and confirmed in 2012.
    INSKEEP: The essence of their case against you is that you had authorized information to be leaked to The Wall Street Journal. You were asked about it three times under oath and sometimes recorded. And the first two times, you either denied giving the information or gave the sense that you didn’t know where the information had coming – or come from.

    MCCABE: Yeah. And I – and Steve, it’s a well-formed question but not one that I can answer because of the legal issues that I’m currently still handling.

    INSKEEP: One more along those lines – you said, I never intentionally misled anyone. Do you, then, acknowledge that, without intent, you made statements that misled people?

    MCCABE: I’m not acknowledging anything beyond what I’ve already told you.
    If this seemed like tough (or at least specific) questioning, NPR softened up at the end. Legal reporter Carrie Johnson asked “How much money did you lose when you were fired 26 hours before your pension was supposed to vest?”
    Inskeep concluded with this sugary inquiry on McCabe’s integrity:

    INSKEEP: Having had this two-decade love affair — whatever it is — with the FBI, do you believe that you personally upheld the integrity at the highest standards of the FBI.

    MCCABE: I do. That was certainly my intention. You know, I lived my life professionally and personally, privately under that – those incredibly lofty goals of fidelity, bravery and integrity.

    https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2019/02/19/mccabe-gets-weird-npr-lying-under-oath#more-share

    Colonel Haiku (273e2b)

  116. 100
    I was just being a smart azz.
    His reads are full of common sense.

    mg (8cbc69)

  117. Definitely a virtuous man, Montagu.

    Colonel Haiku (273e2b)

  118. 71:

    As far as I am concerned, much of the right has gone utterly insane.

    I see the insanity in the comments at Hot Air. There are people who pup up regularly to snipe at any post that’s even marginally unflattering to Trump. The post might give qualified praise to Trump, but the qualification is judged intolerable. Typically the commenter makes no effort at factual refutation, which often would be impossible anyway.

    If superfans can’t dispute the fact that Trump actually said or did something hard to defend, they are left with lobbing insults at those who have the temerity to report what Trump said or did. The heart of their arguments generally boils down to this: “People who don’t revere Donald Trump are terrible people, and therefore nothing they say has any merit.”
    Perhaps my memory is short, but I don’t recall the same level of slavish devotion to defending G. W. Bush against any criticism or doubt. While Bush was not irreproachable, there’s no way on earth that D. J. Trump is more worthy of unconditional trust and fervent admiration.

    Radegunda (694c3c)

  119. @92. How would you know?

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  120. Fortune cookie said so

    mg (8cbc69)

  121. the only perfect person so upset conservatives that they crucified him.

    Sigh. You are tying to make a point, I am sure of it. So you are saying the Romans were conservatives? So who were the liberals? You do know that applying today’s standards to ancient times is not a fruitful venture?

    Now hear this. We are all responsible for Christ’s crucifixion because of our sin. The Messiah came to redeem sinners. Who stood in our place, the innocent for the guilty, so He could, in all Justice, have Mercy on us and forgive our sins.

    felipe (023cc9)

  122. I like the old happyfeet who commented cleverly in a good-natured way (except when it came to abortion). That happyfeet is long gone. I didn’t leave because of happyfeet but I think his departure may result in a better discussion here, and I plan to stay and see if that is true.

    DRJ (d18ca6)

  123. welcome back, DRJ. it’s good to see you.

    aphrael (3f0569)

  124. Radegunda, i’m reminded of this insightful gem from a fantastic author:

    > “No more terrible disaster could befall your people than for them to fall into the hands of a Hero.”

    aphrael (3f0569)

  125. Hi aphrael. Are you looking forward to the movie version (forecast for release next year) or dreading it?

    DRJ (d18ca6)

  126. I’m looking forward to it.

    I mean, the book’s fiendishly hard to adapt well, and it’ll likely have serious problems. But … it’ll be interesting either way, and I trust this team to produce something that works well *even if it’s a mediocre adaptation*.

