Roundup

The New Neo Posted on by

(1) An Obama spokesman responds to the accusations about his involvement in Russiagate with the usual claptrap:

Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,” Obama spokesman Patrick Rodenbush said in a statement. “But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one.”

“These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction,” Obama’s spokesman continued. “Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.”

I guess there was no Russiagate then, and Obama’s hands are completely clean.

(2) CBS may be paying 20 million more dollars to Trump in settlement of his lawsuit. I doubt that would put much of a dent in their holdings, however.

(3) No love lost between Hunter Biden and Democrat bigwigs. No doubt they wish he’d just shut up:

WASHINGTON — Democrats ripped former first son Hunter Biden over a pair of podcast interviews released Monday in which he ranted against party leaders and high-profile donors for forcing his dad out of the 2024 race while misrepresenting the “shady” facts of his own criminal trials.

“My stomach churns. At seeing a foul-mouthed Hunter Biden attack the world,” ex-Bill Clinton adviser Mark Penn posted on X after the 55-year-old Biden scion went scorched earth on the Democratic establishment.

“Hunter Biden continues to personify loss in a way that mainly helps Republicans,” a well-positioned Democratic source told The Post Tuesday. “It’s a sad fact we should move on from instead of trying to troubleshoot.”

How can you “move on” without troubleshooting, if you want to try to solve the problem? As Stephen Green notes, some of Hunter’s points were well-taken:

Sure, Biden indulged in plenty of CYA and excuse-mongering, which is exactly what you’d expect from someone whose increasingly senescent father was sidelined out of his reelection campaign by senior members of his own party. But Biden also told some hard truths that no other Democrat would or could.

Here are three:

On Hollywood phonies: “I agree with Quentin Tarantino. George Clooney is not a f***ing actor. He is a f***ing, I don’t know what he is, he’s a brand.”
On aging Clinton and Obama hands: “James Carville—who hasn’t run a race in 40 f***ing years—and David Axelrod, who had one success in his political life, and that was Barack Obama. And that was because of Barack Obama—not because of f***ing David Axelrod.”
On the Dems who defenestrated his dad: “What they proved, what the Democratic Party proved is they have no guts.”

(4) The House Oversight Committee is subpoenaing Ghislaine Maxell to testify in a deposition.

(5) Ozzy Osbourne of the band Black Sabbath has died at the age of 76. RIP. I can’t say I followed his career, but some of you probably did.

One of those days

The New Neo Posted on by

I’ve been having one of those days.

Oh, the weather’s fine. But I’ve been dealing with the health problems of a friend – my ex-husband, to be exact, because I’m the only relative (ex-relative?) nearby. I’ve gotten the usual run-around from various doctors, offers for appointments a year from now – you know the drill. I did finally get him an appointment for about 2 weeks from now with a doctor who might be able to expedite matters a bit, so there’s that. But it’s been very stressful and frustrating and makes me think that, at least in my area of the country, the health care system is more broken than ever.

And then I had some computer problems.

And now, here I am! Greetings, earthlings.

Meanwhile, Hamas has decisions to make

The New Neo Posted on by

The story:

Hamas is no longer a cohesive organization with a clear chain of command and a formidable armed wing. It lacks an agreed-upon policy for the near future and encounters major difficulties in trying to chart a new course. Rival groups around Khaled Mash’al and Khalil al-Hayeh squabble fiercely among themselves, seeking to fill the vacuum created by the demise of well-entrenched leaders. The organization is at a crossroads.

The article goes on to explain that the split is between those who think October 7 and especially its aftermath has been a disaster, and those who don’t. Note that no one seems to think it was wrong on moral grounds; the disagreements are merely tactical.

More:

These ongoing controversies among Hamas leaders, primarily those residing in Qatar, affect their decision-making in the current negotiations over a ceasefire and release of the remaining Israeli hostages (in exchange for Palestinian prisoners convicted of acts of terrorism). The split between “pragmatists,” who are prepared to accept a phased process of IDF withdrawal, and “radicals,” who insist on the IDF’s complete withdrawal, has produced frequent obstacles in the bargaining and caused shifts in Hamas positions and tactics.

The more moderate wing (although their moderation is relative) believes in cutting losses, cooperating somewhat, and living to fight another day when the time is right. The more radical wing believes it can leverage the remaining hostages into victory:

[The latter group argues] that playing the “hostages card” smartly will allow Hamas to achieve the full withdrawal of the IDF and ultimately to maintain its exclusive control over Gaza. They believe that Qatar, Turkey and many non-governmental donors will devise ways to provide significant aid to them, with Iran doing its best to help. Furthermore, they say that the Palestinian Authority is very fragile and there is no benefit in accommodating it.

Is this true? It’s probably close to it; it makes intuitive sense. Nothing indicates any basic change in the goals, however: to achieve power and to destroy Israel.

Seems like only yesterday …

The New Neo Posted on by

… but it was exactly a year ago that Biden dropped out of the 2024 presidential race. Actually, he was forced out. Democrats ended up being defeated anyway, because – as they had known all along – Kamala Harris was a poor politician who just couldn’t pull in the votes.

Could Biden have done any better had he stayed in? I doubt it, because not only was his presidency disastrous but his infirmities had become obvious no matter how hard the MSM tried to cover them up.

The whole thing is still amazing to contemplate.

Who might be charged for Russiagate, and with what?

