Covering Whistlegate
[NOTE: For a while I called the current Ukraine/impeachment brouhaha “Whistleblowergate.” But that seemed way too unwieldy. Recently somewhere (I don’t recall where) I saw it referred to as “Whistlegate,” and that seems way better to me.]
One of the hallmarks of the major actions by what has become known as the Deep State to take down Trump has been their relative complexity. That’s partly because they were run in a clandestine manner, with many players and even international locations involved. In short, it would take a book – or several – to do each one justice. And I think such complexity is considered a perk by those who designed them, because it makes it easier for their allies in the press to simplify things and lie about them as well as twist them.
Most people have better and/or more pressing things to do than follow all the ins and outs of each story. That’s for political junkies. And although political junkies on the right are usually well aware of what the left is saying because that’s much more difficult to avoid, those on the left can insulate themselves quite easily from the part of the story only the press on the right is covering. And that’s a big part of the plan: to saturate the media and control the “narrative.” The left is confident they can do that successfully.
That sort of confidence is behind actions that otherwise would be puzzling, such as Adam Schiff’s sticking to his script in paraphrasing the Ukraine phone call in a way that can easily be debunked. He did it to get his false insinuations out there and put them in listener’s minds so that they might read them into the story and suspect that’s what Trump really meant. And Schiff also knew that the MSM would cover for him and defend him.
Maybe it will succeed, and maybe it won’t. Time will tell. But there’s certainly no mystery as to why the left works so hard to discredit all news sources on the right, be they bloggers or periodicals or Fox News. The goal is to get the Democrats’ supporters and even people in the middle to consider such sources to be inherently suspect and not worth listening to. They would ban them or deplatform them if they could, and they sometimes succeed in doing so.
I’ve been covering Whistlegate as best I can, but I’m not a team of investigative reporters and I can’t go into everything. I’ve found that the best one-stop source so far seems to be The Federalist, and the best roundup of links to articles from around the net often appears as part of The Morning Report by J.J. Sefton, published early each day at Ace’s.
I take it to be self-evident that no utterance by Schiff should ever be taken as anything other than falsehood or misdirection or obfuscation or equivocation/ prevarication. Having little interest in all the convoluted details of this fabricated affair, I am thereby convinced that the Democrats and all their enablers in the MSM are not to be trusted about this (or almost anything else).
Or, check Mollie Hemingway’s twitter feed:
https://mobile.twitter.com/mzhemingway
Ok, I CANT resist this coming from the contraction reduction
Only the hyperlexic will laugh (maybe)
Whistleblowergate
“Whistlegate”
then to the accidentally apt: “Whistgate”
Whist is a descendant of the 16th-century game of trump or ruff. Whist replaced the popular variant of trump known as ruff and honours. The game takes its name from the 17th Century whist (or wist) meaning quiet, silent, attentive, which is the root of the modern wistful.
and of course Whistlegate is a trick, which is a pun..
A trick-taking game is a card or tile-based game in which play of a hand centers on a series of finite rounds or units of play, called tricks, which are each evaluated to determine a winner or taker of that trick.
the precursor to whist was Trump
A trump is a playing card which is elevated above its usual rank in trick-taking games. Typically, an entire suit is nominated as a trump suit; these cards then outrank all cards of plain (non-trump) suits. In other contexts, the terms trump card or to trump can refer to any sort of action, authority, or policy which automatically prevails over all others.
The English word trump derives from trionfi, a type of 15th-century Italian playing cards.
IF one can also add a bit of fun of abstraction into this word stew…
Trionfi was the 15th-century card game for which tarot cards were designed. Trionfi were a fifth suit in the card game which acted as permanent trumps.
The English word is first documented in 1529 as the name of a card game which would develop into Ruff and Honours and ultimately Whist
Democrats just keep on keeping on.
They’re trying everything.
Will it work? Will it backfire?
Time will tell.
In the meantime, they’re really scraping the bottle of the barrel.
Flinging that mud like it’s going out of style.
And then complaining about how the Republicans are twisting, distorting and perverting the truth.
Yes, the Democratic/MSM hysteria meter is off the charts.
(Chalk it up to Palestinian Rules….)
So, what’ll it be?
Wistfulgate?
Fistfulgate?
Maybe Pustulegate?
Part of their strategy is working – I’m tired of the news repeating their lies. And so many college-indoctrinated folk already believe the Reps are evil, their continued lies continue to be believed by the closed minded Dems.
Who have such high opinions of themselves, especially on being open, and loving others who are “different”.
