This week’s hit job is the Bob Woodward book
Bob Woodward’s been riding on Watergate for nearly fifty years. He’s the author of the latest effort to make the public turn on Trump – that portion of the public that hasn’t already done so, that is.
I would imagine that unless you’ve been hiding under a rock lately, you are aware of some of the charges. I’m not going to go into them here; others have done so quite adequately, in my opinion (see this, this, and this, for example).
But this quote in particular caught my eye. Does the left think this exchange reflects badly on Trump?:
When Mr. Woodward pointed out that both he and Mr. Trump were “white, privileged,” and asked if Mr. Trump could see that they both have to “work our way out of it to understand the anger and the pain, particularly, Black people feel in this country,” Mr. Trump replied, “No,” and added, “You really drank the Kool-Aid, didn’t you? Just listen to you. Wow. No, I don’t feel that at all.”
As someone in the comments section to that thread at Althouse wrote:
That, right there, is sufficient reason to vote for Trump.
I wonder sometimes how it is that everyone doesn’t see the transparency of these hit pieces coming like clockwork, based on what Trump’s enemies are saying and writing, or on manufactured outrage at what Trump actually may have said (or some twisted version of it). And in many instances, what he’s actually saying is just the common sense sort of things that most people are thinking.
Trump is a blunt man, and many people find that awful but at least as many find it refreshing.
It’s quite difficult for the social researcher to suss out valid answers as to people’s subjective states and preferences. FWIW, here’s one data point
https://news.gallup.com/poll/284285/new-high-americans-satisfied-personal-life.aspx
The notion that black Americans qua black Americans are shuffling around miserable is one that is properly challenged. The burden of proof is properly on those making such contentions.
Apparently got McMaster book next week and even a Brennan book also so have those warming up in the bullpen.
Plus I’m sure a couple more stories sourcing ‘anonymous’, ‘some say’, ‘current and former staffers’ and a few others I’m sure I’ve missed.
Wonder if Woodward actually believes that nonsense or if he was trying to get Trump to say something ‘troubling’. The latter I suppose and the fact he apparently believed he got him with what was the absolute perfect answer that most normal people will agree with while also mocking the question further show he how clueless he is.
Woodward once reported on an interview he had with William
Casey, ex CIA chief, while Casey was in a coma. Woodward hears voices in his head and needs psychiatric help.
Imagine if Barry HUSSEIN Obama was president during this “pandemic,” and he said to Woodward what Trump said.
i can see the headlines now; “Obama demonstrates his leadership skills….;” Obama leads the way in maintaining calm in perilous circumstances..” ; Obama’s skill in maintaining calm comes to the fore…” and all the other bullshit the media would print or broadcast.
The media IS part of the deep state. They are nothing more or less than the self- appointed propaganda arm of the leftist / socialist demokrat party.
Of course, let’s not forget that Pelosi and Biden both said , hey, this corona virus is not a big concern.
But it’s OK that THEY said this; they are liberal progressive/socialists who hate EVERYTHING about the USA.
The can do and say no wrong.
The man who made anonymous sourcing a journalistic standard. And couldn’t even do it on his own.
neo writes, “Trump is a blunt man, and many people find that awful but at least as many find it refreshing.”
I certainly do find Trump’s bluntness refreshing. I also find refreshing his willingness to hand right back to his enemies (very much including the mainstream media) the crapola they routinely dish out. ‘Bout time someone prominent on the right did.
I do *not* find refreshing, his
– narcissism
– oversized ego
– juvenile name-calling
– pettiness
– chronic mendacity
– not caring what words he uses to express important matters**
** what I have in mind here is his referring to the mainstream media’s hyping of covid as a “hoax”, as in “Russia! Russia! Russia!” — which *was* a hoax. Look, I know what he was referring to, and so do virtually all of neo’s readers here, but it was much too easy to catch him seeming to declare covid itself being a hoax. He makes too many unforced errors, when precision in wording is a must, especially when his enemies will stop at nothing to bring him down. I know, they’ll lie and make stuff up anyway, but fer Pete’s sake, don’t hand them the d#mn knife!
The left has this way of taking jerks and making them into heroes (Tawanna Brawley / Al Sharpton, Trayvon Martin, George Floyd, now Jacob Blake). Now the right has Donald Trump. He’s got his accomplishments, but he’s a *jerk*.
