Columns, Congress, Constitutional Law, Politics

The Win-Win Impeachment: How Everyone Got What They Wanted . . . Except The Public

Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on how the impeachment trial played out perfectly for everyone with the exception of voters.

Here is the column:

After the impeachment acquittal of President Donald Trump, every network and newspaper rushed forth with “winners and losers” stories. Some said Trump was the ultimate winner while others said he won nothing in a trial that was fixed. Some said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) triumphed while others declared her utterly undone by a sham House investigation.  

It is all part of the same zero-sum construct: For one to win, the other must lose to the same degree. 

Politics, however, is not a zero-sum game. Not only did all political sides win, they seemingly all worked for the same result — an acquittal. 

Speaker Pelosi and The Science of Failure:

For years, Speaker Pelosi openly opposed President Trump’s impeachment. As I wrote previously, the last thing she wanted was to remove Trump and bring about a Pence administration. She wanted Trump wounded but alive in 2020.  

Pelosi had two additional goals. First, Democratic voters grew increasingly impatient with congressional Democrats professing a desire to impeach without actually doing so. This included an impeachment-heavy pitch in the 2018 midterm elections that delivered the House to Democrats. The voters were beginning to see that they were being played, so a failed attempt was the best alternative: Bring an impeachment that was guaranteed to lose with the shortest investigation, thinnest record and narrowest grounds.

Second, it was important to convince voters that the failure was due entirely to Republicans. By rushing the vote before Christmas, Pelosi relied on Senate Republicans to block witnesses so that the House could blame them. (History was on her side, since Democrats voted as a bloc to both block witnesses and a full trial in the Clinton impeachment.) 

It did not matter that a rushed impeachment made no strategic sense. In my House testimony, I repeatedly asked why Democrats would rush forward with an incomplete record when just a couple months would dramatically strengthen their case with witnesses and court orders. Democrats simply declared there was no time to waste in voting for impeachment. They then did nothing for a month after their vote, as Pelosi engaged in the ridiculous pretense of holding the articles of impeachment to coerce the Senate into calling witnesses and holding a fair trial. It was transparently contrived, since Pelosi was destroying the rationale for a rushed House vote. Yet, Democratic voters bought it and blamed Senate Republicans.  

Thus, Pelosi won. She kept Trump in office while enraging the Democrats’ base for the 2020 election. And impeachment leaders like Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) hit record levels of contributions for fighting a fight he was meant to lose.

President Trump and The Art of Outrage:

A failed impeachment proved even more beneficial to President Trump. As shown when he triumphantly held up newspapers with the headline “Acquitted,” impeachment enabled him to claim victory over a “deep state” and Democratic conspiracy. 

He also was able to again highlight the dubious business dealings of Joe Biden’s son, Hunter. While Democratic senators opposed trial testimony by Hunter Biden, Trump told voters they should get the whole story. A Hill-HarrisX poll found 54 percent of independents and 40 percent of Democrats agreeing that “Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine are an important campaign issue that should be discussed.” 

Thus, Trump won, too. According to Gallup, Trump’s popularity reached his highest point, 49 percent – better than President Barack Obama’s polling at this stage in his first term, even without an impeachment. The trial turbocharged Trump’s support, with a breathtaking 94 percent popularity among Republicans. It also proved a windfall for GOP fundraising; the Republican National Committee raked in $117 million online from late September through this week and picked up 1 million new donors. Trump’s campaign coffers swelled to $103 million — compared to less than $85 million combined for the Democratic presidential contenders. Trump’s haul grew almost 25 percent during the House impeachment investigation, from October to December. 

The Media and Managed Mania:

The greatest winner, of course, was the media. Despite the steady drumbeat of media criticism, Trump has single-handedly saved the industry from an economic free-fall. Cable networks like CNN and MSNBC have profited handsomely by offering unrelenting attacks on him; he is the greatest boon for the media business since the invention of the printing press. 

In a rare moment of honesty from a television executive, CNN’s Jeff Zucker told an industry group two years ago: “We’ve seen that anytime you break away from the Trump story and cover other events in this era, the audience goes away. So we know that, right now, Donald Trump dominates.” The notion of replacing the scurrilous Trump with the staid Pence is enough to put Zucker into a tight fetal position.

