Below is my column in the New York Post, which turned out to be the theme for the cover. Despite impressive efforts at spinning the findings by the media, the Durham Report highlighted two scandals. First, there was a comprehensive effort of the political and media establishments to perpetrate one of the great hoaxes in history — a political hit job that ultimately derailed an American presidency. Second, there was no real accountability for that effort for the main players from Clinton to Comey to Congress. It was much like The Murder on the Orient Express. The question is not “whodunit” but who didn’t do it. Spoiler alert: they all did it so no one was punished.
Here is the column:
In Agatha Christie’s “Murder on the Orient Express,” detective Hercule Poirot observes, “The impossible could not have happened, therefore the impossible must be possible in spite of appearances.”
That may be the best summary of the findings of special prosecutor John Durham in his 305-page report issued yesterday.
Not only did the impossible happen, but they all did it: the Clinton campaign, the FBI, and the media.
In hindsight, it would appear impossible.
A political campaign hatches a plot to create a false claim of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.
Making this even more implausible is that the CIA and FBI knew about the plan.
As detailed in the report, President Barack Obama and his national security team were briefed on how “a trusted foreign source” revealed “a Clinton campaign plan to vilify Trump by tying him to Vladimir Putin so as to divert attention from her own concerns relating to her use of a private email server.”
It then happened a few days later.
It was a plot that required everyone to take a hand in derailing a duly elected president and effectively shutting down his administration for three years of investigation and prosecutions.
In this conspiracy, there were dozens of key participants in the campaign, the government, and the media. Here are a few of the characters implicated in this report.
The campaign
The report details how the Russian collusion conspiracy was invented by Clinton operatives and put into the now-infamous Steele dossier, funded by the Clinton campaign.
The funding was hidden as legal expenses by then-Clinton campaign general counsel Marc Elias. (The Clinton campaign was later sanctioned by the FEC over its hiding of the funding.)
When Vogel tried to report the story, he said Elias “pushed back vigorously, saying ‘You (or your sources) are wrong.’” Times reporter Maggie Haberman declared, “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.”
It was not just reporters who asked the Clinton campaign about its role in the Steele dossier. John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, was questioned by Congress and denied categorically any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS. Sitting beside him was Elias, who reportedly said nothing to correct the misleading information given to Congress.
Durham details how Elias played an active role in tracking the media campaign to push the false allegations. (Elias was recently severed by the Democratic National Committee from further representation and has been previously sanctioned in the federal courts in other litigation.)
The report details how false claims like the existence of a “pee tape” showing Trump engaging in disgusting acts with prostitutes in Moscow came from a Clinton operative, Chuck Dolan, with no known basis in fact.
Likewise, now-national security adviser Jake Sullivan and Clinton personally pushed an absurd campaign-created conspiracy theory about a secret communication line between Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin through a Russian bank.
The Clinton campaign later admitted that it had indeed funded the dossier, but Clinton continued to claim that the election was stolen from her by the Russians.
The government
Of course, this conspiracy could not occur without the assistance of the FBI, which Durham found played an eager role due to a “predisposition” of key players against Trump.
Special counsel John Durham completed a four-year review of the FBI’s investigation of allegations Trump’s 2016 campaign colluded with Russia
Durham found the FBI’s probe was “seriously flawed” and had no basis in evidence, according to a 306-page report released Monday.
The special prosecutor found that FBI officials “discounted or willfully ignored material information that did not support the narrative of a collusive relationship between Trump and Russia.”
Durham also found investigators put too much faith in information provided by Trump’s political opponents and carried out surveillance of Trump campaign adviser Carter Page without genuinely believing there was probable cause to do so.
Despite the scathing findings, Durham did not recommend criminal prosecutions or widespread FBI reforms, writing that “the answer is not the creation of new rules but a renewed fidelity to the old.”
Durham’s investigation lasted more than four years, longer than the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe itself.
The dossier was discredited early by American intelligence, which learned that it might itself be Russian disinformation.