Well, two out of eight ain’t bad.
[No, there’s NO way I’ll vote for Biden / Harris, or is it Harris / Biden ?]
(End of rant. Okay, flame away . . . )
Good for President Trump. This country needs a healthy dose of blunt talk, in conjunction with appropriate action.
White Privilege. Systemic Racism. Endemic Racism. Black Lives Matter (more than others).
All memes that get my blood pressure elevated.
I know that my generation benefited from “white privilege” in the sense that we had an easier path to break out of difficult circumstances. And some of us experienced circumstances that were as difficult as many. On the other hand, I would avow that POC have had the benefit of many opportunities, many not available to others, over the past few decades. There is no justification for people the age of those in the streets to talk of “white privilege”. Then again that is easier than looking inward at their own culture and personal choices.
I have commented here and there, specifically to a granddaughter who marched in the Portland area, back before it turned violent: “The best way to combat racism is to treat each person as an individual, with courtesy and respect. The surest way to create racial resentment is to incessantly accuse people of racism based simply on the color of their skin.” Of course, we all know that increasing racial resentment is the goal of the racialists and nihilistic revolutionaries.
I am pleased to say that I have received two deliveries from on-line shopping over the past two days. Both were delivered by young Black women who were pleasant, courteous, and professional. Both doing their best after losing other jobs due to the pandemic. The Black people I pass around the neighborhood on my daily walks are seemingly unfazed by the racial tensions gripping the country. So, I often wonder just how many people are actually creating the havoc; and how much support they have from the community at large.
I wish to add, Woodward is a jerk.
Neo, it’s not a hit job. Woodward interviewed Trump 18 times and recorded every conversation. Woodward reports what Trump says. The media may be interpreting some of the passages but that’s not on Woodward. Clearly Trump trusted Woodward enough, which is a bit wild after the last book he wrote on him but he seems to halfway like the guy. [Or maybe Trump isn’t too bright?].
I would also say Trump saying the CV19 is much worse than the flu and something that is ‘deadly stuff’ but then saying he wanted to ‘play it down’ speaks for itself. I suppose you could put positive spin on it but if Cuomo or an Democratic politicians said the exact same thing you would have multiple posts calling for their heads.
Montage (5:29 pm) said, “Woodward interviewed Trump 18 times and recorded every conversation. Woodward reports what Trump says.”
Woodward reports what Trump says (he’s got recordings), but in any context that’s objective? that favors Trump? or that favors Trump’s enemies?
The triple question answers itself. Are we ever going to get context?
I cannot for the life of me figure out whatever possessed Trump to actually sit down with Woodward. Can any of you??
Woodward interviewed Trump 18 times and recorded every conversation.
Woodward in 1987 claimed to have conducted 12 hours worth of interviews with Wm. J. Casey when the man was in the hospital moribund with cancer. Sophia Casey said this was a fabrication and that she and her daughter were in continuous attendance of her husband and there were no interviews. The press, ever professionally courteous, elected to believe that Woodward managed to pull this off avoiding the man’s wife, the man’s daughter, the medical and nursing staff, and the hospital security staff.
In the avalanche of Trump hit pieces, Woodward’s work is noteworthy.
Somehow the poor fellow fell into the tar pit of critical race theory.
He is not alone, as plenty other ‘intellectuals’ languish with him.
Convinced the sticky stuff is salvation, they sink ever deeper.
With an election on the line, will they awaken and pull free?
Or are they doomed to become paleological curiosities?
Seeing their determination, my money’s on the latter.
Checking their own privilege, they sink from view.
I read a piece at American Greatness about not using leftist language. The author suggests Leftist Establishment Media (LEM) instead of Mainstream Media (MSM), particularly since the latter term implies that the leftist outlets reflect the American mainstream, which they do not. Plus, using LEM allows calling their votaries LEMMINGS.
https://amgreatness.com/2020/09/09/make-english-great-again/
M J R. Trump’s supporters take him seriously and his enemies take him literally. That’s not my saying, it’s been around for years.
Somebody came up with SASS. Situational Autism Simulation Syndrome. Take something Trump said in jest, hyperbole, his usual puffery, exaggeration for effect, etc. and pretend it’s meant to be screechingly, absolutely literal. WE GOT’IM NOW! THIS TIME WE GOT HIS SORRY BUTT!
