When now President-Elect Donald Trump was convicted, the thrill-kill atmosphere around the courthouse and the country was explosive, but no one was more ecstatic than liberal columnist and former prosecutor Harry Litman. The then L.A. Times columnist told MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace that it was a “majestic day” and “a day to celebrate.” A lawfare advocate, Litman excitedly laid out how Trump could be barred from office, declaring that the raid in Mar-a-Lago was the “whole enchilada” in ending Trump’s political career. Now, Litman has resigned from the L.A. Times because the owner wants more diversity of opinion in the newspaper. Litman went on MSNBC to declare that “this is not a time for balance.”
Those seven words sum up much of what has destroyed American media with millions turning away from the echo chamber created by the Washington Post, L.A. Times, and other publications.
Litman is not alone. Many liberals are dispensing with the pretense of declaring opposing views “disinformation” and are now openly fighting to preserve ideological echo chambers and media silos.
In my new book, The Indispensable Right, I write about the decline of newspapers as part of the “advocacy journalism” movement. Opinion pages became little more than screeds for the left, including legal commentators who have been consistently wrong and misleading on merits of challenges or cases.
Last year, Washington Post publisher and CEO William Lewis delivered a truth bomb in the middle of the newsroom by telling the staff, “Let’s not sugarcoat it…We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff. Right? I can’t sugarcoat it anymore.”
Litman has been one of the most unabashed lawfare warriors. Even when the Justice Department was seeking to dismiss the Flynn case, Lipman wrote an L.A. Times column advising Judge Emmet Sullivan how to “make trouble” for the administration. Litman admitted there is “very little leeway to reject the government’s decisions to dismiss charges” but encouraged Sullivan to “accomplish what Congress, multiple inspectors general, and a majority of the electorate have not been able to do — hold the president and his allies accountable for their contemptuous disregard for the rule of law.”
On MSNBC’s Deadline: White House, Litman declared to Nicolle Wallace that Trump’s victory is “an absolute five-alarm fire.” He called the effort to restore a diversity of viewpoints as little more than an attempt “to curry favor with Trump.” He then added:
“And I just think this is not a time for balance when you have someone who’s not telling the truth on the other side. And it’s a deep responsibility. And instead, I think they cowered and are worried about their personal holdings and just being threatened by Trump. And that’s a really shameful capitulation, I think. So, I just felt I couldn’t be a part of it and had to resign.”
It was a telling moment. Litman appeared on a network that has lost half of its viewership and is fighting for its existence in an effort by NBCUniversal to unload it. Readers are fleeing to new media after papers like the L.A. Times and the Washington Post literally wrote off half of the country. Yet, these figures would rather lose their jobs and media platforms than their bias.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
It’s time to end tax-payer funding to NPR and PBS because long ago, they ceased to be
public service entities. They are simply another broadcast format. Rural consumers, once dependent on public broadcasting, now have the most programming access they’ve ever known thanks mainly to the internet and cable. Tax payer funding served it’s purpose. Mission accomplished.
Regarding the LA Times, the new publisher has made the paper much better. It had become unreadable. It appears the Times is getting back to emphasizing reporting. And it appears the newsroom has taken notice that no one has missed the self-aggrandizing columnists and editorial writers who resigned after the publisher refused to endorse a presidential candidate.
One day, many years ago before the world-wide-web became what it has become today, when my wife and I subscribed to the Los Angeles Times in newspaper format (the only available format in the 1970’s and 80’s when we subscribed), we especially enjoyed spending Sunday mornings with the Sunday version of the paper — she’d read the Calendar and Metro sections, I’d first read the Business, then the Opinion section.
Then she did the Crossword puzzle, and usually needed no help but for maybe one or two clues – and I often knew the answer.
Our marriage was cemented during those years, as we were raising two young children in southern California.
It would be nice if the new owner of the LA Times succeeds in somehow bringing back the quality of the paper from back then — there were no guys like Litman at the paper those years ago.
Prof Turley gets it right again. As for Litman, the guy is almost always wrong. His far left wing bias has destroyed whatever existed as credibility.
The raving lunatic litman looks like a walking corpse with his posted pic at substack. Dead man . Nothing there but decay and horror.
Why would anyone post a pic like that, and how would they not be aware of how grotesque it is ? Truly, living in the bubble, a horrible existence of constant lies, it certainly shows.
Gigi didn’t show up to work here today?
Not another birth control abortion????
This Sunday I listened to Shostakovich symphonies 11, 8, 7, 12 & 13, the last being the Baba Yar symphony with bass soloist and bass choir. Enough for tonight, especially after #13.
Self indulgent virtue signaling and a confession all in one. Do we applaud or assume you increased your IQ, or both, as well.
Well, shakdi, why would you write something so hateful and ignornat? Why?
Nothing beats The Brandenburg Concertos on a Sunday.
I thought Shastakovitch was dead.???
Nothing like being stupid at 6:23 AM eh Flyod?