There never was support for the allegations, but the FBI launched and maintained a massive investigation anyway.
Durham noted that the FBI showed a completely different approach to allegations involving the Clinton campaign.
The Trump investigation was a “noticeable departure from how it approached prior matters involving possible attempted foreign election interference plans aimed at the Clinton campaign.”
Nevertheless, former FBI Director James Comey would continue to reference the entirely unsupported “pee tape” in interviews.
Even though investigators found no support for the campaign-created story, in a 2018 interview, Comey delighted viewers by saying: “Honestly, I never thought these words would come out of my mouth, but I don’t know whether the current president of the United States was with prostitutes peeing on each other in Moscow in 2013.”The FBI was assisted in this effort by members of Congress on the House Intelligence Committee.
Even when the false narrative was played out and the lack of support was becoming obvious, former House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) assured the public, on March 13, 2018, that “I can certainly say with confidence that there is significant evidence of collusion between the campaign and Russia.”
He never produced the promised evidence.
The media
The most essential player in this conspiracy was the media, which pumped up the dossier as gospel. On MSNBC, Rachel Maddow assured her viewers that “no major thing from the dossier has been conclusively disproven.”
On CNN, one of the guests insisted, “I think we actually have to stop calling it the ‘infamous dossier’ and increasingly calling it ‘accurate dossier,’ the ‘damning dossier.’”
CNN host Alisyn Camerota attacked Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and said the dossier “hasn’t been discredited, in fact, it has been opposite, it has been corroborated.”
Durham has laid out how the most cited claims were not supported, let alone corroborated.
Indeed, he found there was no basis for this investigation to have been launched in the first place.
Yet, like in “Murder on the Orient Express,” all of the culprits were then let go.
Comey went on to make millions selling books and giving speeches on “ethical leadership.”
Former FBI special agent Peter Strzok was given a job by CNN.
Clinton general counsel Marc Elias is advising people on election ethics and running a group to “defend democracy.”
After all, this was a collective effort. In Washington, the more people involved in a conspiracy, the less culpable it becomes.
They all did it, so no one did.
Jonathan Turley is an attorney and a professor at George Washington University Law School.
How it all began, per the Durham Report
State of Intelligence Community Information Regarding Trump and Russia Prior to the Opening of Crossfire Hurricane
As set forth in greater detail in Section IV.A.3.b, before the initial receipt by FBI Headquarters of information from Australia on July 28, 2016 concerning comments reportedly made in a tavern on May 6, 2016 by George Papadopoulos, an unpaid foreign policy advisor to the Trump campaign, the government possessed no verified intelligence reflecting that Trump or the Trump campaign was involved in a conspiracy or collaborative relationship with officials of the Russian government.
Indeed, based on the evidence gathered in the multiple exhaustive and costly federal investigations of these matters, including the instant investigation, neither U.S. law enforcement nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.
page 8
Durham Report
Former AG Barr: Durham report clears Trump, investigation an ‘abomination’
“”Both the press and the FBI abandoned any semblance of professionalism and took up the cause with a vengeance,” Barr added. ”
https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/former-ag-barr-durham-report-clears-trump-investigation-abomination
Quoting Alfred Whitehead from ‘Dialogues’
“Intelligence is quickness to apprehend as distinct from ability, which is capacity to act wisely on the thing apprehended.”
“a false claim of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.”
It wasn’t false.
Manafort colluded with Kilimnik.
Stone colluded with Guccifer 2.
Don Jr. colluded with Natalia Veselnitskaya.
Trump publicly called for Russia to hack Clinton’s emails.
Russia preferred Trump to Clinton, Russia intervened to help Trump, Trump welcomed the help, and he lies about it to this day.
Mueller wasn’t able to prove conspiracy due to obstruction, and then Trump pardoned the criminals who’d worked on his campaign.