So many nice people, smart people, but close-minded feeling Trump is bad, thus rationalizing why the facts they recognize as facts show that he’s bad.
Where is the competitor to Fox News, or NY Times? Epoch Times seems worth watching; NBC recently spent time smearing it. It seems to be run by ex-(Red) Chinese. I’m starting to like it more.
They want to run this thing like a campus Title IX tribunal. Anonymous accusation. No pretense of due process. Accusation equals guilt. First to accuse wins.
Oblio…
thats probably true, but that wouldnt be a tribunal it would be a kangaroo court
A kangaroo court is a court that ignores recognized standards of law or justice, and often carries little or no official standing in the territory within which it resides. The term may also apply to a court held by a legitimate judicial authority who intentionally disregards the court’s legal or ethical obligations. The defendants in such courts are often denied access to legal representation and in some cases, proper defence and the right of appeal.
They would also like these too…
A show trial is a public trial in which the judicial authorities have already determined the guilt of the defendant. The actual trial has as its only goal the presentation of both the accusation and the verdict to the public so they will serve as both an impressive example and a warning to other would-be dissidents or transgressors. Show trials tend to be retributive rather than corrective and they are also conducted for propagandistic purposes. The term was first recorded in 1928
Lest we forget (H/T Instapundit:
“What is portrayed as an ‘impeachment inquiry’ is actually just a made-for-cable-TV political soap opera.”
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/344102/
Just wanted to point out that the reference in the title is incorrect. It was Al Capone’s vault, not Hoffa’s.
Great stuff!
Julie Kelly, American Greatness:
The Anesthetic Effect of Ukrainegate
Excellent sdferr,
There’s been discussion here about “projection” by Dems. It’s a psychological term that suggests that because Dems do some illicit thing frequently, they believe it must be true that GOPers are doing it too. I think that type of projection happens some of the time, especially at the mid and lower levels of their power structure.
But, as the Julie Kelly excerpt states, this is a calculated preemptive tactic. If you know someone is going to call you a liar soon (because you are actually lying), call them a liar first. The anesthetic nature or fatigue is part of it, but more importantly perhaps, it makes the second claim of the same offense look childish, pathetic, and reactionary.
Where is the competitor to Fox News, or NY Times? Epoch Times seems worth watching; NBC recently spent time smearing it. It seems to be run by ex-(Red) Chinese. I’m starting to like it more.
Tom Grey: Epoch Times is an odd enterprise run by Chinese-American Falun Gong practitioners. Falun Gong is a Buddhist/Taoist/qigong movement in China which has grown large enough to be considered a threat by the Chinese government, therefore they are brutally repressed. FG practitioners are routinely tortured and killed. It is estimated that thousands have been used for organ harvesting. [shudder]
So I am naturally in sympathy with the Falun Gong, but they are not the sort of people I look to, necessarily, for accurate political commentary.
I took tai chi for six or seven years and qigong was a part of that (though we called it chi gung). I enjoyed it, but it all seemed shot through with Chinese superstition.
I don’t quite know what to make of the Epoch Times.
“One of the hallmarks of the major actions by what has become known as the Deep State to take down Trump has been their relative complexity. That’s partly because they were run in a clandestine manner… In short, it would take a book – or several … such complexity is considered a perk by those who designed them…”
Hook, line, and sinker.
Simple test, if it were Obama instead of Trump, would we think it is a “deep state operation”? Would we think Obama should face impeachment?
Or, are you totally blind now on Trump – very little he does can be wrong, nor even warrant criticism here – the focus here has certainly been about everything else.
If we are concerned about Biden’s son’s activity in Ukraine, are we not the least bit concerned about the Trump family current involvement and the barely (if at all) arm’s length between Trump’s business and his position?
Heck, we even jump past this and spend more words and blog space focusing on “deep state” and the Dems reaction / unfairness.
Ok. It’s overblown in many cases and unfair. So what’s the path forward?
More complaining about how overblown and unfair the Dems are – while ignoring many of the problems on our side?
.
And the crowd here doesn’t see any irony in “but because he stands in the way of the Left’s agenda to permanently transform America.”
About all that argument boils down to is “he fights!” – but for what, really?
Trump has hardly coherently argued, nor been consistent on several major aspects of what used to be conservative policy / philosophy.
That takes convincing the public – something Trump just seems incapable and uninterested in doing.
Just one example, the deficit – bigger than ever, but, he effectively said he doesn’t care because he won’t be in office long enough to see the consequences.