OT
“[Saturday] Large Explosion Collapses Building in The Hague, Five Bodies Recovered From Rubble, Multiple Hospitalized”
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“[On] 21 November 2024,…the International Criminal Court (‘Court’) [in the Hague],…issued warrants of arrest for Mr Benjamin Netanyahu and Mr Yoav Gallant”
What a cohencidence.
Shakdi, did your toilet back-up? Are you publishing too much Shite?
That was me.
Jonathan: Harry Truman famously said: “Show me a man who gets rich by being a politician, and I’ll show you a crook”. Truman couldn’t predict DJT but his comment nevertheless applies to the crook who is about to enter the WH again.
In 2016 DJT promised he would have no time to play golf as president. And voters believed him. How much golf did the Trumpster play during his first term? Much more than any other president, except for Eisenhower–but he played on the WH lawn so that doesn’t count. In fact, during his first term, DJT played a total of 307 times at his golf resorts. That’s almost a year taken off from his official duties. And the cost to the taxpayers? More than $142 million. And that doesn’t include SS protection and housing at Mar-a-Lago–for which DJT charged the government–nor Coast Guard protection. How much golf will DJT play during his second term? Will he try beat his previous record? No doubt.
Then there is DJT’s latest grift–and he hasn’t even been sworn in! The newest scam is DJT’s perfumes and colognes. Go to “Get Trump Fragrance.com” and you can see what he is hawking this time. DJT says in his ad: ‘Here are my new Trump Perfumes & Colognes. I call them Fight, Fight, Fight because they represent WINNING. Great Christmas gifts for the family…”.
So there you have it. A “convicted felon” and number one grifter-in-chief will be back in the WH on Jan. 20th, 2025. But the voters have spoken so we will have to live with it because the Constitution doesn’t prevent a convicted felon and adjudicated rapist from being President of these United States. That’s the sad state of affairs of our politics these days!
Joe Biden got rich through politics. Donald Trump lost money. Other than, great essay, Denny-poo.
Insert “that” where you think it will do the most good.
Trump did not get Rich as president. He LOST many.
He Trippled his net worth in the 4 years he Was NOT president.
Regardless, he was very rich BEFORE he got into politics.
If you do not want tax payers to foot the bill for protection of presidents while golfing (or spunking all over interns) change the law.
People care about Biden’s constant Vacations and 4 hr days – because he has failed as president.
Reagan spent very little time in the WH in his 2nd term. And people were HAPPY – life Was Good, it was “Morning in America”.
Trump may never sped a day in the WH for the next 4 years. He may gold from morning to noon.
The The Economy is good, the wporld is peaceful, and the borders are quiet – people will diefy him.
You make the common error of those on the left.
The labor theory of value is a crock.
It is NOT how hard you workm how many hours you put in that determine your success, your Worth
It is what you accomplish.
I hope someone buys you some Trump cologne for Christmas.
Regardless, has Trump FORCED anyone to buy a bible or steak, or sneakers, or cologne ?
Then what are you complaining about ?
Why do you think you have the right to say that others can NOT buy Trump branded products ?
The newest left-wing scare tactic: Trump will play golf! We can’t have golf! Instead, we must have endless wars in the middle East and everywhere else in the world.
You have bombed us with all this garbage about Trump using various songs supposedly without permission.
One of those you ranted about was YMCA.
It is TRUE that the author and singer of YMCA asked Trump not to use the song – despite having purchased a use license from BMI – that according to the songs writer and lead singer.
But the REASON that he asked Trump to stop using the song is he was getting over 200,000 hate emails from left wing nuts angry that he had purportedly let Trump use the song.
HOWEVER he subsequently noted that Trump had driven plays of the song up to #1 o Billboard and he was making money from a decades old song that had otherwise ceased to produce significant income and as a result he told litigators in France who were seeking to Sue Trump – because aparently French courts like to meddle in US politics, to STOP the littigation, and he has subsequently come out saying that he is HAPPY that Trump is using the song. BTW he also debunked claims that it was a Gay or Trans song.
I would note that even BEFORE Willis decided that he was happy to be rolling in dough because Trump had revived the popularity of his song, that he CEDED that Trump had paid BMI for the necescary licenses for the song.
OOOPS.
One day out of five for exercise that sustains the health of our Chief Executive is better than what those other weaklings have done. And Trump, at least, is selling something in exchange for campaign contributions, unlike all those nothing-for-something beggars!
On Nov. 5th 2024 we had the jury verdict in the most massive criminal trial in history.
And voters voted NOT GUILTY.
Your just Liars, Cheats and Crooks
Who cares.
AAH! Too bad sore loser
Haysoos, dood. Trump didn’t get rich being a politician. In fact, last round, Trump donated his entire salary to agencies like the National Park Service et al. Yer gonna have to work A LOT harder if you want the mic drop moment. LOL.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2021/02/27/president-donald-trump-probably-donated-his-entire-16m-salary-back-to-the-us-government–here-are-the-details/
Balance is a the worng goal.