Lying is Trump’s superpower. Dahlia Lithwick “His point is to dominate truth. … Every time he doubles down on a lie, he is making a point about him being the master of truth.” And his supporters like that. Paul Waldman: “When he says “The election was rigged” or “I did complete the wall,” gets corrected, and then says the lie again, steamrolling over the journalist, it isn’t about which of these competing versions of reality will be judged factually accurate. … It shows him defeating his enemy, mocking them, pouring his contempt on them while his fans applaud and cheer. Without that foil there’s no drama. When it’s over he has proven his mastery over the people he and his fans loathe. That doesn’t mean anyone outside of his base is at all persuaded. But for that base, it creates a visceral thrill no other Republican can touch.”
Turley is doing nothing but entertaining the base, throwing doubt on facts and muddy up the water.
^^^ This mindset ^^^ is an example of why the jury pool in our country has been corrupted. These types of ^^^ MSNBC-propagandized people ^^^ cannot, simply cannot, see facts or truth when they are staring them right in the face. They are gone. Zero capacity for reasoning or critical thinking. They regurgitate their ‘programming’ like the dupes and useful idiots they are. They have been MK Ultra’d to such an extent their brains and ability to think or reason or understand has been totally destroyed. This ^^ mind virus ^^ (see above) is partly why it is now impossible to get a fair trial in much of the country.
the trolls are colluding with Hunter Biden’s suppliers of crack cocaine, Chinese opiates and Russian cognac
Hear!! Hear!! They live in an alterate universe where up is down, wrong is right, and San Fransisco is a Utopia
And don’t forget – the border is not open!
😂
Agreed, but it’s bad for the country. We have to be able to distinguish true from false.
Anonymous –
1) “Manafort colluded with Kilimnik” They were in business together for many years in Eastern Europe. Of course, they “colluded.”
2) “Stone colluded with Guccifer.” Guccifer is Romanian.
3) “Don colluded with Natalia Veselnitskaya.” She is actually Russian, but only a lawyer, and not connected to the Russian government. They met once.
4) “Trump publically called on Russia to hack Clinton’s emails.” No, let’s get the words straight. I just listened to Trump’s jocular remarks avaialble here: https://www. bing.com/ videos/search?q=trump+called+for+russia+to+release+Clinton+emails& – He said: “Russia, if you’re listening I hope you can find the 30,000 emails that are missing. If think you will be rewarded mightily by our press.” There is no suggestion that the Russian government hack anything.
The rest of your comment is just rhetoric. Did the Russian government “prefer” Trump to Clinton? If so, it is not suprising when you consider record as a warmonger, and incompetent one as well. And if you were a foreign government and saw Hillary’s contempt for law, why would you want to deal with her?
1. You admit that Manafort colluded with a Russian agent.
2. Guccifer 2.0 is a persona created by Russian RU officers: https://web.archive.org/web/20180714161915/http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/07/13/gru.indictment.pdf
3. How would Russia “find” the emails without hacking? And Trump wasn’t joking when he said it.
4. Veselnitskaya had ties to the Kremlin: https://web.archive.org/web/20210215170237/https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/27/us/natalya-veselnitskaya-trump-tower-russian-prosecutor-general.html
Russia wants to harm the US. Of course they’d prefer Trump.
Want to eliminate 30 minutes of completely wasted time? Don’t read Svelaz and his 200 comments for every issue.
Isn’t it funny that Svelaz and “Anonymous” spend all day talking to each other about how wrong everyone else is, including LAW PROFESSOR Turley.
He doesn’t really write 200 comments. He writes one comment 200 times.
Thersites,
Funny!
And true.
HullBobby,
That right there.
Just scroll past.
Hullbobby, still whining? LOL!! At least you are still reading my posts even though you claim you don’t. We know you do. We…can tell.
Negatory! I treat your posts much like one would a psycho acting out on a NYC subway platform. Avoidance. The outcome of any encounter would be predictable.
T e column might have mention that this wa the real insurrection. Not the phony J6 crap with protestors sentenced to up to 20 years. That was a deflection for the crap that the DNC and its hand maidens the FBI, Justice and the media pulled off.