Yep, that is thwarting the left’s agenda in action for ya. More like co-opting.
.
Probably the worst thing he is doing is widening the Overton Window on Presidential power – can’t wait for Prez Warren to inherit that /sark.
Right next to that is turning off those who could be swung away from the left – a large body of folks who are not hardcore left – this shouldn’t surprise anyone.
I said that Trump is an escalation. And, indeed, that is what we are seeing in response in the real and perceived “hysteria” on the left.
Those who could swing away from the left see the ethical challenges, mendacity, incoherence, and pompousness of Trump; the uncritical, steadfast defense of him by much of the “conservative” world (who mostly focus on how bad the Dems / left are, and “deep state” conspiracies to explain the latest trouble Trump has brought on himself – because they can’t admit the deeply flawed Trump is the author of much of it); and, the hypocrisy of positions and standards that once were considered important (and previously leveled against the Dems), now abandoned, ignored, or worse, vigorously opposed.
The right and GOP have lost a lot of trust and credibility.
These voters also see many problems with the Dems, but all that remains for the GOP to sell any of them on is “not Dems”, in their “binary choice”.
Unfortunately, many have concluded or are leaning “not Trump”, and it will be an uphill battle for the GOP to win much other than the safest positions in 2020.
And, I suspect, it will be so for a couple more elections beyond (until the right recognizes the folly of supporting Trump and gets back to something coherent and consistent – if they can).
I am thankful, as I said here some long time ago, that Trump has not turned out to be, in results, much of an authoritarian – not for a lack of his trying or desire. However, I think that is a function of the system the Founders had set up, and the character of others, rather than about Trump himself.
He is too incompetent and self centered to be that organized – who knew that would be a good thing to say about a President!
.
On the basic facts, it seems an ethical line is crossed on the Ukraine call issue. BUT, that is a judgement call and others can disagree. Still, I cannot help but think that many who don’t see it with Trump would readily see it, were it Obama.
Should Trump be impeached? I think it is counter productive with an election so near. HOWEVER, the target of Trump’s “concern about corruption” was Biden – hard to say that doesn’t present a threat to the Dems. Impeachment is a political process and with a Dem majority in the House – theirs to decide.
Is this some minor issue that some unhappy “deep state” left warrior decided to “get Trump” by whistle blowing? Not a minor issue (see judgement call above). Trump didn’t have to get so d*mn near that line. Recall, it was Trump that made the decision to withhold Congress support and shortly thereafter talk the way he did that created the ethical question in the first place.
If this were a one time situation with Trump – maybe – but just too much of Trump courting, if not blowing past, ethical lines that it cannot be ignored, nor can the benefit of the doubt be given.
“Deep State”? Hardly, given the potential consequences and risks for the individual.
Too many want to believe that it is this complex web of planning and activity.
How about we apply Occam’s Razor, it simply may be that someone just couldn’t let this one slip by, as it was a step too far in their judgement (likely exposed to much more such littler steps earlier).
That person is not the only one with a role of authority that sees this as troubling.
But then, of course, that must be the “deep state” at work, right? Nobody can be an honest broker, it all has to be all-in for the left or for Trump.
.
Electing Trump was a compromise – a “lesser of two evils” – supposedly with eyes wide open on what we were getting ourselves into.
Fast forward three years and it looks like many folks lost that perspective, and have gone “all-in” on Trump in the “we vs them” fight.
That change has compromised what they originally said they stood for, and it has compromised the country.
The Left are not the only enemy we need to watch out for – that is, if we truly believe in what we say we do.
.
I ask everyone to seriously think about this rather than respond in the usual way.
“seriously think”
As if people haven’t been doing that right along, and have therefore taken the positions they hold in rejection of the claptrap dished out by the Obama White House, FBI, CIA, DNI, DOJ, with their affiliated news media orgs. CNN, MSNBC, NYT, WaPo, etc.? One could merely turn the table to ask you to begin thinking seriously, my good fellow.
I have “seriously thought.” Do you, Big Maq, seriously think that Trump is making US policy decisions based on who stays at his hotels? Do you have any evidence for that? And his “authoritarian” tendencies have consisted mainly of reversing Obama policies installed by executive fiat, most of which exceeded Obama’s constitutional powers in the first place.
Trump has submitted budgets which would reduce spending significantly. The House, first led by Paul Ryan and now by Nancy Pelosi, has completely ignored presidential budget requests. There’s no guarantee that Congress will get serious about spending even if Republicans lead both houses. It’s certain that, if run by Democrats, Congress will only increase spending, not cut.
