Apparently this is a real thing:
RIP Bob Newhart
Such a funny guy, with his very own deadpan style.
Greatest last episode of all time:
Speeches at the Republican Convention
Peter Navarro delivered quite the barn-burner.
I’ve noticed varied YouTube comments on different postings of the speech. When posted by outlets neutral or friendly to the right, there was a great deal of praise for Navarro. At versions from leftist sites there was a lot of this sort of thing: “He’s a crook!” “The GOP is a party of cons and felons!” Interesting approach – and similar to the “Trump is a convicted felon!” meme – use a kangaroo court and charges for which no one on the left would be prosecuted, convict your opponents, and then criticize them for being felons. It’s so incredibly and transparently dishonest, and yet it seems to resonate with a lot of people on the left.
Another powerful speech was this by a woman whose son was killed in New York and who accused Bragg of inappropriately reducing the charges against the assailants:
There were also the heartbreaking Gold Star parents:
And of course there was J. D. Vance. I don’t much care for political speeches in general, but I see that people seemed to find him natural, energetic, and relatable. I think his rust belt appeal is real and important.
Tonight is Trump’s night.
ADDENDUM: See also this about Vance.
Will Joe give in?
We have the rather odd spectacle of the Republicans rooting for Biden to stay in the race, and Democrats trying to push him out and replace him. Biden himself seems weak and frail at the moment, suffering from COVID – which I think he actually has, because there’s a mini-surge – and being barraged by requests and even demands that he step down.
How firmly can Biden cling to power, and for how long? As I’ve written before, he’s a stubborn old cuss. But as time goes on and the number of Democrat leaders calling – publicly – for his abdication increases, it seems he will probably waver. My sense is that the final result will depend on how many people tell him to pull out, and in what ways they threaten him if he doesn’t. If they make it clear that, if he doesn’t withdraw, they will challenge him at the convention and make it impossible for him to be nominated, then I believe he will see that he has no alternative but to quit before he’s forced out. But will they say that? And can they accomplish it? I have little doubt they would like to do so.
Lastly, of course, is the question of whether a replacement such as Kamala would do better. Polls are fairly useless at this point, although state polls in swing states are most helpful and national polls least helpful. And even though this campaign season may already seem endless, there are still over three months to go, and three months is a long time in politics. Do people really know Kamala Harris, and would more exposure to her over time enhance her appeal or detract from it? That’s just one of so many many unanswered questions. And for that matter, whom would Harris choose as her VP, and would it matter?
And then there’s fraud …
Changing one’s mind about Trump
I’ve noticed that, in the coverage of the Republican Convention, the MSM seems to paint those who have changed their minds about Trump since 2016 as fickle hypocrites. For example, Trump’s current running mate J. D. Vance was basically a NeverTrumper back then, and the media wants us to remember that and distrust him for it.
On the other hand, one of the themes of the convention has been such mind-changing. That was the point of the speech given by Amber Rose, a model I’d never heard of before but who gave an interesting “changer” speech the other day:
The message is clear: do your own research on Trump and you’ll find that much of what you thought you knew – and hated – about the man is a lie.
It’s a clever approach – although because a mind is a difficult thing to change, it probably won’t work with most people. But it’s intriguing, and I can identify because although I was never a NeverTrumper I was extremely Trump-skeptical during the 2016 campaign. Trump won me over pretty quickly by his performance as president, but that’s because I kept an open mind to begin with.
Open thread 7/18/24
Taken the other day on a walk:
Biden’s not having a good week
Now he’s tested positive for COVID.
Biden’s had COVID before and his symptoms are reported to be mild.
Reports are that Iran wants to assassinate Trump
Of course Iran hates Trump and doesn’t want him to win the election. They can’t believe their good luck with Biden as president, and would like it to continue. Therefore:
Iran has for years considered a plan to get back at Trump for his killing of top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in 2020. But the officials said the intelligence has ratcheted up in recent months and officials have become more confident in Tehran’s intentions. They also said there may be more attempts on Trump’s life in the coming weeks.
Both officials were granted anonymity to speak about sensitive intelligence.