Without accountability it is certain to be repeated. It was a successful playbook.
Adam,
Yes, It drives me nuts how this is not labeled as an insurrection. Obama, Clinton and all involved are traitors. But nothing will happen to any of them.
Turley wrote this yesterday.
“Buried in the detailed account is a little noticed footnote stating that Clinton General Counsel Marc Elias “declined to be voluntarily interviewed by the Office.” Likewise, Durham noted that “no one at Fusion GPS … would agree to voluntarily speak with the Office” while both the DNC and Clinton campaign invoked privileges to refuse to answer certain questions.”
Interesting!
Also misleading because they both, in fact, testified.”
This isn’t entirely fair, as Turley acknowledges later in the piece that Elias testified at trial, but handwaves away that testimony as “strictly limited by the court.” Which is true to the extent it was limited to the precise events Turley is ranting about. Does he want Elias to share his tips for making risotto?“
https://abovethelaw.com/2023/05/jonathan-turley-john-durham-lack-of-evidence/
This is what Turley does and hopes his more gullible readers don’t notice, because he knows or relies on them to be too stupid to notice the omission of facts. I’m betting on the latter.
Turley is essentially a smarter, less creepier version of Rudy Giuliani. He is after all batting for Trump’s “hoax” shtick. Just less Rudy-like.
I understand Why Elias and others refused to cooperate.
Mueller used Cooperation very effectively to Frame people for process crimes.
Regardless, what Turley states is FACT.
In the US a refusal to cooperate can not be used to impute criminality.
In the UK it can.
Regardless a refusal to cooperate does NOT prevent those in the US from imputing guilty OUTSIDE the jury room.
The Refusal of Elias and others is evidence in the court of public opinion.
Turley is just slowly being red pilled by the bad conduct of those on the left.
Did Elias testify to something that contradicted the Durham report ?
Joe Patrice at Above the Law as usual make quick work of Turley’s sloppy work.
“It is not clear whether Durham was able to get a full account from these sources, but he was still able to establish the details on how this unprecedented political hit job succeeded despite a lack of evidence.” You’d be forgiven for believing this sentence more at home on Ancient Aliens than among the collected works of a law professor, but Jonathan Turley is no ordinary law professor. And besides, Ancient Aliens at least claims to have evidence.”
That sentence said it all. “It is NOT clear whether Durham was able to get a full account from these sources, but was able to establish the details…” This is lawyer-speak for Durham’s conjecture and insinuations are evidence for the lack of evidence in the Durham report.
Turley goes on a freewheeling conjecture roadtrip in his last couple of columns on the issue. Between whining and demanding the media give it the attention he wants it to have and his constant insinuations he really has nothing. All he has is the good ol’ Trump stand-by. It’s a hoax. Because…it is. LOL!!!
Right but in Murder in the Orient Express they executed a child kidnapper/murderer who had been clearly guilty but who got off on a technicality. These 12 people were victims of the same system that has let Clinton et al walk while indicting Trump. Although I appreciate any reference to Agatha Christie, she had a strong moral sense. In one of her books, this whole mess would have had a much more enjoyable – at least to lovers of justice- ending than watching the likes of Peter Strzok ride off into the sunset thumbing his nose at what used to be our system of justice.
“In one of her books . . .”
My thoughts, exactly.
“carried out surveillance of Trump campaign adviser Carter Page without genuinely believing there was probable cause to do so.”
There are so many little things that sound innocuous, until you learn of the full scope. This is one of those facts.
The FISA warrant allowed the capture of all the communications of page. cell line business line, texts, emails, browser history, We all understand that part. It also means “2 hops. Page calls Sam, one hop, the Govt gets all of Sam. Sam call Julie, second hop, the govt gets all of Julie. You can see how this quickly takes in hundreds of people. Must assuredly, this captured Trumps communication.
