I previously ran a column about a demonstrably false statement made about my testimony in the Trump published in a Washington Post column by Jennifer Rubin. She never corrected the statement, but I let it go after writing a column addressing the false information in the Post. I now look back at that column with a degree of fondness since at least Rubin was right that I did testify at the hearing. Now Rubin has called me a crackpot for a column that I did not write. The lack of minimal research by Rubin has become something of a signature element. In her latest controversy, Rubin not only responded to those ridiculing me for a piece written by someone else but expressed delight at my forced retirement over the column. Ironically, her Post column the same day is entitled “What If Facts Matter?” — criticizing President Trump and his claims of “fake news.” In fairness to the Post, this latest error was not published by the newspaper though she identifies herself as “Conservative opinion writer at @WashingtonPost, MSNBC contributor” with a banner photo of the Washington Post on Twitter. What is becoming increasing clear is that, as the Post declares, “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” but accuracy dies with Jennifer Rubin.
I wanted also to respond to the criticism of Darren’s argument as “absurd” – a conclusion apparently reached solely on the headline of his column. The characterization is as unfair as it is unexplained in the tweet.
On Saturday, our weekend blogger Darren Smith wrote a column on his opposition to the order of the governor of Washington State to close the schools (Darren lives in Washington). Rubin later tweeted that she found the argument in the article to be “absurd” and said that I had become “crackpotish.”
The most interesting aspect of this attack is that there is no way that Rubin actually knew what the argument was that she declared to be “absurd.” The automatic tweet on posting on the blog simply gave the title of Darren’s column: WA Governor Inslee’s Order Cancelling Remaining School Year Possibly Unconstitutional I can understand if the author of the piece is not clear from that tweet since they go out automatically on http://www.jonathanturley.org. However, Rubin had to read the column to declare it “absurd.” It does not say what the argument of unconstitutionality might be. It could be a state statutory issue. It could be a matter of state constitutional law. It could be a violation of a standing court order or a federal constitutional argument. You could not possibly know without clicking on the link and reading it. If you did, you would first read the byline for “Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor.” At the end of the column, you would also find Darren Smith identified as the author. You would also find this express statement that the article did not reflect my views and was not reviewed by me:
So, if Rubin actually read the column, it was impossible to conclude that it was written by me. There are only two options here and neither is good. Rubin did not actually bother to read the argument before calling it “absurd” (and personally attacking me) or she read the argument and disregarded the fact that it was written by a third party who said it did not reflect my views.
I am inclined to go with Option One only because I am already familiar with Rubin’s loose understanding of sourcing columns. In my earlier column criticizing Rubin, I discussed a column in the Washington Post where Rubin stated that Democratic counsel Norm Eisen was able to extract concessions from me during the impeachment hearing. That was news to many of us since Eisen only asked me one question about my views that I had just stated as the premise of my testimony and had previously published in the Wall Street Journal. Thus, my “concessions” appear to be repeating one of the main points of my testimony that was stated repeatedly before the single question from Eisen. After making this point repeatedly in both writing and in my testimony, Eisen asked me to repeat it again. Making it even more bizarre, Eisen insisted that I simply answer “yes or no.” That was the only question asked of me at the hearing by Eisen. Indeed, I believe that that was the only question asked of me by the Democrats in the entire hearing.
Rubin declared that the single word answer on the previously stated premise of my testimony was a major “concession” extracted by Eisen. I assumed that the obvious mistake would have been corrected by Rubin but she refused to respond or correct the error. The reason I return to that prior controversy is that the error would have been obvious if Rubin had taken the time to actually read the transcript. Had she taken that minimal step, she would have seen that that statement was the core of not just my prior writings and my oral testimony before the question, but it has been my position since the Clinton impeachment hearings.
However, she was correct that I testified and Eisen asked me a single “yes or no” question. That turned about to be something of a high point for Rubin.