It is not at odd for people who only voted for Trump in order to keep the Democrats from gutting the Republic (imagine the Clintons with 2-3 SCOTUS nominees and a partisan administrative state) to find themselves encouraged by Trump’s performance in office. A lot of things he doesn’t get right on the first try, but it is not hard to see that he is motivated (mainly) by love of country in a very old-fashioned and even sentimental way, something that was hard to discern in the Obama Administration.
The thing that is being investigated is the origin of the Russia hoax in 2016. The same names (Crowdstrike, Fusion GPS, Podesta, etc.) and places keep coming up. Ukraine was a nexus for both corruption and propaganda. The question is high up the corruption in the Obama Administration went.
The latest story is that the “whistleblower” is a disgruntled NSC staffer who was asked in 2016 to dig up dirt on Manafort from Ukraine. (We’ll see whether that is the case.)
So no, Biden is immunized because he might be a future Presidential, and the administration has done nothing wrong to ask for the new Ukraine government’s help.
Should be “Biden is not immunized”
“Trump has submitted budgets which would reduce spending significantly. The House, first led by Paul Ryan and now by Nancy Pelosi, has completely ignored presidential budget requests. There’s no guarantee that Congress will get serious about spending even if Republicans lead both houses.” — Kate
Good one Kate. I guess Big Maq missed the numerous statements around the time frame of the Trump tax cuts, where Trump talked about serious spending cuts. Outside the Freedom Caucus, there just isn’t any support for it, certainly not by the US Chamber of Commerce or Biz Roundtable. Those two are salivating for big stimulus spending, like Obama’s stimulus that became a “shovel ready” laugh line for this speeches.
Big Maq is correct that Trump isn’t going to win any conservatism awards from the Hoover Ins. or Heritage, but he so much closer to those ideals, than Paul Ryan, or Mitt Romney, John McCain (bless his soul), or probably Mitch McConnell. But no, Big Maq wants Republicans to get wrapped up in the lack of perfection.
_____
“How about we apply Occam’s Razor, it simply may be that someone [whistleblower] just couldn’t let this one slip by, as it was a step too far in their judgement …” — Big Maq
Oh, so “someone did something”? — Omar
A step too far would have caused said someone to file a complaint with the ICIG who would have thrown it out based on pure second hand info., but that’s not what happened.
“Someone” thought about a complaint and went to Schiff’s committee.
“Some group” got “someone” a team of lawyers to write a complaint, while “some group” contacted the Obama ICIG to rewrite the rules for whistleblower complaints to include hearsay.
Then the complaint was filed with the ICIG and Schiff’s committee got a copy.
The news on the compliant got out (leaks? I forget) and Schiff denied prior knowledge.
Then we learned that Schiff lied about prior contact.
I could go on, but why? Sure, we’re the ones who are Trump blind. No conspiracies or Deep State here.
Artfl,
Thanks very much for the discussion of “whist” (I’ve always been curious about just what sort of game it is) and “trump.” That scratches some itches I’ve had since I was barely a teenager!
Interesting also on the “kangaroo court” vs. the “tribunal.” :>)
First, #NeverShrillary was the trump for me in 2016, and it was most certainly the right decision.
In 2020, it’s #NoDems onaccounta SCOTUS if nothing else. But there is something else, namely, as far as I can see nobody in the current field has the sense of responsibility (or even honesty, let alone honor) of a worm.
I’d be more than happy to be convinced I’m wrong about that; but the Dem nominee would also have to have the stones to stand up against his entire Party, including the strongest hard-Left/Progressive/Socialist/Communist leadership and sub-leadership members.
. P.S — nice to see Edit again.
Stop the presses, pay attention folks: We have here, in a nutshell—an elegant nutshell, an eloquent nutshell—precisely why Trump has to be turfed out. Why it is necessary. Why it is virtuous, Why it is moral that HE MUST LEAVE— and if unwilling, then MADE TO LEAVE (kicking and tweeting, if need be).
And it’s simple, perfectly understandable, perfectly rational, even perfectly obvious!— though it does help if you’re NOT a “Deplorable” (TM):
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/former-cia-chief-brennan-unblinkingly-rewrites-entire-basis-us-judicial-system-one-short
Yes, BRENNAN (the Barbarian?) hath spoke!!
(And now that we’ve solved this, we can move on to the next issue. Finally.)
(And yes, it’s great to see Edith again….)