Another side note on FISA warrants. This was renewed 3 times. The application requires the govt attest to the NEED for the extension for the reason the warrant is responsible of gathering evidence that furthers the investigation. That means each of those extensions were granted because of lies under oath by the DoJ and FBI
Chief Justice Roberts is now guilty of aiding and abetting the fraudulent issuing of secret warrants to spy on US citizens. Roberts has been silent on ALL the FISA abuse. The latest audit of 702 lookups found 1.4 million, almost all exclusively done by the FBI or its contractors were illegal. Several previous audits have found the same. The FBI have never been held to account.
Iowan 2, it is inconceivable to me how Durham could have reasonably concluded that there was no provable crime committed by any of the officials involved in the submission of four materially misleading applications to the FISC, the last two of which were determined some time ago to have been illegal by DOJ itself. He had full subpoena power and the authority to grant immunity. The complete impunity of these officials guarantees that the abuses will continue.
Iowan 2, it is inconceivable to me how Durham could have reasonably concluded that there was no provable crime ….
Why is it such a burden for you to read the Durham Report? Im not even an attorney and yet just reading the first 10 pages of the DR, I came to understand the governing principles that guided Durham’s actions
Read the Durham Report.
Read the Durham Report.
Read the Durham Report.
it is the furthest thing from rocket science that one can encounter. Sheesh!
Wow, Turley sure is laying it on thick with the dud that is the Durham report. It’s getting to the point where Turley essentially succumbs to the nutty conspiracy theory world where endless arguments going into one rabbit hole after another is the norm.
If Turley put as much effort into Trump’s own voter fraud ‘hoax’ his analyses would have more credibility. It’s pretty sad seeing Turley’s slowly circle the drain into the abyss that is the conspiracy theory rabbit hole that is the MAGA universe.
He’s already made it clear he is frustrated by the lack of attention from the media on the Durham report. He is essentially demanding others to cover it more and give it the attention HE desperately seems to want it to have. Since they are not going to “bow” to his demand he seems intent on doing it himself by continually flogging this DOA report just like the Hunter Biden “scandal”. Real lawyers and real professors who have been digging deep into this issue know this is just a sloppy rehash of previous findings. It took 300 pages of “explanations” and expanding on previous regurgitations of problems already pointed out by the IG report.
Yesterday Turley, a former defense attorney literally suggested former Clinton staffers and members of her campaign “volunteer” information in exchange for immunity. Really? The very fact that he suggested congress offer immunity to get people to talk means only one thing. Durham failed. Durham could have offered immunity too. He had the power to offer it and he never did. Why? Because he didn’t have any evidence or guarantee that their immunity would protect those individuals. Nobody would trust an individual like Durham. Especially when he clearly was being disingenuous with others. What makes Turley think congressional republicans can be trustworthy with their “promises”? That was a really stupid suggestion, to offer immunity so they would give up their 5th amendment right.
All Turley has left is concocting more BS about the origins of the Russian collision story and raging at the lack attention to something that will fade off by the end of the next week.
Svelaz, we know you get paid to post. Does your handler know you never actual engage on the topic?
All you really have to do is copy and paste any of your posts from the last week. They all say the same thing.
Whores like Svelaz, Anonymous (bugger), Gigo, Dennis McIntyre, Fishwings and the rest of the average-IQ goon platoon really aren’t worth your time.
+ 1,000,000,000
Thesires, spewing insults is the first sign that you don’t have an argument. Being upset that there are others pointing out a counter argument or a different point of view because YOU can’t offer anything of substance seems to be the bigger problem, not my posts or the others who offer the same views as I.
Touch a nerve, did I?
LOL! No.
I’d love to read substantial comments offering different points of view.
Do you know anyone who does that?
Iowan2,
“Svelaz, we know you get paid to post. Does your handler know you never actual engage on the topic?”
You don’t know squat. Nor do I have a “handler”. Pointing out Turley’s BS points on his column is literally engaging on the topic. YOU on the other hand are not engaging on the topic. Irony perhaps?