Point is, the latter were already Trump haters. Nobody buys their schtick. It’s only an unforced error if the left’s frenzied response convinces anybody, which is unlikely.
Limbaugh, today, opined the American people were tired to the point of ignoring the hit piece of the week. That doesn’t mean his opponents won’t flog it until the next one comes along. But normal people are immune.
But, anyway, at least Woodward got the font right this time.
Paul in Boston: That fictional work that Woodward wrote based on interviews he had with a comatose Bill Casey should have forever disqualified as any kind of reporter. What an unprincipled, disgusting human being he is. Thanks for reminding me.
Richard Aubrey (7:09 pm), ’twas Selena Zito four-plus years ago . . .
“WASHINGTON — Journalist Selena Zito famously summed up President Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign when she wrote, ‘The press takes him literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally.'”
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/04/23/taking_trump_seriously_and_literally_133682.html
I hear you and I get you, friend, . . .
. . . but it’s not just his words. Actions (track record), demeanor, maturity, and so on. But we need not belabor this. We’re on the same side — I’m just curmudgeonly.
To learn that Trump is fully cognizant of his enemies having drunk the Left’s “Kool-Aid” greatly gladdens my heart. This man not only fights but knows full well what he fights.
Woodward, the MSM, and Montage think it is a major crime for the President to be calm and optimistic, instead of running around screaming, “We’re gonna die! We’re gonna die! We’re all gonna die!” is some sort of crime. Thank God, Washington, Lincoln, FDR, and Churchill didn’t agree with that philosophy when things were going bad for them! I suppose “Keep Calm and Carry On” was a sign of great moral depravity on the part of the British when the bombs were falling all around them.
Montage and his ilk apparently never heard that actions speak louder than words. While Cuomo was sending sick old people back into nursing homes, Trump was banning travel from China, forming a COVID-19 task force, and persuading/browbeating/invoking the Defense Production Act to get ventilators and PPE produced by American manufacturers. Tell me again, Montage, which one was handling the pandemic better?
Montage: “Trump saying the CV19 is much worse than the flu and something that is ‘deadly stuff’ but then saying he wanted to ‘play it down’ speaks for itself.”
REALITY CHECK: now we know that Covid is both no worse than the flu for most of the young and middle aged. But it rises in risk incidence over 50 years of age, precariously so above 70.
These facts emerged as Northern Italy was beginning to experience the disease in Mid February when the first demographic characterisation of Covid-19 appeared from authorities in China, but given the chaos and China’s history of communist whitewashing, uncertainty and doubts were definite instead of solid facts.
Foreign observers and scientists were seeking confirming evidence from outside China to determine what the real risk really amounted to. “Wait and see…?” became the day-to-day reality.
This came out well after after Trump closed down travel from China at 5PM on February 2nd:
The Hill…
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/481028-biden-slams-trump-for-cutting-health-programs-before-coronavirus-outbreak
…via Sundance
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/02/02/china-joe-accuses-president-trump-of-fearmongering-coronavirus-due-to-suspension-of-entry/
Trump was hysterical and xenophobic and not following science, declares the nominee of the party of hysteria over the mildest of recent climate change associated with natural El Niño events — it was warmer during the 1920s and ‘30s than today if proxy temperature measures are taken seriously or if actual unadjusted US temperature records are compared — with more federal spending on it than anything sciencey save medicine.
Yeah. Truth Teller Joe. /sarc
The elders and males (especially with comorbidities) at risk in demographic skew of the pandemic emerged from China’s CDC report on February 17th, and later confirmed in Italy. (See “Coronavirus demographics — very much a risk for older people and the strange split in severe case rates” from 0 [for the young] to 15% mortality over age 80:
http://joannenova.com.au/2020/02/coronavirus-demographics-very-much-a-risk-for-older-people-and-the-strange-split-in-severe-case-rate/)
“The good news — babies and children appear to be not at risk. The not-so-great news, people over 80 in China have up to a 15% fatality rate (usual caveats, based on unreliable communist statistics and will hopefully be lower for many reasons, see below.)….
“The news on ‘rates of severe cases’ is mixed. Singapore, Japan and HK are looking at 15% early rates. But many other nations are looking at 0%. Hmm?”
