Bret Stephens | Only Impeachment Can Save Republicans – The New York Times

Opinion Columnist

Credit…Saul Loeb/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

If there’s one thing Republicans in Congress ought to consider as they weigh the merits of impeaching Donald Trump, it’s the story of the president’s relationship with Mike Pence.

In December 2015, then-Governor Pence tweeted, “Calls to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. are offensive and unconstitutional.” In April 2016, Tim Alberta reported that Pence “loathes Trump, according to longtime friends.” In July of the same year, Republican strategist Dan Senor tweeted, “It’s disorienting to have had commiserated w/someone re: Trump — about how he was unacceptable, & then to see that someone become Trump’s VP.”

You know what came next. Pence turned himself into the most unfailingly servile sidekick in vice-presidential history. He delivered the evangelical vote to Trump. He stood by the president at every low point, from the “Access Hollywood” tape to Charlottesville, Va., to Helsinki to the Ukraine call. He indulged Trump’s fantasies about a stolen election.

He betrayed his principles. He abased himself. Then Trump insisted that he steal the election. When Pence refused — he had no legal choice — Trump stirred the mob to go after him.

David Lindsay Jr.
Hamden, CT | NYT Comment:
Thank you Bret Stephens. It is not often that you go to Mitch McConnel for support. “The philosophical case is clear. Senator Mitch McConnell was eloquent and right: “If this election were overturned by mere allegations from the losing side, our democracy would enter a death spiral. We’d never see the whole nation accept an election again. Every four years would be a scramble for power at any cost.” ” I have to disagree with the comment by Socrates. The GOP is not finished, and unfixable. I hope and support that the good citizens of the Lincoln Project do start a third party, which I suggest they call, The Party of Lincoln. If they run against Trumpster Republicans in two and four years, the Trumpsters could all be removed from office, replaced mostly by Democrats. Then, the Lincoln Project conservatives will be able to take back over the the defeated GOP if they want that brand for their own. I am of the same mind as others, like Thomas Friedman, who has written eloquently that our democracy needs at least two healthy, robust parties, to represent the democratic, moral and economic principles of both the left and the right, and hopefully both more centrist than the wing nut radicals of either.

Saturday, the NYT Editorial Board Shoots Itself, by David Lindsay and others

Saturday, the NYT Editorial Board Shoots Itself

On Saturday, May 3rd, the NYT put out a scree, Investigate Tara Reade’s Allegation, that so infuriated me, that I considered seriously whether to cancel my subscription to the Times. I thought it was pathetically overboard. I went to the comments to find solace and confirmation, which I found in spades. Like the top comments:

RogerD

PhiladelphiaMay 2

Times Pick

No. The accusation against Biden should not be investigated without the same type of investigation into the multiple allegations against Trump. Both men are running for the highest office. Both must be held to the same standard. Why does the Editorial Board give a pass AGAIN to Trump? Both candidates should be treated the same in this instance. Investigate both or none.

22 Replies3184 Recommended

 

dre commented May 2

D

dre

NYCMay 2

Times Pick

This editorial says there are inconsistencies in her claims and accusations. A huge understatement from what I’ve read. Most of us agree all serious accusations should be taken seriously. But there has to be believable corroboration, facts, supporting evidence…and a consistent pattern of integrity and believability on one side or the other. I don’t see evidence of integrity on her side. If you look at everything she has said and written about Biden over nearly 30 years, she doesn’t seem credible. She has said repeatedly over the years that he was basically an ok guy, though he rubbed her neck once and made her uncomfortable, but it was not sexual in her own words. All of a sudden though her favorite, Bernie, is trounced, and it’s now for the first time, in March of 2020, a claim of sexual assault. And hard to believe but she has written she loves Putin, too. Everyone of course has to make up their own mind about her credibility, but unless something new and significant comes up, Joe will get my vote.

14 Replies2439 Recommended      https://nyti.ms/2WolEkW

 

Bret Stephens reminded his co-workers at the editorial board, in his piece Biden and the Presumption of Innocence, that you are usually considered innocent until proven guilty, but he slammed Biden for going too far in 2011, trying to stop or reduce male on female assaults in US colleges, by making it too easy for any complaint to terminate any male student. https://nyti.ms/3cZkF18

 

Lisandra Villa at Time Magazine wrote: “After she came forward with allegations against Biden, Reade’s credibility was called into question by some critics, who noted her support of other candidates in the 2020 Democratic cycle as well as blog posts she wrote praising Vladimir Putin, including a now-deleted Medium post entitled “Why a Liberal Democrat Supports Vladimir Putin.” Reade says her past posts regarding Russia have been taken out of context. “What I would say is I do not support Vladimir Putin any longer,” she says.”