The same goes for Fox News. While long the dominant cable network, Fox posted unrivaled ratings during the Senate trial, beating not just its cable competitors but the networks.  

What the media needed was a heated but failed trial that kept Trump in office, still fueling headlines. Echo-journalism requires angry readers and viewers who find solace in hearing one side of the Trump saga. For the media, replacing Trump with Pence would be like going from a Mardi Gras romp to a Gregorian chant.

Bolton and The Selling Books Through Silence:

There were individual beneficiaries, too, but none come close to the likely windfall of former national security adviser John Bolton. He used impeachment to shamelessly plug his forthcoming book with tweets like, “For the backstory, stay tuned ……. .” 

Whereas his former aides came forward at personal risk to defy the administration — including some now fired from the White House — Bolton insisted on receiving a subpoena while careening between threatening litigation on one hand and inviting compelled testimony on the other. Rather than disclosing information he had to share, the Senate was hit by lethally timed leaks from his book draft. When the House asked him to submit an affidavit before the trial ended, Bolton reportedly refused. It left many suspicious about Bolton’s motivations. After all, you can’t sell an affidavit on Amazon. 

It did not seem to matter that the republic was in crisis. The only thing that would have been catastrophic for Bolton would have been a court compelling him to testify for free, or Trump actually being removed. Instead, we’ve all been forced to “stay tuned.” And, like fired FBI director James Comey and his own tell-all book, Bolton almost certainly will become rich.

Of course, there is one set of losers in all of this: the public.

American voters remain the greatest chumps the world has known. Both parties continue to play them in scam after scam, filling the public’s dresser drawers with the political equivalent of $5 “solid-gold watches.” Yet, the public continues coming back for more, trained to rage with the same Pavlovian bell used every election.  

The simple fact is this: While the two parties, the media and Bolton got what they wanted, the public may have gotten what it deserves.

200 thoughts on “The Win-Win Impeachment: How Everyone Got What They Wanted . . . Except The Public”

  1. And, like fired FBI director James Comey and his own tell-all book, Bolton almost certainly will become rich.

    If the US government can file a civil law suit in order to claw back any profits derived from the release of Edward Snowden’s memoirs – which exposed criminal activities (eg total surveillance of US citizens in direct contravention of the US Constitution) on behalf of the US government – it can and should do the same regarding the two scurrilous curs (ie James Comey and John Bolton) who are seeking to profit on their dubious actions while holding public offices.

  2. The Democrats lost BIG! The next election will show the results…Repubs will take the House and gain more seats in the Senate. Trump will win. The impeachment in the House and Impeachment “trial” in the Senate was a sham.

  3. It’s worth saying again:

    American voters remain the greatest chumps the world has known. Both parties continue to play them in scam after scam, filling the public’s dresser drawers with the political equivalent of $5 “solid-gold watches.” Yet, the public continues coming back for more, trained to rage with the same Pavlovian bell used every election.

    The simple fact is this: While the two parties, the media and Bolton got what they wanted, the public may have gotten what it deserves.
    ~+~
    That is exactly the current state of the electorate and the chumps deserve what they get. The only regrettable part is that decent, informed individuals must suffer the inanity of childish voters and banal politicians’ results. Yet, if they find a manner in which to evacuate themselves from this morass one can actually find worthy pursuits that better their own lives for themselves alone.

    Those who demote themselves through blind and voluntary subservience to political types and thus suffer continual anger or lust for personality cults will be the losers and riff raff who miss out. Simply put if all sycophants for politics are glued to CNN or some other outlet serving them their rage precursors there will be less of them, say, walking out in the camp grounds or enjoying a trail or other venue. They can be happily pissed off and we can instead enjoy the woods by ourselves while doing something real. (As opposed to giving money to politicians to help them ensnare their own minds)

    For many people politics serves as a distraction that can, depending what their ego craves, give them relevance, support, face, belonging, or money. And while they are checked out of reality that just means more opportunity and time available for entrepreneurial individuals to take their place and make it work for themselves. And in the end, the independent thinkers can have their cake and eat it, while the sycophants can be anchored in their station, foolishly satiated on politicians’ table scraps.

    Take charge of your life, for your own benefit. It’s not our business that other people want to fail.

    1. Very well put. As H.L. Mencken once said “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”

      The thing is, supposedly we don’t have a Democracy (or, as I like to call it, a “Mockracy”), we have a representative Republic.