My point is that both narratives were in play during February and both were true, but simply for different age groups. Joanne Nova in Australia studied microbiology and has co-authored published papers in the field. Here’s how she further explained the battle of two Chinese virus themes on February 19th, high risk versus low risk:
“The all important rates of progression to severe cases is spread from zero to 15%”
“Adjusted for the eight day delay in progression to severe symptoms, the number that keeps coming back is strangely split at close to zero, or an unappealing 14% — Singapore has 4 severe cases out of the 28 it had on Feb 11th. (14%) Hong Kong had 49 cases on Feb 11th, and 7 have progressed to severe or critical. 14%. In Japan there were about 28 cases a week ago, and 4 of those are severe. (14%). The Diamond Princess cases: 15% severe (see below).
“But in many places the news is good. South Korea is interesting, with 46 cases and still none classed as ‘severe’. Fifteen of those cases are only one day old, so don’t count, but 28 of those cases are eight days or more after diagnosis. This is encouraging. As is the lack of any ‘severe’ progression in Australia (only five active cases left [after recoding nearly 1,000]) and in the US, Germany, and France (apart from one death of a Chinese man, ten of the other cases are now at least ten days old and haven’t progressed.) Taiwan, likewise, had 18 cases a week ago, and apart from one death, none of the others have progressed to severe.
“Why the disparity?…”
Why indeed. Today it is easy to dismiss uncertainties as to whether or not a dangerous pandemic threat was coming our way or not. But back then in February, the fog of uncertainty was quite real.
JoNova quotes two experts on opposite sides of this issue at length, one in Hong Kong, another in Japan. One warns, the other remains unconvinced.
She rounds out her February 19th post this way, before discussing personal preparations one might take: “The world may become split between the no-virus states and the infected ones [predicting our status by early summer] — call me an optimist — all clean countries need a two week mandatory quarantine as a barrier. Or we may (cheery thought) be in the early stages of a pandemic.”
We may be less than half way through this crisis. And this simple binary is being challenged. Why?
The virus incubation period before symptoms appear is about double the 8 days then believed — 14 days isn’t hard and fast but works for far over 99% of the cases, but maybe not for thousands. And the R0 is definitely higher than then thought, meaning that it is over twice as easy as the influenza, over 3 cases are contracted for every first.
Those are two huge determinants of the threat that were lacking in solid measurement in spring, and certainly not in February. This lack meant room for much speculation as well as hope to substitute for facts.
Woodward is obviously engaging in simpleminded retrospective conflation because of the histrionic and outraged rage-machine he works for in a city that ought to be quarantined from the citizens they cannot even hope to respectfully serve, beyond its suburbs. He serves His Master Class, not the People who defiantly chose him and rejected their elite, hoary, and obviously criminal preference. Worse, they don’t care to learn who they must serve — unless the New Civil War explodes in their very streets.
I hope they get it by then.
Neo wrote: I wonder sometimes how it is that everyone doesn’t see the transparency of these hit pieces coming like clockwork, based on what Trump’s enemies are saying and writing, or on manufactured outrage at what Trump actually may have said (or some twisted version of it).
I think everyone does see it, with the Deplorables alternately amused by the DNC/media’s clueless self-assurance and disgusted by Their Majesties’ sneering contempt for half the country.
I wish to commend Lizard’s poesy, with a few changes to increase the near-rhymes, which I much prefer to blank verse, and title it “The La Brea Election.”
Banned Lizard on September 10, 2020 at 6:06 pm said:
Kate, that’s a good point about the designations. The thing is that one has to decide how to talk about the media in a not-overly-esoteric or jargon-y way oftentimes, with family, for example.
I liked Banned Lizard’s poem, too, but I think, Aesop, that you underrated somewhat the patterns that exist within it. There’s obviously the ziggurat visual construction, which I like because I’ve been known to build poems with that sort of visual effect in mind sometimes, or a mathematical pattern occasionally. Besides that, though, I was just thinking about the rhythm of the lines and there are some fun patterns in there. I’ll illustrate it like this with accented/unaccented syllables in a certain possible way of reading, broken up a little arbitrarily to show how I think the feet could be divided up in interesting ways. (The numbers are just the line numbers for reference.)
1 ..o.. ..o.. o…o..
2 .o. .o. .o. .o. .o.. .o..
3 o.o.o .o.o.o.o. o.o.