One news source I read last week? reported that Tara Reade told someone she left the US government partly because she was fond of Putin and Russia, and didn’t like how they were treated by the US government, but I can’t remember the source.

Source: Tara Reade Accuses Joe Biden of Sexual Assault: What We Know | Time

There was an interesting conversation at my facebook page after this post.

  • Tinker Lindsay She’s not well.

     

    Carolyn Siebert BobsinCarolyn Siebert Bobsin replied
    • Delete or hide this
    • Tinker Lindsay Carolyn, I respectfully disagree.
      Delete or hide this
    • Carolyn Siebert Bobsin Tinker Lindsay Ford had some weird issues. She said she was afraid to fly yet she had flown for business and pleasure. Two front doors built in her house ? Her demeanor looked like she was unsure of what she was saying. The questions asked of her were leading her along. Something happened to her but it was not Kavanaugh.
  • Ellen Unger Freiler The social media trap caught her squarely…
    • David Lindsay Gregory F. Todd Wow. That’s horrible. Do you know anything about Salon, it is new to me.
      Edit or delete this
    • Gregory F. Todd David Lindsay – the story in Salon was picked up from another (left leaning) website (Raw Story), which picked up the original story from reason.com.

      Anything in Salon or Raw Story is something I like to trace back to another source, — but just because it appears on those websites does not make it false.

      (I’m surprised, in a sense, that you are surprised by this. Are you familiar with the tricks and practices of Karl Rove, James O’Keefe, and so many others in the right-wing media ? It’s well worth our study to know who we’re dealing with!)

      Delete or hide this
      Reason.com
      REASON.COM
      Reason.com
      Delete or hide this
      Carolyn Siebert Bobsin Reade is a lot more believable than Ford. This must be seriously investigated!
      Delete or hide this
    Write a reply…
  • Seth Bates It’s time to stop giving this story air UNLESS it is in the context of “allegations of sexual misbehavior against Trump and Biden must be fully investigated, in parallel, by objective parties” (not the DOJ which is run by discredited and biased Bill Barr.)
    Delete or hide this
    • Carolyn Siebert Bobsin Seth Bates the Trump accusations were throughly investigated. I think he did have sex with the women but it was consensual. Then it becomes a he said, she said. Money is probably the motivation. Reade’s situation is different. She looked up to Bieden. She didn’t want to get him in trouble until he became the Dem candidate. Then maybe her conscience became her motivation.
      Delete or hide this
    • David Lindsay Carolyn Siebert Bobsin Hi Carolyn. what you say about Tara Reade is absolutely possible. But it seems more likely to me that she is a well paid political saboteur. Those of us outside the Fox News bubble already know that Trump tried to get the President of the Ukraine to start a phony smear on Biden. And, If your thinking is right, she should have spoken out when he was up for Vice President.
    • Peggy Kane Carolyn Siebert Bobsin You need to look into both situations further.
      Delete or hide this
    • Seth Bates Carolyn Siebert Bobsin well, Carolyn, let me start by pointing out that your comment to me is worded to show that you have accepted each of Ms. Reade’s statements as true, without any proof. Not an open mind, or just accident of grammar.
      I have not seen ANY details about the 25 allegations against Trump and they have not been asked in the press. And on the other hand I have read extensively about Reade’s accusations and her personal history. It’s a confused and jumbled mess, and it does not give me any sense of her reliability.
      I stand with my statement – the Trump allegations must be investigated, in public view, just as everyone is suggesting should be done with Biden. If not, this descends into a one-sided smear of Biden.
      And all of that being said, even if the Reade allegations turn out to be supported, I have to choose between Trump and Biden in November. Sorry, but there is no question to me but that reelection of Trump would result in further, possibly fatal, attacks on justice, voting, the environment, and the American people.
    Write a reply…
  • Gregory F. Todd The New York Times does that a lot: handwringing, earnest angst, thoughtful whining, wanting to do always the right thing, and overthinking it.