As many know, I have run various writers on the blog including some who expressly disagree with my views. Darren runs columns regularly on the weekends. I actually disagree with points in Darren’s column but I have always found his work to be thoughtful and well-researched. I make a point of not reviewing such columns because this is a blog dedicated to free speech and diverse viewpoints. In this case, Darren was basing his argument on a state court decision and state constitutional provision. The argument turns on the interpretation of the word “ample” in the state constitution. Of course, Rubin does not explain why she calls his argument “absurd” in the interpretation of such a general term. That is likely because she never bothered to read the argument. The fact is that, while I was not convinced by Darren’s argument, he presented in his usual direct and honest way. It is more limited and nuanced than she suggests. Many have agreed with it. It is a view that others likely share and I am glad that we offered a forum for it to be considered by others.
Of course, all of this is beyond the point. Rubin clearly did not know either the specific argument or the author of the piece.
Rubin has previously been criticized about her writings including controversies over calls to “shun” and “shame” Trump officials and to “burn down the Republican party.” However, those are largely based on the merits of her views as opposed to her penchant for not letting facts get in the way of a good attack. As the joke goes among journalists, Rubin has repeatedly shown that “there are just some facts too good to check.”
There is one silver lining in all of this. If I am now going to be blamed for columns that I did not write, I insist on credit for other columns that I did not write. Here are a list of columns I now claim as mine alone:
Dave Barry [Jonathan Turley]: “The First Olympic Scandal Rears Its Ugly Head” —The Miami Herald
Barack Obama [Jonathan Turley] The Way Ahead, Economist
Pope Francis [Jonathan Turley] Life, measured by love, is meant to serve others Vatican (Clarion Press)
James Madison [Jonathan Turley] The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments, Federalist Papers No. 51
Rubin may find these pieces “absurd” but I stand by each and every one.
Next time get a Constitutionalist Commentator. Conservatives are like liberals and hey some of them are liberals. (hint get a dictionary that is pre-PC and read the definitions of political conservatives vs liberals. SHOCK! Defined as … Conservatives are the ‘in power’ party doing everything to stay in power and ‘liberals; are the outsiders doing everything to get in power.’ The definitions have no connection to specific parties
Either that or just join us in the Constitutional Centrist Ranks and be in the largest voting block.as they include everyone who voted against Clinton. 40% of the total votes cast. The two parties by any description like conservative or liberal split sixty neither one had the required majority so the independents controlled the election.of 2016. And turned the slippery slope with a cliff just ahead into the socialists hanging from the edge of the cliff this year by their fingernails.
God commands:
Women are to make babies.
Communists dictate:
Women are to run America.
______________________
“That dudn’t make any sense.”
– George W. Bush
______________
If women run America, there will be no babies.
If America has no babies, there will be no America.
If America has foreign babies, America will be foreign.
If America has an insufficient number of babies, America will be subjugated and subsumed.
It’s babies that matter!
What continues to amuse me is the fact that the professor is “troubled” when the president portrays some journalists as being purveyors of fake news but squeals like a stuck pig when it happens to him.
Perhaps Jennifer Rubin Reads These Comment Threads?
The Moderator of these comment threads routinely allows the meanest, stupidest people to attack other commentors with baseless lies. As recently as Friday, our very stupidest commenter was allowed to post a trashy video in response to another commenter. This practice has been going on for months. Turley is totally aware of it!
Trumpers on this blog have been allowed to attack female commenters with language that would never be tolerated in a professional workplace. I know of one case where a female commenter was formally expelled from these threads for hitting back at unusually nasty comments.
Then we have commenters who seem most active when Turley writes columns about Black politicians or Black criminals. That was on full display last week in a pair of unrelated columns. One concerned a liberal White couple murdered by 2 Black suspects and the other featured a Black female senator who wants Trump referred to The Hague for prosecution.