      1. Ben Franklin, we gave you “…a republic, if you can keep it.” The Founders imposed profound restrictions on the vote as did the Greeks and Romans. The Founders did not imagine that vote restrictions would be lifted. Tytler told us that one man, one vote democracy is nonviable and always devolves into a dictatorship. Merriam Webster defines a republic as “…people entitled to vote.” The communists in America vigorously endorse one man, one vote democracy because it allows all the parasites to vote for ever increasing benefits and entitlements which, in turn, allows the evolution, conquest and seizure of America by the communists – the full imposition of the “dictatorship of the proletariat.” The Founders gave Americans the one and only thing they could: Freedom. The one and only thing that monarchies and communists can offer is subservience and slavery – before they ultimately go broke as did the USSR after 75 years.

      3. “we don’t have a Democracy (or, as I like to call it, a “Mockracy”), we have a representative Republic.”

        That is right and for good reason. In a democracy two fox and a chicken sit at a table deciding what to have for lunch. Instead we opted for a republican government and federalism dividing up the power where there are checks and balances everywhere. The left wishes to get rid of the checks and balances and the individual laboratories of experment (the states) that advances societies needs.

    2. And in the end, the independent thinkers can have their cake and eat it, while the sycophants can be anchored in their station, foolishly satiated on politicians’ table scraps

      And I thought I was harsh

      Last Monday I posted 2 comments answering Allan’s question about what my clinic was doing about Coronavirus. I stated that we were doing nothing differently in the clinic. If you check those comments I authored, the IP address is to a different state in the country, and assigned to a top-5 university medical center. A physician principal investigator there has been working with me long distance on a specific research protocol. i will be joining him next year and leaving VA. He often loses heart in his vocation because he feels patients aren’t terribly concerned about practicing self-regulation or self-control. Plus he sees his university as “not all that”. Thus while I consider it an honor to be visiting that center, in my colleague’s mind “we are no better than any other hospital”.

      Last Thursday I posted 2 comments to the blog in the morning between 10 am – 12 PM. I was posting from the “free clinic” in my city where I tend to the poor, the uninsured and immigrants with no English skills. I am the sole fluent bilingual medical professional there and I find my work there refreshing.

      On Wednesday and Friday I posted from my usual IP address: the state university with which I am affiliated.

      The clinic at the top 5 university caters to the affluent and those who teach or work there are considered the “elite” scientists of the country. So you would think that what we see at the hospital clinics there would be totally different presentations than state universities. You would be wrong if you thought that. The rich, educated population is no different than the population I serve at the local state university. The ailments I see at both locations, several hundred miles apart, find their origins in what you reference in your above comment. The word I prefer to use is “satiety”. I have invoked the 7 Cardinal Sins many times on this blog, and it is hard for me as a Catholic and product of a Jesuit education, NOT to reference them considering our culture is one drowning in voracious appetites, none of them good. In spite of the demographics of the patients at both universities, (self-pay vs Medicaid), the medical maladies, their treatment plans, the etiologies are identical. They are all self-inflicted and worsening because patients are non-compliant.

      At the free clinic, the patients have nothing. Some are able to contribute some funds towards clinic fees, but most of the clinic funding is provided by a religious organization. The patients are grateful. They are compliant. They don’t want to be there because doing so means missing work. They clean houses, they work on roof tops, they are plumbers, electricians, laborers and work in kitchens. Theirs is one of extreme humility. They are grateful, they are ashamed, they do not express much because they know they can not pay for the medical services. The difference in this population is that they have, what we Cubans say, ganas . Amy Chua uses the word grit in her excellent book, ” The Triple Package: How Three Unlikely Traits Explain the Rise and Fall of Cultural Groups in America”.
      https://www.amychua.com/other-books

      No matter where i go, what type of patient i see, no matter what type of students or trainees I teach, be it a 3rd tier state university, or a top notch prestigious university, the attitude is one of ho-hum, “give me what is mine” (like the Prodigal Son).

      I am seeing that our problem in America has to do with satiety. We have too much and it has made 2/3 of us fat, slothful, prideful, wrathful (like many on this blog), and greedy.