CNN previously reported that the U.S. received intelligence about an Iranian plot to assassinate Trump before Thomas Matthew Crooks, 20, tried to kill the former president at his rally in Pennsylvania Saturday. The two officials stressed to POLITICO that there was no evidence Saturday’s shooting had a connection to Iran.
Absolutely no connection. Crooks is the last person Iran would choose. But, as in a detective story, there are an awful lot of people who wish Trump dead.
Schiff joins the chorus saying Joe must go
Fresh on the heels of the story regarding Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D-NY) recent visit to Delaware to confab with President Joe Biden (presumably to encourage him to bow out of the 2024 presidential race) comes news of the most prominent Democrat to formally call for Biden to exit stage left: Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) has now formally called for Biden to drop out of the race.
This follows Schiff’s prediction that the Democrats would lose if Biden remained atop the ticket, and possibly lose the House and Senate as well.
Note that all Schiff cares about is whether Biden can beat Trump, and also how a continuing Biden candidacy will affect other races in November. He (like mot Democrats) ignores the fact that if Biden shouldn’t run in 2024 he also shouldn’t be president now, because the issue is not solely winning or losing but mental and emotional competence.
Meanwhile, Biden had some sort of angry meltdown during a phone call with Democrats, and the contents were leaked – which means a Democrat who wants Biden to get out of the race was almost certainly the leaker:
In a leaked Zoom call with moderate House Democrats on Sunday, President Joesph Biden once again used his dead son, Beau Biden, this time, to insult and denigrate the military and combat service of Colorado Congressman Jason Crow (D). Biden was unhinged as he told Crow to “tell me who did something that you’ve never done with your Bronze Star like my son!” President Biden was attempting to convey the message that he was fit and able to continue on with his campaign and snapped at Crow when he politely expressed his concerns to the president.
Instead of addressing Crow’s and other moderate Democrats’ concerns, Biden snapped at Crow and went on a full-blown assault, which ended with an attack on his Army and combat service and comparing it with his son Beau’s service. Biden specifically ridiculed Crow’s Bronze Star in a pathetic and out-of-bounds attack, which the campaign did not deny or dispute.
I think they’re afraid Biden will embarrass them further, after he is locked in as the nominee.
… [I]n a new interview with BET, the president directly stated that he would drop out if medical professionals advised him to.
The 81-year-old president made the remark in a BET interview taped Tuesday when asked what it would take to prompt him to reconsider his candidacy.
“If I had some medical condition that emerged, if somebody, if doctors came to me and said, you got this problem and that problem,” Biden said in an excerpt released Wednesday.
Biden must be polling significantly worse than Kamala these days.
More on the shooter’s movements and possible motives
Strange stuff:
So Crooks was spotted early on with a rangefinder. I wonder if security had ever considered whether a rangefinder – in the absence of a weapon – would be allowed. At any rate, the officials who were alerted lost track of him. And in fact Crooks seemed to have been sighted several times by different officers, flagged as suspicious for different reasons each time, and lost by law enforcement. Did they communicate with each other? Did anyone ever realize this was the same person over and over? Did they have a clue what level of suspiciousness would be enough to stop the proceedings or delay them, until the suspicious person was identified and in custody or ascertained to be non-dangerous?
These reports only solidify my original notion that what went on in Butler, PA, last Saturday was a case of gross incompetence, terrible communication and coordination, stupidity, complacency, and lack of imagination.
We also have learned that Crooks’ parents had reported him missing hours before the shooting. They seem to have been alarmed:
His father told law enforcement he assumed his son had gone to the shooting range at the The Clairton Sportsmen’s Club to practice with his rifle and would be back by 1pm on Saturday, CNN reported. …
But as time went on he grew more concerned and phoned local law enforcement. …
Both of Crooks’ parents are behavioral therapists and Crooks’ father said he was baffled by his son’s actions.
That article also contains a pretty good timeline of Crooks’ movements and interactions with security.