That column about the murdered White couple, “I Swear I Hit Them”, April 8, brought some of the meanest comments I have ever seen on this blog. Interestingly, these meanest comments were aimed not at the Black criminals, but at the White couple for ‘trusting’ the Black criminals! In the world of Turley Trumpers White liberals who trust Blacks deserve the most abusive scorn any racist can muster.
So ‘yes’, it’s totally possible that Jennifer Rubin reads these threads on occasion and that has influenced her assessment of Turley. One could easily get the impression that Turley revels in throwing red meat to exceptionally stupid commenters under the pretense of ‘free speech’.
And by the way, that trashy video posted Friday evening is still on the comment thread. Our Moderator freely allows a certain commenter to post trashy, baseless lies on a frequent basis. It’s possible that Jennifer Rubin happened to see that trashy video on the thread. Perhaps ‘that’ incited her to snipe at Turley.
Yay! Yet another pointless post that has nothing at all to do with the subject from Mr/s. Warner. I expect that soon we’ll be treated to walls of text s/he copies pastas from news articles, instead of original thoughts of zee’s own.
Shall we mark you down for, “blame JT for someone else’s stupidity”, or are you going to be reasonable…just this once? I see you’re already laying the groundwork for Rubin to pin commenters’ posts on him. Following that “logic,” I hope your inane oratorical demonstrations are not attributed to me because I did not post a (boldface) disclaimer back in 1996.
If you assert Rubin read the byline, will you also swear that Epstein killed himself?
Dave, we dont remember when you first commented here. But it wasnt long ago. You seem to pop in and out rather mysteriously. Are someone we know by another name??
Regarding Above: I strongly suspect that kydave is the same commenter also known as ‘Estovir’ ‘Young’ ‘Beatrix’ and ‘spete17’.
Do you keep little journals on the people you meet online? Without intending the pun: I’ll take a page from you and say that WE are neither of those. WE are simply me.
Also: I strongly suspect that you’re a demented version of Turley’s Pierre Delecto. I have never seen a post of yours that agrees with any point Turley makes, but yet you seem to be constantly compelled to post (I nearly said “read his posts” but several times you’ve made it clear that you rarely do so). In times past, I’ve wondered if you are maybe a scorned lover?
OMG!!!!
Bwahahahahahahaaha
You will pay bitterly by the crazed idiot that multiple personality Seth Warner / Peter Hill / John Burgoyne / Enoch Poor / Anonymous / Paintchips is. Prepare to laugh your azz off for the sh!tstorm that awaits you from the sad scorned friendless one
Yeah, Crazed Idiot, keep it going!
Seth has no friends, no family, no wife, no one to call his own
Sad
Didnt he say he had an inflatable doll?
Euuuuwwww
Disgusting
“Disgusting” and “sad” — the two of you — @ 3:11 and 3:17
Grow up, idiots.
What is wrong with inflatable dolls?
And still, no answer. Seth: Shall we mark you down for, “blame JT for someone else’s stupidity”, or are you going to be reasonable…just this once?
/*———
DVR, I’m quite familiar with Seth’s previous work. I’m considering an amendment to my “Scorned Lover” hypothesis that Seth is actually the Crazed Idiot persona he keeps referencing. With al the voices in his (err, excuse me: “Their” head–I forgot about the Royal We) it was ever only a matter of time before they start arguing with each other.
Maybe he keeps “score” in his My-Ramblings-On-Turley’s-Blog journal by counting replies?
Maybe his therapist told him to call anyone who doesn’t resonate in his echoes *A* crazed idiot and he just misheard the instructions?
Can anyone recall a single instance where Seth agreed with Turley? Yeah, me neither. It’s puzzling, then, that he cannot break the compulsion to read/post (assuming he even reads before posting) on teh site, no? Likewise, can anyone recall a single instance where Seth made an intelligent, cogent point? Pasting a wall of text from some news article doesn’t count as him making the point.