      I often quip to friends that what Americans need, more than anything else, is Dinosaurs. Until Americans sense that they need to haul ass, run, flee, and work for their fire, their shelter, their food, their cave woman, we will continue to get fatter, more lazy, more wrathful and all of the other stuff

      Nearby 2 individuals railed against HIV patients in America which are largely homosexual men. You have to be living in a cave to not know as a homosexual that you can get HIV with promiscuous sex. It is hard for me to have compassion on homosexuals in the clinic when they are newly diagnosed with HIV. Some of them are honest and confess “it’s my own fault”.

      I feel the same exact way towards newly diagnosed patients with heart failure, Type 2 Diabetes, atherosclerosis, heart diseases, stroke, sleep apnea, and many cancers: all of these are related to obesity and those are behaviors, like homosexuals with promiscuous sex, that people choose. I’m not going to say, “let them die, they chose their path” but sometimes….it does cross my mind

      Thanks Darren for everything you do for this blog. I am posting less and less because I think my time is better served elsewhere. I do hope Turley pays you well for running this blog. You deserve a raise.

      Don’t forget to keep hauling ass.

      Vaya Con Dios a todos

      – Estovir

      1. Thank you, Estovir, for your thoughtful and detailed post. It reminded me of a conversation I once had with a math teacher in South Florida who taught in a poorer (lower middle class) school district that was adjacent to an affluent school district. In the poorer district, he said the students tended to worker harder for their grades and most had after school or weekend jobs. Drug use was lower than in the affluent district, where students were known to raid their parents’ medicine cabinets for prescription medications, just for a high. The students in the poorer district tended to be more respectful, in the affluent district, more arrogance. Of course, this was years ago and the poorer district may have changed since. And even though he was a public school teacher, his own children were home schooled, which I thought was interesting.

        I’m not sure what you mean by non-compliant. Lifestyle, pharmaceutical or both? Because I would be considered non-compliant on pharmaceutical. However, I am fortunate to have a MD who works with me on lifestyle and natural remedy and I love him for it. We are having some success!

      2. Estovir,

        Thank you for the time to write an interesting reply. I read many years ago an account of an Indian tribe in the American SW–I do not remember the name–who was effectively cut in half by the imposition of the US-Mexico border. One part of the tribe remained in Mexico, the other the U.S. Over time the two tribes favoured differently. The Mexican faction stayed (for lack of better words) more along the traditional lifestyle or at least were more delayed. The Americans’ situation worsened from a health perspective. Diabetes and obesity were very rare in the former and approaching a majority of the population in the U.S. It is important to recognize that these were at one time one people for the purpose of genetics and predispositions.

        While few cases of causation can be attributed to one element, it became evident that the lack of exercise, junk food choices, metabolic syndrome, and low cost food that came along with the newly acquired westernization at least abetted the process to their detriment.

        I’ve recently had to travel out of town on business, much longer than usual. Having to rely on restaurant food now takes too much of a toll on my body. I gained weight, it seemed most food was coated in carbohydrates, rolled in salt, then microwaved before plating. I make a point of eating “real food” at home but restaurants in the NW especially are becoming no longer worth it. The minimum wage costs are making restaurants cut both quality of the food and raising the prices. It now costs for two people at least forty bucks a meal if you don’t order drinks but count the tip and the higher taxes. It ain’t worth it any more, not for the kind of food you get. I can no longer justify spending nearly the same amount of money for one meal for us than we do in six days eating at home. When I got home I remarked how glad I was to finally eat regular food again.

        But back to satiety. Your observation is correct that people don’t appreciate things any more. I tend to believe much of it is out of both ignorance and laziness–ignorance because they never had to deal without something and laziness because they take it for granted.

      3. if you’re saying that sloth and gluttony and lust are at the root of behavior-related problems like obesity, at least over large numbers of people, I agree

        of course we have shared karma. social conditions will tend to dictate what opportunities are most available. so for example when we all have to live in suburbs because the cities are in a state of perpetual over-taxation and crime, then, we have to rely on cars, and we have that much less time for walking as the usual human exercise, throughout the ages

        eating too much sugar is also easy when it’s added to nearly every prepared food. so you have to cook for yourself more. this takes time but at least it tends to be cheaper in the long run, as well as healthier.

      4. “He often loses heart in his vocation because he feels patients aren’t terribly concerned about practicing self-regulation or self-control.” …ganas and grit.