I have a strong suspicion that Crooks revealed very little of his true self to his parents. He was a secretive cipher, quiet but with an internal life that finally exploded in the assassination attempt – which I see as his way to be famous and make history. We also have this from an ex-classmate, who says that Crooks didn’t like any politicians:
A former classmate of would-be assassin Thomas Matthew Crooks says the 20-year-old gunman once mocked him over his support of former President Donald Trump and had a general disdain for mainstream politicians across the political aisle.
“I brought up the fact that I’m Hispanic and, you know, I’m for Trump. And he said, ‘Well, you’re Hispanic, so shouldn’t you hate Trump?'” Vincent Taormina told Fox News Digital Tuesday. “No. He’s great. He was a great president. He called me stupid – or insinuated that I was stupid.” …
Taormina [said] that Crooks was usually quiet, except on certain topics that he seemed passionate about, including math and politics. And on those issues, he could be “smug [and] arrogant,” he added.
This fits exactly with my current theory, which is that Crooks had grandiose ideas about himself and that he committed the crime to overcome the fact that despite his great superiority he was still a nonentity. This is very similar to Oswald, who found that JFK was a target of opportunity due to the motorcade route but who had no special animus towards JFK but was hostile towards many public figures, including General Walker, whom he had tried to assassinate earlier. Oswald had a very firm sense of his own superiority but was also a failure and nonentity – and was a relatively young man as well, only just turned 24 years old.
Here’s an interesting video on security at Butler:
Open thread 7/17/24
Cheatle needs to go
Seems to me there was a time when people respected the Secret Service. Then again, memory deceives me, because even back in 1963 when Kennedy was assassinated, many of the conspiracy theories – which involved just about every possible government agency – implicated the Secret Service as well.
So it’s no surprise that the assassination attempt on Trump is not only already rife with conspiracy theories galore, but that some of them involve the cooperation of the Secret Service.
I’ve already said my piece many times over about the JFK conspiracy theories, and so I’ll repeat my position only briefly here: the conspiracy theories are garbage – sometimes merely ignorant garbage, and sometimes malevolent self-serving garbage by grifters out to make a buck. Read Bugliosi’s book Reclaiming History, especially the first 500 pages or so, if you want to learn the facts. That sounds like a lot of reading, but it’s all riveting. You can access a great deal of the book online, here.
I also don’t ascribe to conspiracy theories about Saturday’s attempt on Trump; I’ve seen nothing to indicate conspiracy, and Crooks would be the last person conspirators would choose. But incompetence of the worst order on the part of the Secret Service and other law enforcement agencies? That I can get behind. There’s no question in my mind that Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle has got to go. Get a load of this:
The Secret Service director said the security agency did not station snipers on top of the Pennsylvania roof from which a gunman shot former President Donald Trump last weekend because it was “sloped.”
Kimberly Cheatle, the Secret Service chief refusing calls to step down after Trump was shot in the head, told ABC News that federal officials opted to forgo snipers on the rooftop that was identified as a security threat days before the event.
“That building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point. And so, you know, there’s a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn’t want to put somebody up on a sloped roof,” she said. “And so, you know, the decision was made to secure the building, from inside.”
Three counter-snipers were positioned in the building underneath the roof from which Saturday’s gunman fired multiple shots killing one rallygoer and injuring three others, including Trump. The event’s security “command center” was even notified of the shooter moments before the would-be assassin began firing into the crowd.
This makes zero sense unless there was a policy of zero tolerance for any injuries to Secret Service agents, however remote the possibility. It makes even less sense when you consider how slight the roof slope was – and besides, weren’t Secret Service snipers positioned on a roof with a similar slope right behind where Trump spoke? And I’d love to hear the rationale for positioning snipers inside a building, where their sightlines would probably be highly limited.
I’ve also read that there were sightings of the shooter Crooks as early as 30 minutes before the incident, and that local law enforcement was trying to figure out if he was dangerous. Did they confront him? Apparently he kept appearing and disappearing. Did an important alert go out, or did he look so innocuous they dismissed him as not worth much concern?
It seems to me that complacency as well as sheer stupidity were the reasons this happened the way it did, and sheer luck enabled Trump to survive. But not securing the high places is unconscionable. I’m no security expert, but how about at least a drone?