I tell you, its obvious estovir and young are two different writers
I really like your masterful use of the Royal We: it lends you a certain amount of authority…without actually doing so. Unless you mean it in the schizophrenic sense, which would actual explain a lot about your oratorical presentations. Why are you soooo obsessed with the length of my tenure here? What does that have to do with anything I’ve ever posted? There’s numerous other sites I tend to visit, and I’ve never seen your name on any of them. Does that somehow impact what you post here? I didn’t think so.
Of course I have another name that I use in real life. I’m not going to tell it to you. I don’t really have any other online personas beyond KyDave40601, or occasionally KyDave, depending on if the site uses Disqus or not. Are you known to “us” by some other name? Again, not that that has any bearing on your posts.
Speaking of posts, are you going to respond to mine or just keep pondering the mysteries of life, the universe, and KyDave? Yeah, I didn’t think so. Again.
Dave, you’re Crazed Idiot and I suspected it the first time I saw your name about 2 weeks ago.
I imagine like many Trumpers you’re worried this pandemic will be Trump’s Waterloo. So you’re putting in extra time on this blog to represent friendly Trumpers under different names.
I am here a little more frequently, due to stay-at-home orders. I quite possibly may be either crazed, and idiot, or maybe both, but I have never gone by any other name (except, as noted above KyDave). Keep dancing. I guess eventually you’ll get around to posting a response.to the original question:
Shall we mark you down for, “blame JT for someone else’s stupidity”, or are you going to be reasonable…just this once?
Darren could have taken care of this a long time ago, by adding his name to the tweets.
Anonymous, Crazed Idiot is working overtime to pack these threads with Trump-friendly comments. It almost makes me wonder if he’s a professional activist that was brought in to get this blog ‘back on message’. No wonder Jennifer Rubin has gotten a bad impression!
Shall we mark you down for, “blame JT for someone else’s stupidity”, or are you going to be reasonable…just this once?
Still waiting…
“Dave, you’re Crazed Idiot and I suspected it the first time I saw your name about 2 weeks ago.”
Stop playing these silly guessing games, Seth.
Aww, lighten up, Anon. I’m just honored Seth made a Turley-Blog-Posters journal about me to begin with. I’m grateful for the affirmation that I exist, and that Seth thinks I’m important!.
I’m also still holding my breath for Seth to actually respond to my question.
Seth’s histrionics are so off the chain that regulars here have taken to calling him Paint Chips. The moderator Darren Smith has chastised him countless times. Seth circumvents IP blocks that Darren devises by using VPN or quite possibly running around to different Starbucks for wifi access
ROTFLMAO
Kydive, don’t wait for Paint Chips to respond. His earliest name that I can remember was Peter Hill but he was called Peter Shill or Shill for short. Since then he has gone through multiple name changes, the latest being Seth, perhaps because in real life he might like the sound of a lisp. He has been accused of having a sexual identity problem that on the list has for him developed into a sexual crisis. He’s a whiner and complainer. He doesn’t know much of anything and that frustrates me.
As a disclaimer I am his Diaper Man so I am somewhat privy to his incontinence along with his imcompetence.
You have my deepest, most sincere condolences, Allan. I’m sure decent people everywhere mourn for your burden.
hey Seth it could be AMERICA’S Waterloo if we aren’t careful
from agricultural production to real estate to finance, it’s hard to predict were the cascading effects will bite the hardest
but the longer we stay in lockdown, the more clear it will eventually become
I’m an early advocate of social distancing but there IS a tradeoff and reduced economic activity eventually will mean loss of life as well
God Bless Trump and the governors at this difficult time when leadership is faced with choices between evils on both hands.
I’ve been tossed off of here twice. Once for getting spirited with use of an f bomb in responding to a particular cyber stalker on here. The other time I’m not sure what I did other than respond to what was coming toward me. No use of spirited language, just standing ground.
I notice also that can get you taunted on here >> coming back with another name after getting bounced with a previous one.
Quite a badge of honor. Good for you.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Hey, I remember when I lived in Ohio that most of the jokes were about Kentuckians. I imagine it’s vice versa, no?