    I’m not going to get the Lord of the Rings, but i’m also not going to get the Hobbit, and that’s probably a middle ground that I can live with.

    aphrael (3f0569)

  127. Re: McCabe:

    I think the story he tells about anyone thinking about involing the 25th amendment is probably a total lie and he said it only in order to be consistent with what “Anonymous” wrote in the New York Times (or to play well with it – it’s a different story there)

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opinion/trump-white-house-anonymous-resistance.html

    Given the instability many witnessed, there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president. But no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis…

    Letters about it:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/06/opinion/letters/anonymous-trump-resistance.html

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  128. I had to hear an excerpt of what McCAbe said on 60 Minutes replayed several times before I noticed what he was saying. (emphasis mine(

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-andrew-mccabe-told-60-minutes-about-trump-and-the-25th-amendment/

    ANDREW MCCABE: Discussion of the 25th amendment was simply Rod raised the issue and discussed it with me in the context of thinking about how many other cabinet officials might support such an effort. I didn’t have much to contribute, to be perfectly honest, in that — conversation. So I listened to what he had to say. But, to be fair, it was an unbelievably stressful time. I can’t even describe for you how many things must have been coursing through the deputy attorney general’s mind at that point. So it was really something that he kinda threw out in a very frenzied chaotic conversation about where we were and what we needed to do next.

    How many other cabinet officials might support such an effort.

    Rod Rosenstein was not a member of the Cabinet!

    Yes, true, with regard to any investigation of either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton or their campaighns, he was considered thd Attorney General, because Jeff Sessions had recused himself, but he was not with regard to invoking the 25th amendment.

    And Rod Rosenstein is too good a lawyer to have thought that he was.

    McCabe too.

    Ihe whole conversation is made up!

    Rosenstein didn’t broach it and McCabe didn’t broach the topic of the 25th amendment.

    And then notice that McCabe tries to say he doesn’t remember much, and that this bit of conversation was said in an offhand manner. (!?)

    I have also heard it claimed that this incident is not in his book. That would make sense if he only first thought of claiming that after the beginning of Septemeber. The book had probably been largely or entirely written then.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  129. Well apparently he didnt talk to the gang of 8 either, according to his book.

    Narciso (acaba3)

  130. @49. “A much bigger team of vipers…… CBS’s Lara Logan Calls Media ‘Mostly Liberal’ in Scorched Earth Interview…”

    snake-bit-harkin; doth bite on fake news…

    Lara Logan and CBS News Have Parted Ways

    Lara Logan, the journalist who gained wider renown covering war-torn spots in the Middle East for CBS News, is no longer with the network and has not been for several months.

    The split, disclosed as the result of Logan making an appearance over the weekend on a podcast in which she suggested news consumers ought to get information from both liberal and conservative outlets, might come as a surprise to outsiders. Logan had been working for “60 Minutes” and gained a reputation for visiting dangerous locales in Afghanistan and Iraq, often embedded with U.S. armed forces. She joined CBS News in 2002 and had been one of the unit’s top foreign correspondents.

    A CBS News spokeswoman said Logan left the news unit at some point in 2018. Her last piece for CBS News appears to be a May segment for “60 Minutes” about poachers slaughtering rhinoceros in South Africa. Logan had been represented by UTA, and prior to that, N.S. Bienstock. A spokesperson for UTA could not be reached for immediate comment on Logan’s status with the agency.

    Logan has reported from around the world, and joined CBS News after stints as a freelance producer and reporter for multiple news outlets. She cut a mesmerizing figure at CBS – a woman who was eager to go to scenes of conflict, often under duress. Despite her reputation however, Logan’s tenure with CBS News had rocky spots. In 2011, she was attacked and sexually assaulted by a crowd of men while she was covering celebrations in Egypt related to the departure of former Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak. Logan was hospitalized for four days upon her return to the United States and discussed the incident on air for CBS News.

    In 2013, Logan had to issue an on-air apology for a “60 Minutes” segment she led after other news outlets found it contained inaccuracies. The story,  centering on a 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, was found to be lacking in its efforts to substantiate the assertions of a key source, security officer Dylan Davies. He had claimed to be an eyewitness to the attack by insurgents that left U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens and three others dead. Logan and a producer, Max McClellan, both took a leave of absence from the network in the aftermath of the report.

    During this weekend’s podcast, Logan told conservative host Mike Ritland, a former Navy SEAL, that most media outlets skew liberal. “The media everywhere is mostly liberal, not just the U.S.,” she said, adding later that “This interview is professional suicide for me.”

    Logan has over the years proven more outspoken about the subjects she covers than some other journalists might be. In 2012, a month before her “60 Minutes” report on Benghazi aired, she gave a speech suggesting actions the U.S. should take in response to the attack on the Benghazi compound. Those remarks came under fire late from her former employer.“From a CBS News standards perspective, there is a conflict in taking a public position on the government’s handling of Benghazi and Al Qaeda, while continuing to report on the story,” a review of the ’60 Minutes’ segment found.” – source, variety.com

    DCSCA (797bc0)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2097 secs.