And Perkins Coie is running the respondent case in the Lake v. Hobbs. Their involvement in another apparent election fraud that was critical to the DNC!!!
Clinton, Comey, Strzok, Elias, Brennan, et al want the American people to believe that they answered to a “higher calling”. When you do, you can lie on search warrant affidavits and fabricate stories to spoon feed to a breathless media with reckless abandon. Even a coup to take out a sitting President is ok. They are traitors all. Every last one of them. We used to know what to do with traitors in the United States years ago. Regrettably, not anymore. Thank you, Jonathan, for an excellent article.
What was the reward that Obama, Biden, Lynch, Rosenstein, Brennan, Clapper, Hayden, Podesta, Sullivan, Elias, given for their misconduct?
Upon being briefed by Brennan….Obama had a Constitutional duty to ensure the matter was effectively and properly investigated….he did not do that.
Biden was present and knew what was going on and said nothing.
Comey had a Constitutional duty to ensure the matter was properly and effectively investigated and to see that the Report of Investigation was derived to the Attorney General…..he did the very. opposite.
Attorney General Lynch had a Constitutional Duty to ensure the Rule of Law and Constitution were complied with….with the FBI falling under her direction supervision……she failed in that duty.
Elias should have been put under the corner of a Jail and it be let back down on him.
Sullivan should not be in the position he currently holds and should not have any kind of security clearance.
There should be a very special place in Hell reserved for the likes of these people and should they be reported Hell bound one morning I would enjoy my Coffee all the more for it since the US Justice System is not enclined or willing to hold them accountable during their time on Earth.
“The funding was hidden as “legal expenses” and the campaign was fined by the FEC. Now compare to Alvin Bragg’s accusations against Trump regarding the money paid to the stripper. One gets a fine and one gets an indictment. Life in Doublestandardstan.
This article is powerful, Professor Turley. It rings so true that I’m both angry and sad. This kind of abuse of power is the kind of should bring the entire U.S. government to the ground with farmers and statesmen storming Washington with pitchforks, but I can’t even imagine that happening.
Yordie, you’re being taken for a ride. Turley is relying on his readers to simply take what he says at face value. He’s depending on you and others NOT to think for yourself and do some diving into the details. He’s basically doing what Fox News does. He uses his position as an “esteemed” professor to lend credibility where none exists and leads the gullible to not question his opinion. He’s feeding you BS which he uses to gain legitimacy among the easily led and the gullible. Why? Because it’s much easier than selling his arguments to smarter and more knowledgable people. That’s why he’s often ridiculed by the real professionals and real legal analysts.
Au contrails. A fair number of those who read the blog are attorneys admitted to the bars of various states.
Typo alert: I meant to say “au contraire.”
Good quote!
Well written Professor Turley.
It is no longer a conspiracy theory when one or more people conspire. Do not forget that the FBI lawyer falsified information on the FISA request regarding the status of Carter Page being a CIA asset.
This should NEVER be tolerated by any citizen no matter their political views. But we are no longer told to accept differing points of view and political philosophies. Those who beat the drums of totalitarianism demand that we take sides and rage against the enemy we are told to hate.
Smug so-called elites don’t care about the welfare of the average citizen. In fact they despise us. They are possessed with selfish power. Raw power. Nothing else.
The FBI Didn’t Persecute Hillary. It Protected Her.
https://www.thefp.com/p/the-fbi-trump-durham-report
Along with the good professor’s summary of the greatest hoax or as I call it, The Biggest Lie, The Free Press’s Eli Lake does a good job of breaking down The Biggest Lie.
I marvel at Bari Weiss’s comeback. She is such a great inspiration for young women. A female, a lesbian, a Jew, she set on fire A.Z. Sulzberger’s bird cage paper, with her scathing letter of resignation, after facing outrageous anti-semitism by the very self-appointed clerics of Woke Religion. She married, her wife is a Jewish convert, who apparently had a child, and there they are growing, and growing, and growing as a bona fide business. I suspect Bari is making far more money than what she was paid by Sulzberger. Whatever her political or religious proclivities, Bari is a testament that America is still the place of making one’s dreams come true provided one has resilience and grit like Bari Weiss.