Gufaw: They’re about Tennessee-ites!
Excuses.
Or perhaps you’re off squealing your complaints to this Rubin person, and she actually listened to you Seth
you feeling very smug about this perhaps
Kurtz, people of prominence could be reading these threads. And Crazed Idiot could be creating a seriously bad impression. But that wouldnt occur to Trumpers.
Seth, its not in my nature to care too much about people of prominence. I tend to think that real decision makers don’t pore over comments sections like this.
maybe some press room people do but they are a class of lick-spittle servants of their ownership as far as Im concerned. And that means Jeff Bezos doesnt like Trump and he’s clever so he tells his editors to find someone like this fake conservative lady Rubin to say whatever, boom, she’s in print. like jeff bezos cares how much money he loses on a piddling newspaper or whether anything is true or not.
I can hardly believe how critical the average Democrat is about billionaires and how they work the angles, unless they live in Silicon Valley or have villas in Davos in which case they are per se ok.
let’s get this clear. Jeff Bezos hates Trump so most of the stuff that gets printed by his way-down lackeys in the newspaper he owns, is going to reflect that bias. bias. it exists not just in the hands of the much feared government censors of old King george’s time it also exists in the private hands who own consolidated control of mass media.
“Kurtz, people of prominence could be reading these threads.”
It’s possible, but not likely, Seth. There isn’t much, if anything, of value to be found in the comments section, IMHO.
Jennifer Rubin is a nutcase. The ONLY reason the Washington Post keeps her on is because she claims she’s “conservative.”
Jonathan:
“You tweet it, you own it.”
(Add the name of the weekend blogger to the tweet (and future tweets) and move on. And ask your guest writers to use boldface type to make both their names and the disclaimer stand out. You’ve indicated, above, that Darren’s name is in boldface type in his posting. It is not.)
TURLEY DIDN’T USE BOLDFACE* ZOMG!!!!!111!!!1!!!!
*and Rubin can’t read bylines.
Which is worse? Turley, of course. He should know that somebody is going to ignore the actual, written part of a post and take precautions to prevent it. Thank you so much, Anon, for injecting some clarity into the discussion. I have never been so wrong in all my days of living. Thank you for showing me—us all—the Way!
“TURLEY DIDN’T USE BOLDFACE”
He did. The article has been updated.
Calm down, honey.
Turley tweets it, Turley owns it. It’s that simple.
And yes, it makes sense to highlight certain things in a guest posting.
Keep on whining, though.
The comment at 11:48 is to kydave40601.
You mean, like, whining about the inability to read a byline, or the initial lack of boldface? Rubin writes it, Rubin owns it is THAT simple, much like your argument (except specious would certainly apply to the latter, along with disingenuous).
And, yes, it absolutely makes sense to confirm whom you are criticizing in a “news article.” Maybe it’s all the sense-making that is confusing you?
This comment is to Anon at 11:12, 11:48, and 11:56, and all the other simpletons that can’t grasp the absurdity of your line of (so-called) reasoning. How can you give merit to Rubin’s article when it’s addressed to the wrong person? That seems like a very glaring lapse (of lucidity, perhaps?).
There are plenty of reasons to criticize Mr. Turley: this isn’t one of them. Wipe the egg off your faces and move on.
Rubin did not write a news article about JT’s column. She didn’t write an opinion article about it. She posted 2 tweets. One sentence and one LOL. Or maybe that was a guest poster she let’s use her blog.
Clearly, old ‘kydave40601’ isn’t the brightest bulb.
Wiat, for the record: Which Anon are you?
I suppose I conflated the terms article and tweet. I would own that mistake, but Rubin didn’t clearly point out in her tweet that it was a tweet, and not an article, so I blame her! She should have used some boldfaced declaration but chose not to, so it’s clearly her fault.
Gee, arguing is easy if you don’t have to be intellectually honest! I kinda like this: I see why leftists do it so often.