        Centralized economies and centralized planning train the individual to depend on society for their own mistakes. Ganos/ grit are a result of an individual having to depend on himself while learning how to work with family and neighbors who have more influence over the individual. That is the war we are facing today as a society. We are rich so we are shielded from the worst effects of a centralized economy and centralized planning.

  5. Perhaps it’s finally time for the biased media to cover the Libertarian Party? And I don’t mean faux “libertarian” Gary Johnson, but Jacob Hornberger who won the Libertarian Party’s Iowa caucus this week.

  6. Hollywood’s dream works are, by trade, studiously two-faced and sincerely insincere, but when it comes to communism, Hollywood is deadly serious. As usual, the ends (global communist control) justify the means.

    Hollywood hated the purely evil and diabolical neocon, John Bolton, until the double-crossing “backstabber” stylized his second-hand hearsay and speculative contrivances into a for-profit book.

    Then Hollywood’s hate turned to true love.

    John Bolton, “Devil or Angel,” dear, whichever you are, we love you now.
    _________________________________________________________

    “They only give us 45 seconds up here but that’s more time than the Senate gave John Bolton.”

    – Brad Pitt
    ________

    “Devil or Angel”

    – The Clovers, 1955

    Devil or angel, I can’t make up my mind
    Which one you are I’d like to wake up and find
    Devil or angel, dear, whichever you are
    I love you, I love you, I love you

  8. “You are a lyin’ dog-faced pony soldier!” I can’t wait to use this line. 😉

    Joe Biden did it again. Does anyone want Biden anywhere near the Oval Office? Nope. Go home Joe. You are embarrassing yourself. The one good thing about the impeachment debacle is that it brought national attention to the decades-long history of Biden family corruption and sleaze. And we all now know what a lying corrupt doofus Joe Biden actually is.

    https://nypost.com/2020/02/09/joe-biden-calls-woman-lying-dog-faced-pony-soldier-at-campaign-event/

    “Former Vice President Joe Biden bizarrely called a young woman a “lying dog-faced pony soldier” at a campaign event in New Hampshire on Sunday.”

      1. “I’m told Chuck Graham, state senator, is here. Stand up Chuck, let ’em see you. Oh, God love you. What am I talking about. I’ll tell you what, you’re making everybody else stand up, though, pal.”

        – Joe Biden, Sept. 9, 2008
        _____________________

        – Biden, telling Missouri state senator Chuck Graham to stand up at a campaign rally, before realizing that Graham is confined to a wheelchair.

  9. Some other guy got what he wanted too. A chance to testify on TV to tell Republicans what they wanted to hear – that if only the Democrats had done this or that then Trump/Republicans would not be blocking all the witnesses. And if only they had let the courts rule then certainly the courts would rule quickly and not slow walk this think past the next election and certainly the administration would not be posing more objections once they lose the first round of cases.

  10. JT ignored the very real possibility that Pelosi honestly believed Trump unfit for office and is disappointed that he was let off. I think that there were very reasonable reasons for Pelosi doing what she did.

  12. Who cares about the public. As a Citizen I care about citizens and we got what we wanted. A funeral ceremony for the Socialists.

  13. I don’t believe Pelosi would have torn the text of the SOTU in two if she felt happy with the impeachment of Trump. Part of the text she tore was, of course, the various descriptions of the guests who received standing ovations so that’s bad optics.

  14. When politicians can look back at how they flip flopped between Clinton and Trump positions (with video evidence), Two words come to mind: Term Limits

  15. I repeatedly asked why Democrats would rush forward with an incomplete record when just a couple months would dramatically strengthen their case with witnesses and court orders.
    __________________________________________________
    The answer is pretty simple — it would not strengthen their case

    The witnesses were withheld not because they had incriminating evidence (as Turley and so many other assume). The witnesses were withheld because the Trump administration has taken the stand that at no time and in no way does the Congress have the power to compel any part of the executive to produce evidence or witnesses before Congress.
    The trump administration has also asserted in Court that the Courts have no authority or power to compel witnesses from the executive to appear before Congress

    The McGahn case is similar. The trump administration argues that Congress has no valid authority to subpoena executive witnesses. This is not because McGahn has incriminating testimony (he does not) the position the WH is taking is they will give no testimony ever period.