Fun fact on the anti-semitic history of the NY Times under the Sulzberger clan:
The Sulzberger family: A complicated Jewish legacy at The New York Times
Throughout the generations, the paper has maintained a veneer of objectivity — even as it buried stories of WWII atrocities against Jews
Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr. was raised in his mother’s Episcopalian faith and later stopped practicing religion. He and his wife, Gail Gregg, were married by a Presbyterian minister.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/the-sulzberger-family-a-complicated-jewish-legacy-at-the-new-york-times/
Estovir,
Agreed!
Bari started with Common Sense, but had such a strong following, she then created The Free Press and has done very well!
I subscribe. I really look forward to their TGTF, weekly news wrap up usually written by Bari’s wife, Nellie. Nellie hits the big stories of the week with a little of her own commentary. She is hysterical!
.”I marvel at Bari Weiss’s comeback. “
Estovir and Upstate, based on your respective comments, I looked up the Bari Weiss, and Ben Shapiro interview, which is very revealing. It is worth a listen if one hasn’t already heard it.
Bari and Ben are opposites where big vs. small government is concerned. That is my underlying disagreement with Bari. The rest is an intellectual joining of two amazing minds that demonstrate a potential future for the nation.
They are both 39, which is the age of a type of maturity I cannot adequately explain. They both have children, so they must look toward the future, and both have a realization that they are not the centers of the universe.
Bari is not having a comeback but has grown into a person of meaning, as has Ben Shapiro.
Bari Weiss proves she is more attuned to the reasons of decay in our civilization than Ben. Ive been saying this for years. People have lost a sense of meaning and the expulsion of religion from their lives and ostensibly the public square. St Augustine was right, “O Lord, my Lord, I could not rest until I rested in Thee” from his “Confessions”
@49:00
Ben Shapiro is too political for me. Ironically Bari is more Jewish even if Reformed.
I miss the days of associating with physicians who were Orthodox. Truly towering people. Now, no where to be found
@41:00
Bari says a lot here that I appreciate. I do not push religion. It is not a specific flavor of ice cream or a ball team. It is something one accepts on their own because it has meaning. However, I believe man is born with a need to believe in something. Today we see the faith-based religion of leftism, where big government replaces religion and individual morality. That is where some of Bari’s ideas can lead.
Ben agrees with Bari but recognizes that her statement is not a “mutually exclusive explanations.” As I said before, he is more grounded in his understanding of government policy and what that policy can lead to. Subtly, Ben briefly touched on their differences (“why it happened when it happened”) but didn’t want to pursue the thought to protect the discussion’s flow.
Does Bari understand what happened but miss the cause? Ben brings the subject to intersectionality, which touches on the reason.
Estovir, I think I understand your feelings. I cannot say one is better than the other, though, in political matters, I prefer the person who understands government and the problems associated with its growth. I think Ben better understands that and leaves his religion out of the picture.
Ben can compete favorably in the religious sphere with Bari, but he is not interested in proselytizing (neither is Bari). That is not a feature religious Jews find desirable.
I would think Ben would be more to your liking politically. I guess I am wrong. They discussed a few issues on the video, and I noted their ability to discuss them and take definitive positions.
On the issue of abortion, both have an understanding of the opposing side’s views. Bari’s view seems to contradict your own (I think). Am I wrong?
On the issue of government growth with ever-increasing programs, I believe you saw where that led under Fidel’s rule and how socialism infringed on the individual’s independence. Ben leaves such matters to the community and religious organizations. The needs of neighbors are where both institutions can shine. Big government competes with religion for the affinity of the individual.
I have difficulty piecing together where you stand on these issues, but that is why, while liking both, I find Ben more grounded on matters of government policy.
I have difficulty piecing together where you stand on these issues…..