That is why things like blenders have a warning in BOLD PRINT not to put one’s figers into the blender while the blender is running. The authorities look towards the lowest common denominator, Anon and Jennifer Rubin.
the above coward has posted that same comment half of a dozen times, showing what really matters to the TDS ilk is repeating a false claim incessantly. Facts dont matter, just screaming over others until they hearers acquiesce or stone the screamer. Option 2 works faster
“the above coward has posted that same comment half of a dozen times”
Clearly, math isn’t one of your strong points. ‘Logic’, either.
Mainstream “conservatives” in the MSM are little different than leftists in that they believe their own propaganda. Remember how the Covington Catholic kids were treated by “conservative” media personalities such as Bill Kristol? The situation could have been avoided with some basic fact checking and follow up but most MSM sources just assume White wickedness and perfidy.
Always an excuse for rethuglicans particularly the bat-shit crazy ones.
When one calls something a ‘a Rubin’ one is describing ‘fake news’.
She hates Trump and her values change as soon as Trump endorses something she might have previously agreed with.
So Mr. Charles CW Cooke noted.
The NeverTrump dispensation has no popular analogue. It’s a collection of word-merchants subsidized by liberal donors like Pierre Omidyar. Some of them don’t need the money (David Frum, George Will) and some of them are still on the teat of notionally starboard philanthropies (Mona Charen) or have a mix of income sources (Ramesh Ponnuru), but it’s otherwise astroturf. What’s interesting is that all of these people were established opinion journalists prior to 2015. For rank and file Republicans who consume this sort of literature, the revelation has been that a large fraction (perhaps a majority) of the starboard commentariat ca. 2014 had little rapport with actual conservative voters and (push comes to shove) proves to be quite hostile to them to such as a degree that they work against them. There’s been a great deal of failure theatre in the Republican Party over many decades, and you can see one reason for that by contemplating this crew.
“If Trump is indeed a tyrant, he is a tyrant of the mind. “
DSS, your comment made me read the article in National Review something I only read indirectly from a few that write there. I don’t recall the name Cooke except for his position at national review but that wouldn’t be unusual. I don’t like the way he writes though he hit the nail on the head with this one “If Trump is indeed a tyrant, he is a tyrant of the mind. “ His examples proving that contention have been repeated over and over again.
do you have a link to this article? Thank you
Yes Absurd explains it in his obtuse way, which I can translate
Rubin is a fake conservative, and the fake news Wapoo just hosts her remarks to delude the voters
Kurtz, that’s irrelevant to JT’s mistaken attack on her. He and his “guest blogger” f… up and can’t admit it.
Yep.
I’m not going to criticize Turley for how he runs his blog and tweets or whatever. You guys can do that just fine. Im just glad i have this space to chat at all. the internet is as locked down as it ever has been and the big mass media is ever trying to squash citizens down to size in favor of the good old days when they controlled darn near everything that people could see.
so you got google-alphabet-youtube censoring and demonetizing countless content creators who dissent from their agenda and of course bezos’ flunkies at wapoo will pile onto guys like Turley too if the opportunity arises.
see i have this hypothesis that they’re attacking Turley just because he lets Darren run a comment at all. Turley has risen to their attention due to the testimony before Congress, he is on the scheiss list, and this little tiny sliver of freedom has their eye and they given it a little stomp of the foot as the opportunity arose. that’s how i see it.
Similar to how Allan is synonymous with stupid on this blog.
JT, besides for not trashing other people because of your own sloppiness, two suggestions:
1. Don’t tweet headlines from other people’s columns as if they were your own, as you did with the piece in question.
2. Change your format so that when someone follows that tweet they don’t see immediately next to the column headline with small print noting a guest editorial, a large picture of you. People on twitter go through them fast. That’s why they are tweets. If Rubin had read to the bottom of that one, she’d have been the only one.