    1. WH is taking is they will give no testimony ever period.
      ________________________________________________
      That is not stated quite correctly.

      The WH position is that they do not have to ever give testimony to Congress, but they will be willing to negotiate and use it as a bargaining tool and thus will give testimony if they get something in return.

    1. I don’t think he insulted the readers. Yes, it was harsh, but voters need to hear it. He’s exactly right, the public got played and I’ve said that myself with respect to this sham impeachment. Everyone had a ball, except us.

        1. I’m sure there is, but the Prof calls it like he sees it. I wasn’t offended, but as I’ve said, I already felt the same way he did.

        2. Pretty honest assessment, actually. Never underestimate the chumpiiness of the American voting public. They fall for personality and reconfigure principal to fit their vote for Prom King. A gullible lot for sure.

          2. Kind of like what happened when Obama got elected. The Messiah had arrived. Cuz Hollyweird sez so. Riiiiight.

            1. “…when Obama got elected. The Messiah had arrived.”

              We know you have issues…

              1. Dum dum I didn’t say that, the media did. Magazine covers did. Where were you????

              2. Be careful there Anonymous. Or next time I’ll call you a ‘lyin’ dog-faced pony soldier.’

                  1. Oh Elvis my friend, where have you been? I’ll give you one example:

                    “Next to a side shot of Obama’s head, the ‘Inauguration 2013’ Newsweek cover story pronounces: ‘The Second Coming.'”

                    The author of the cover story long-time Newsweek veteran Evan Thomas, gave Obama God-like qualities during his first year in office, saying on MSNBC, “In a way, Obama’s standing above the country, above — above the world. He’s sort of God. He’s going to bring all different sides together.”

                    And of course, Elvis, we all know that none of that was even remotely close to the truth of who Barack Obama was as POTUS or as a person. What a complete fraud.

                    2. And if Obama wasn’t awesome, Trump wouldn’t be trying to kick over his sand castles every single day.

                  2. Oh and Elvis, back atcha re Barack Obama using your very own words ——>>

                    “Never underestimate the chumpiness of the American voting public. They fall for personality and reconfigure principal to fit their vote for Prom King. A gullible lot for sure.”

    2. “Phyllis Rogers says:February 10, 2020 at 9:51 AM
      Nothing like insulting your readers.”

      I’m certainly not insulted. JT calls ’em as he sees ’em.

    1. Calling the entire American welfare state constitutional is a bad joke.

      You communists may like communism but the Constitution doesn’t allow it.

      Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto 59 years after the adoption of the Constitution because none of the principles of the Communist Manifesto were in the Constitution. Had the principles of the Communist Manifesto been in the Constitution, Karl Marx would have had no reason to write the Communist Manifesto. The principles of the Communist Manifesto were not in the Constitution then and the principles of the Communist Manifesto are not in the Constitution now.

      Article 1, Section 8, precludes taxation for redistribution and regulation while the 5th Amendment precludes any interference by government in the possession and disposition of or the claiming of or dominion over private property.

      1. Article 1, Section 8, precludes taxation for redistribution and regulation
        _________________________________________________
        The Constitution was amended -> 16th amendment

        “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

  18. Impeachment Exposed the Dem’s led by Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi as radical, step on the rights, making a mockery out of the Constitution and Rights of the President. The Dem’s might have been pleased with their radical base but Moderates and Independents feel differently and could see what the Dem’s were doing and IDIOTS they are and fear them if they take control.

    Romney may have won with CNN, MSBC and etc. but he is a BIG TIME LOOSER with Conservatives, Republicans and etc. A SNAKE – LIAR – SELF CENTERED

    Jonathan you say main street media was a winner but when you look at their ratings by show, they are sinking and CNN is a very big time looser.

  19. There is one loose string here…. the Democrats are talking about another impeachment. If they attempt that, it seems to me that a lot of independents, the voters needed to win, will tune in, tune out and turn off – and then vote Trump back in.

  20. The real loser was the country; our democratic system has been damaged by the partisanship and lying of all sides – Dems, Repubs, and most of all the media.

    I expect low behavior from politicians, but the media is is the real villain. Time to curb their privileges.

      1. Lately the media and academia have not been fond of the first amendment. They like the Chinese version.

Comments are closed.