The New Neo Posted on by

There’s a lot of talk about the new Russiagate documents and whether anyone will be charged, if so who and with what, and what the chances of conviction might be. I came across this video yesterday. I’m not a Barnes fan, to say the least – I think he’s wrong on many issues. But I do think he’s usually very good on specific legal questions such as this. He seems to detest Pam Bondi, by the way. But as I said, he may be spot on about what charges the Russiagate perps might face. Neither treason nor sedition are among them.

Anyway, it’s worth a listen; it’s just a couple of minutes long:

As for the list of names, it’s unclear but it would probably include but not necessarily be limited to Clapper, Comey, and Brennan.

“He that keepeth Israel”

The New Neo Posted on by

Robert F. Graboyes is a writer I often read, and I recommend this more personal piece he wrote about his beloved recently-deceased wife. RIP. She sounds like a rare and wonderful person, and it sounds as though they had a blessed marriage.

But I’m also writing this to focus on Psalm 121, which he quotes thusly:

The Jewish Publication Society’s 1985 translation of Psalm 121 reads as follows:

“I turn my eyes to the mountains; from where will my help come?
My help comes from the LORD, maker of heaven and earth.
He will not let your foot give way; your guardian will not slumber;
See, the guardian of Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps! …”

I remember that psalm, but it’s the King James Version that I recall. That version goes like this:

I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, From whence cometh my help. My help cometh from the LORD, Which made heaven and earth. He will not suffer thy foot to be moved: He that keepeth thee will not slumber. Behold, he that keepeth Israel Shall neither slumber nor sleep.

I’ve written previously about my preference for the King James Version rather than later versions; you can find the post here. And with Psalm 121 I feel the same way, especially the line “Behold, he that keepeth Israel Shall neither slumber nor sleep.” What’s wrong with “behold” and why would anyone change it to “see”? I don’t know the Hebrew, and perhaps “see” is more correct, but I can’t imagine why because see and behold mean more or less the same thing, although the latter has much more gravitas and importance. Don’t we want gravitas and importance for the guardian/keeper of Israel?

And what about guardian versus keeper? The former is a somewhat legalistic word and it even conjures up the idea of an adult taking care of a child. It seems all wrong to me. Now, you might not like the archaic “eth” suffix on the word “keep,” and although I like it very much I can see an argument to leave it off. But I see nothing wrong with “keep” or “keepeth” versus “guardian.”

And there’s that extra word “shall” in the King James Version. I very much like it; it adds weight as well. After all, “the guardian of Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps” sounds more like the guardian might have insomnia and we don’t know why. The “shall” in the KJV connects the guarding and keeping with the vigilance involved in not sleeping.

And the “slumber nor sleep” is redundant, of course, because they are synonyms; but saying something two times in different ways is one of the conventions of Biblical poetry. Fortunately, both versions keep that convention (or do they guard that convention?).

Why TDS has gotten worse among many Democrats in Trump’s second term

The New Neo Posted on by

I’ve noticed that, ever since Trump’s 2024 election and especially since he took office in January, some of my Trump-hating friends and acquaintances have gotten even angrier at Trump and angrier at those who support him, as compared to Trump’s first term. Here are my ideas about why that’s happened.

(1) Trump’s first term victory was considered a fluke and this one was not. Therefore they believe the electorate has become more evil and/or stupid.

(2) In Trump’s first term, they could claim that he didn’t “really” win because he didn’t win the popular vote. In the second term, he won the popular vote.

(3) Efforts to sabotage Trump’s first term – such as Russiagate – were immediately successful in that they convinced a lot of people and also had a restrictive effect on Trump in terms of what he could accomplish and how much energy he could devote to his policy aims versus fighting the lies.

(4) There were many people in Trump’s first administration who either weren’t onboard with his goals or were actively against them. This is far less true in his second term.

(5) He hit the ground running in his second term.

(6) During the Biden administration, Democrats watched Biden undo a great deal of what Trump had done in his first term. And now they’re having the nightmarish experience of watching Trump II undo what Biden did, or re-do what Biden had undone.

(7) One of the most awful things about the 2024 election, as far as the Democrats are concerned, was their loss of support in several of the groups on which their power depends: black and Hispanic voters. They’re not sure what to do about that.

(8) The Trump assassination attempt in Butler galls them, because it was such a close call and many really really wish Trump had been killed. His seemingly miraculous survival is especially frustrating.

(9) They thought that their lawfare against Trump would work either to put him in prison or at the very least to turn more voters against them. Instead it had the opposite effect, another dramatically and deeply frustrating result. It’s something like the classic scene in a horror movie in which the hero or heroine thinks the monster is gone and is finally able to relax and then bam! The monster pounces.

One of these things is not like the other: Russiagate, Epstein letter

The New Neo Posted on by

One is an extremely serious offense and well-documented. The other is meaningless, unauthenticated, and very likely fabricated.

Rescissions bill passes

The New Neo Posted on by

PBS and USAID funding cut:

Just after midnight, the House of Representatives approved a $9 billion rescissions package by a 216-213 vote. The bill now heads to President Donald Trump’s desk for his signature which is expected on Friday.

Two Republicans, Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania and Mike Turner of Ohio, voted against the measure. Fitzpatrick, you may recall, also voted against passage of Trump’s big, beautiful bill earlier this month. He is a moderate from a swing district in the state that Democrats are hoping to flip in next year’s midterms. …

This legislation will block $8 billion in funding to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and $1 billion to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for the remainder of the fiscal year.

NPR has long outlived its usefulness, except to the left. And the left isn’t happy. If so, I would suggest they donate money to keep NPR going.