Oh yeah. Grow thicker skin. Start with an apology to Rubin and quit going off on anyone who throws shade. The column was crackpot and to a casual observer, you promoted and wrote it.
btb – Rubin made the mistake, not JT. Stop being an apologist for idiots who cannot do the basics.
His handlers at Correct-the-Record told him he had to eat all the sh!t sandwiches.
Paul:
“… idiots who cannot do the basics.”
***********************
Obviously, a tribalistic response by btb defending the IWCDTB tribe.
I can’ t figure out who the IWCDTB tribe is. Are they related to the STFU tribe? 🙂
But, should someone who is only a (very) ‘casual observer’ call themself a ‘journalist’?
The WP’s standards are low indeed.
Bob, she’s an opinion writer, not a reporter. Other opinion writers like JT shouldn’t make deciphering their opinion a mystery.
So, perhaps JT should write at a grade-school level to keep from mystifying WP writers? Or, perhaps JR should up her game slightly?
Bob, his guest columnist is already doing that. That’s the problem.
If that’s true, then it’s even more puzzling why JR couldn’t follow it.
As if Rubin would choose to follow it.
Look, squirrel.
LOL.
OMG. Thank you for the laugh amidst all this otherwise gloomy news.
Apologize to Rubin? That’s your take after what you just read? Or maybe you use the Jen Rubin method of critique of not actually reading what you criticize.
I had to read yours a couple of times just to convince myself that was actually your response.
Bless your heart..
Brian, Rubin spent about 1 sentence on the column JT tweeted as if it was his own and which then , upon clicking it, featured a large picture of him next to the headline and text which followed. So, that’s her fault for thinking he wrote it? She didn’t study it. Nobody did. So now JT is worked up about his own sloppiness while Rubin is attending to more important issues. He should STFU and do the same.
“So, that’s her fault for thinking he wrote it?”
Yes. It’s her fault for thinking that he wrote something that was actually written by someone else. It’s known as false-attribution. It suggests shoddy journalistic standards.
Dude. It was a f… tweet with JTs name and picture. That’s it. When you click it it goes to the headline with JT’s name and picture! ….. and a small disclaimer. That’s JT’s fault, not Rubin’s. If he doesn’t know how to use tweets he should stay off it.
Yep. As old what’s-his-name* often says: “This isn’t that difficult.”
*”This is absurd x XXii”
Sorry, but she made the false-attribution, not him.
I recognize your point, we simply disagree.
Yup. If Jon had a landscaping company and his guys hung out on the patio of a client’s house and were smoking weed and fighting, first call would be to the business owner.
And he’d be responsible for speaking to the issue.
And he’s kind of leaving Darren out to dry here.
Apology to Rubin?? Sure, why not…
“Hey Jennifer, Jonothan is sorry that you’re a sh*tty writer.”
Done. :o)
Again, no sound arguments from the usual suspects on how it is Rubin’s fault for not overcoming JT’s sloppy promotion of a column he didn’t write. How dare someone not read tweets featuring a column headline under the tweeter’s picture and name which if clicked goes to the column headline with the tweeter’s picture and name …. and a small print disclaimer …. with appropriate care! If tweets weren’t meant to be subtly written and read, they wouldn’t use them for legal notices and documents!
btb:
“Again, no sound arguments from the usual suspects on how it is Rubin’s fault for not overcoming JT’s sloppy promotion of a column he didn’t write.”
*******************
(As if you’d know one when you see it). Hey Pot (as in half of Kettle), the sound argument obvious to all but the terminally obtuse is that you don’t criticize something you know next to nothing about. It’s good advice for you to follow given your proclivity to do it early, often, comically and irredeemably.
translating mespo:
.
Yeah, I hear the mental gears grinding but am not optimistic.
I’m confused: I thought us idoit Deplorables didn’t like readin’, wirtin’, and maps. Now you’re saying that readin’ ain’t all that important?