4 .o…o..o. .o..o.
5 .o.o.o.o .o.o.o.o
6 .o.o..o o..o.. o.o..
7 o.o.o.o. .o.o.o.
8 o.o.o.. .o.o
Some comments:
1: unusual first couple of feet;
2: a more standard meter asserts itself, but with a twist in the latter part;
3: again pretty standard and steady – only if one contrives to read the word ‘intellectuals’ tetrasyllabically is the meter maintained throughout, but interestingly, doing so (“intellecshul”) suggests that country contempt already indicated by the quotes in the original – a slightly tongue-in-cheek reflexive commentary, almost fourth-wall kind of effect;
4: this is the most irregular line, possibly connected with the mental state of the characters – it’s a certain moment of decision in the poem’s ‘plot’, what with the characters’ feelings about the death trap, noting that their reaction in this telling is psychologically opposed to that of the dinosaur antecedents – not sure if this storytelling device was the motive of the rhythmic selection, but I’ve occasionally used such suggestive methods in poems in the past, so it is plausible that such was the case here;
6: very tough to build rhythmic patterns around words like those, but the meter did take some shape after all;
8: great dramatic finality in the meaty closing iambs.
“I liked Banned Lizard’s poem, too,” – Philip
Thanks for the extended analysis – you are obviously a Master Versifier yourself!
I confess that I responded mostly instinctively, without plumbing the depths of prosodic criticism.
Bravo to Lizard, in any case.
The parallelism in lines 4 and 8 is striking.
Why is Woodward so revered? As far as I can see he answered a call from Deep Throat (who was a typical entitled liberal who was not given the job he wanted). Woodward then took dictation from Deep Throat & published it. Is this Jounalism? No wonder we have a press so willing to use any leaks they can get. Sad…
Why is Woodward so revered? As far as I can see he answered a call from Deep Throat (who was a typical entitled liberal who was not given the job he wanted). Woodward then took dictation from Deep Throat & published it. Is this Jounalism? No wonder we have a press so willing to use any leaks they can get. Sad…
Woodward and Bernstein have claimed Mark Felt was Deep Throat (IMO, Felt courteously agreed to cop to it because others were building the case that ‘Deep Throat’ was a composite and the Rube Goldberg procedure they say they used to arrange meetings with ‘Deep Throat’ a nonsensical plot device). Felt wasn’t an entitled liberal. He was a careerist engaged in self-dealing exercises.
At the time Woodward offered his incredible tale in re Wm. J. Casey, even Fred Barnes said he believed Woodward. The press in the Newseum era covered for each other reflexively. Keep in mind that Sophia Casey was vociferous and specific and (to a normal person) the more credible party. He makes up a wild cock-and-bull story and you’d have to scrounge to find someone in the media milieu of the day who called bullsh!t and was able to publish that call.
Critics of Woodward and Bernstein have been able to demonstrate over the years that very little in the course of events over those 26 months was attributable to their reporting. They were trading in information that prosecutors and federal investigators were already making use of to build a case against various parties; they uncovered nothing new.
NB, the FBI, the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice, and the US Attorney in DC – working without any information technology – were remarkably efficient compared to their counterparts today. The whole business stem to stern was wrapped up in three years and change. One other thing. the three men in charge of the FBI during those years. Earl Silbert, the assistant US Attorney in charge of prosecuting the case in 1972 and 1973, and Henry Petersen, head of the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice were part of the permanent government. The special prosecutors who replaced them – Archibald Cox, Leon Jaworski, and Henry Ruth – were all registered Democrats. One was a Harvard professor who had been Solicitor-General during the Kennedy Administration, one had been president of the American Bar Association, and one was a quondam aide to John Lindsay. The whole operation was the work of the Democratic establishment. The star witness in front of the Senate Watergate Committee successfully concealed a datum that Gordon Liddy and others have made public to little effect since: that they burgled the Watergate complex to perform a personal errand for said star witness, who fancied someone on the staff of the DNC had compromising information about his fiancee.
I like the version where Deep Throat was angry he did not receive a desired promotion. Entitled liberals applies to all the entrenched bureaucrats who think half the country are deplorable. Recent news about the phones wiped of information by Mueller’s band of despicables is yet another instance of their dishonesty. They feel they are so superior they can operate in an unethical manner.