I reject the “conservative vs liberal” categorizations. I have said as such many times on here. I am a Catholic mystic through and through. Saints Augustine, Ignatius of Loyola, Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, Mother Teresa of Calcutta, and 20th century Trappist monk Thomas Merton, all are my heroes. When I see a situation, I look for God, and then take action. Sadly, I am a hypocrite, flawed, imperfect and a sinner. St Paul the Apostle speaks profoundly on my dilemma which happily speaks to many holy Catholics:
What I do, I do not understand. For I do not do what I want, but I do what I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I concur that the law is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. For I know that good does not dwell in me, that is, in my flesh. The willing is ready at hand, but doing the good is not. For I do not do the good I want, but I do the evil I do not want. Now if [I] do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. So, then, I discover the principle that when I want to do right, evil is at hand. For I take delight in the law of God, in my inner self, but I see in my members another principle at war with the law of my mind, taking me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Miserable one that I am! Who will deliver me from this mortal body? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Therefore, I myself, with my mind, serve the law of God but, with my flesh, the law of sin
Romans 7:15-25
There is a harsh saying in Spanish that my parents often said: “entre mas muletas que tenga un hombre, menos hombre el es”. I believe that phrase profoundly. However, I am very compassionate and merciful towards the weak, the hurting, the broken. There is only 1 group of people I do not and will not ever tolerate: the arrogant.
I have never met Ben Shapiro nor Bari Weiss. I can’t say I understand Bari’s positions, but she speaks the language of God that I speak. I don’t buy Ben’s comment that his wearing the yarmulke says how Judaic he is. That’s garbage. Too many Catholics wear their Rosary on their car rearview mirror, and that hardly speaks to their Catholic living. I used to work with some very holy Orthodox Jewish Cardiologists and Pulmonologists at Mt Sinai Medical Center and Miami Heart Institute. They were towering men but gentle men towards their patients. When they entered a conference room, everyone noticed, even if they did not say a word. Not surprisingly, one of the Orthodox Jewish Pulmonologists told me that everything he learned in how to be a physician was from Catholic Nuns at the former and now closed St Francis Hospital in Miami Beach. That’s humility. I thought the world of him and hope I can be as great a physician and medical researcher as him.
In the end, how we treat each other says everything there is to know about ourselves. This is why I am so harsh towards Donald Trump. I know you wish to debate this, and that’s fine, but this forum isn’t the place for that. Forward and onward
“I reject the “conservative vs liberal” categorizations”
I reject those labels also, but many call me conservative, something accepted for convenience, but that would be inaccurate.
Religion and politics should distance themselves from each other as the former is a free choice to develop character, while the latter is how groups of people compelled to interact function.
“Sadly, I am a hypocrite, flawed, imperfect and a sinner.”
We are all, except those who think they are the center of the world.
“I am very compassionate and merciful towards the weak, the hurting, the broken. ”
To help the sick and needy is the end, but the means to achieve it is where the problems arise.
“I have never met Ben Shapiro nor Bari Weiss. I can’t say I understand Bari’s positions, but she speaks the language of God that I speak. I don’t buy Ben’s comment that his wearing the yarmulke says how Judaic he is. That’s garbage.”
You misinterpret Ben. He marked himself by wearing a yarmulke as a part of his covenant. There is a bit of irony that you feel he wears it for a different reason since he knows that the yarmulke makes him a target for violence, something one does not seek.
Though I never met Bari, I have met Ben. As a Jew, he is genuine, though you will not see it written on his sleeve. You will not hear him telling others to follow in his religious footsteps. That is part of being Jewish.
“This is why I am so harsh towards Donald Trump.”
Like you, Donald Trump is a sinner magnified by the media and political spin. He is a far more decent man than most, but too many make judgments in haste. However, the question is not if we like him but if he is the best man for the job. He is.
“Here is the column”
Excellent summary! Thank you.
Reminds me of this quote from the novelist Walter Scott: “Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.”