I mean, you might have a point if Rubin had simply misstated something in the column. However, to have completely missed the byline doesn’t really have an excuse…unless y’all was wrong about readin’ and all that {goes back to playing his banjo and looking for people with purty mouths}.
btb is the spawn of Le Petomane
It’s interesting how some folks come on here to Turley’s blog here every day for free and scold him, trash him, insult him, and give him lectures.
What do these people have in common? Obviously they hate Trump
obviously they are not gracious.
who knows what other connections there may be
Kurtz, no doubt you include me. About one in ten posts I’ll agree with JT and the rest of the time I criticize his opinion. You should welcome the dialogue and so should he.
don’t put words in my mouth. i’m actually not complaining about you..
and i have welcomed dialogue explicitly.
OK.
Jennifer Rubin is not a Conservative Republican. That says it all.
Does anyone remember Toby Keith’s ‘The Critic’?
Rubin is a nut case, she wished Trump supporters harm from Coronavirus and etc. She should be fired but, the Post won’t. She has serve Trump Hate.
What is the “forced” retirement that JT mentioned in today’s blog about himself and J.Rubin?
You committed the cardinal sin of not reciting the party line like the other toadies @ the impeachment hearing.
Poor Jennifer has a severe case of TDS. Perhaps, the worst case on record. Although a number of former federal prosecutors and other government officials from msnbc might be suffering equally. Literally, her entire being is consumed with hatred for everyone and everything that might be associated with orangeman bad. Her ability to reason is forever altered.
Well, at least the “conservative opinion writer” at the WaPo has a face made for radio … and lightly watched programs on msnbc.
I angrily cancelled my WaPo subscription 4 years ago, because I began to gag on the poor journalism (or excellent sensationalism), sloppy juvenile writing, and so on. I won’t even read past a headline now
As for the actual article, I have in fact been searching for such articles actively, of late. I am from Miami, and I cringe at the edicts and mandates and orders that the State and local governments seem to be able to conjure, with no legal standing, and even less moral judgement. Frankly, I was hoping for even more – I want to see real lawsuits, challenging the Constitutionality of many of SARS-CoV-2 edicts. Putting one billion of the schools children out of school is, I’m sorry, “crackpottish”. Thank you as always!! Sorry your voice is so alone nowadays.
The bird…bird…
The bird is the word.
Don’t you know about the bird?
Everybody knows that the bird is the word.
—-
Now everyone flip that itchBay the bird.
Rubins always been a clown. Now she’s exposed as a lazy one. By the way, I enjoyed Darren’s piece.
The broader problem is the mainstream media wants instant gratification and personal glorification from it’s peers. They pick Trump apart for lying but if they do it from intent or laziness, the greater good gives them “moral” high ground moving on to the next article.
Charles CW Cooke on Rubin:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/12/jennifer-rubin-trump-obsession-mindless-opponent/
I’ve long thought it was sort of odd that she abandoned law practice in middle age to take up topical commentary, given that she has no particular gift for it and very few people can make a living at it. Well, here’s a thesis: (1) she quit practicing law because she was not meticulous enough to be a satisfactory lawyer and it shows on her employment history and (2) she didn’t have to be good at topical commentary, she just needed to turn in copy on time and say things useful to her employers. Note, a ‘shill’ is a person employed by a casino to play blackjack with customers. He doesn’t have to be good at blackjack, just be able to keep the customers interested in playing.
From TIA’s Cooke link:
“Rubin is not the only example of this president’s remarkable talent for corrupting his detractors as well as his devotees, but she is perhaps the best one. Since Donald Trump burst onto the political scene, Rubin has become precisely what she dislikes in others: a monomaniac and a bore, whose visceral dislike of her opponents has prompted her to drop the keys to her conscience into a well. Since the summer of 2015, the many acolytes of “MAGA!” have agreed to subordinate their true views to whatever expediency is required to sustain Donald Trump’s ego. Out has gone their judgement, and in has come their fealty; where once there were thriving minds, now there are just frayed red hats. …”