    I’m inclined to believe her, to the effect that something happened. But what??

    Why did she change her account just recently?

    To be honest, I think the representatives from the MeToo movement should have an open-sit down with Tara Reade to understand who, what, why she is motivated to modify the story now

    • David Lindsay I’ve enjoyed these discussions. I don’t mind investigating Joe Biden, as long as we do the same with equal ferocity to Donald Trump, and to Biden’s apparently flakey and sole accuser. I would like to know if someone put her up to changing her story, or if she was motivateed by her own politics. As Maureen Dowd wrote in her excellent but complicated essay in the Sunday Review in the Times, women, as well as men, are just as capable of really bad, dishonest behavior. Maureen listed every known great mistake Joe has made against women, and which does not include assault, but still balanced his imperfection against the convenience that this story has in helping Trump and hurting Biden polically with women and young people, both of whom are vital to the up coming election. Dozens of women, who have known Biden for years, don’t believe this accusation. I have read their testimonials in the comments section of the NYT.
      Edit or delete this
      • L

    • Gregory F. Todd David Lindsay – absolutely. It seems admitted that he ‘touched her’ in a way that ‘made her feel uncomfortable’. This was a view shared by a number of women last year, who mentioned ‘creepy’ neck massages etc.

      There’s a difference b/w that and putting your finger in someon’es p*** (the Drump image, ha-ha). And while the claim is that several witnesses say this is what she told them, the fact remains that she didn’t say anything about it publicly until recently.

      Why?

      And what is the effect, if any, of the great support for Bernie Sanders, and the adulation for Putin?

      These are all interesting questions. I’d love to get to the bottom of it.

      But my guess is that the right-wing strategy will be: NO. NO WAY. You won’t get to the bottom of anything. THIS WILL FESTER!

      The right wing are obsessed with “getting back” at teh “other side”, in this case the Kavanaugh thing.

      They will never get over it, based on my obsservations.

      Delete or hide this
    • David Lindsay Gregory F. Todd Probably won’t. But they will hopefully and probably get a lesson in humility by the 2nd Blue Wave.
      Edit or delete this
    • Seth Bates David Lindsay That’s my take as well. However, and this is critical, there will NEVER be an investigation of any credibility (or of any kind) into the 25 allegations that Trump is facing. If we agree on that then… THEREFORE it doesn’t make sense to flog this dead horse.
    • David Lindsay Seth Bates I am an optimist. If we, including environmentalists from both parties, take all three branches of government, we can investigate Donald Drumpt, up and down, from Russian collusion to awkward moments with the IRS, and as James Thurber might say, from his guggle to his zatch. Think of all the times Robert Mueller said, we couldn’t go there, because we had a narrow mandate. So Peggy Kane, I expect there will be a lot “there.” From the perspective of the dead, Trump’s refusal to use his powers to protect Americans from the COVID-19 pandemic could be viewed as criminal behavior. Even if I’m a pathetic, arm chair idealist, history will not be nice.
      Edit or delete this
  • Peggy Kane It’s a travesty, imo. So little there, there.

Opinion | In Diplomacy, Trump Is the Anti-Reagan – by Bret Stephens – NYT

“An optimistic take on Donald Trump’s historic meeting Tuesday with Kim Jong-un is that it’s Geneva Redux — a reprise of the 1985 summit between Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that established their rapport, fundamentally altered the tenor of relations between the superpowers and led within a few years to the end of the Cold War.

Let’s hope so. Because another take is that it’s the Plaza Redux, meaning the 1988 real estate debacle in which Trump hastily purchased New York’s Plaza Hotel because it looked like an irresistible trophy, only to be forced to sell it at a loss a few years later as part of a brutal debt restructuring.

The case for Geneva Redux, made this week by Peter Beinart in The Atlantic, sees parallels between Trump and Reagan, Republican presidents whose hawkish rhetoric and ignorance of policy details disguised an inner pragmatism and visionary imagination.

“Trump’s lack of focus on the details of denuclearization may be a good thing,” Beinart writes. “Like Reagan, he seems to sense that the nuclear technicalities matter less than the political relationship.” “

Source: Opinion | In Diplomacy, Trump Is the Anti-Reagan – The New York Times