In EVERYTHING people come with biases.
We do not seek to overcome biases with balance.
We do so with freedom and by seeking credibility.
There is no real debate over whether murder is good. We do not need balance when discussing murder.
All we need is to NOT censor those that make a different argument.
Few people argue that murder is good, Those that do have no credibility because nearly all people have resolved that murder is not good.
People who argue that murder is good – lose credibility on other topics – because when people are wrong they tend to be wrong alot.
Especially when they argue things that have long ago been concluded as absurd.
Still those voices can not be censored – because occasionally they are right,
And because the weakness of arguments claiming murder is good as an example reinforces our grasp that murder is not good.
LAT does not need to be balanced. It needs to be credible. Being credible means Being RIGHT most of the time and correcting yourself when you are not.
The problem with Litman is not that he is on the left – it is that he has been wrong about most everything.
That said those on the left tend to suffer from significantly more error than those on the right.
To SOME extent that is natural – conservatism is nearly always about favoring the status quo,
it is inherenltly true that the status quo is nearly always more likely to work that some new idea.
At the same time – the improvement of mankind comes through new ideas.
Those attracted to shiny new things are going to be wrong nearly always, but when they are right- they change the status quo and life gets a little better for all of us.
The modern era problem is that those new and wrong things get tried – and then we are Stuck with them – even though they did not work.
I think a lot of the country has indicated that it thinks the murder of Brian Thompson WAS good.
“I think a lot of the country has indicated that it thinks the murder of Brian Thompson WAS good.”
I think that is a fairly large overstatement. The only evidence for that I have seen cited is the large number of “laughing icons” that were replies to United Healthcare’s eulogy post on him. No doubt there is a significant element of schadenfreude in the general public’s response to his death, and that is understandable. I had read in initial accounts of his murder about the 32% rejection rate for claims; this morning I read a new allegation that there was an AI bot used for initial claims evaluation that was incorrect and needed to be overridden *90%* of the time. That certainly doesn’t seem to describe a responsible, well run organization, or one that could even survive without being inextricably woven into the noncompetitive government/pharma/healthcare corporatist tapestry. Personally, I would prefer that he hadn’t been murdered, but my eyes are dry. 20 years ago or so, comedian Chris Rock had a joke as part of his stand-up routine that was about a guy who murdered his wife, after she repetitively cheated on him and then threw her infidelity in his face. The punchline was “I don’t approve, but I understand”. Assuming that he was killed in retaliation for Thompson’s company causing grief by dropping the ball on coverage, that would pretty much sum up my reaction to his murder.
LAT does not need to be balanced. It needs to be credible.
The problem here is that it cannot be credible if it is NOT balanced. And being “right” is a matter of opinion anyway, you give out a balance argument/counter argument and let the chips fall where they fall with the public. Because being “right” is just an “opinion” .of the public..Hopefully mot Americans have a strong sense of moral right and justice and make the right/correct choice the majority of the time. The American Public hasn’t always hit it right, but has the vast majority of the time. And we usually fix it down the road if we are wrong.
“The problem here is that it cannot be credible if it is NOT balanced.”
Nonsense. Aparently you can not read. Do we need to provide equal time to those who claim murder is good ?
“And being “right” is a matter of opinion anyway”:
No everything is NOT just a matter of opinion. If you think that murdering people is OK, try putting that opinion into practice and see where that gets you.
I would note that just as everything is NOT an opinion, all opinions are NOT equal.
We do NOT know for certain where covid came from. Could have been the wet markets, could have been the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Both are Opinions – but the calculated odds that it came from the wet markets are currently about 1:13000000, and the odds it came from WIV nearly 1:1
“you give out a balance argument/counter argument and let the chips fall where they fall with the public.”
Again you are engaged in typical shallow thinking.
Why don’t you try to put your scheme into effect in the real world.
Some people beleive the earth is flat – must we provife them with equal time ? provide both sides of the argument.
The left is incorrect in silencing people whose views they do not like. But they are correct in that while you can not silence people, you need not listen to them
Each of us as individuals gets to choose what arguments we hear, and whether we listen to both sides.
The wisdom with which we make those choices is a major factor in our personal success.
If you spend lots of time being fair and balanced over flat earth debates – you waste your time.
Just as if you buy nonsense that your sex is a choice, and you ignore those that try to set you straight – you waste your time.
” Because being “right” is just an “opinion””
Both false and irrelevant.
The entirety of mathematics and science rest on a few postulates that we presume to be true but can not prove.
They are just “opinions” but even though we can not prove them to be true, they have never failed to be true, and without them everything we think we know turns to schiff.
We can not know anything with absolute certainty. Btu we can know many many many things to near absolute certainty.
Again get past first order thinking.
You can not make the world function if everything is an opinion and all opinions are equal.
“Hopefully mot Americans have a strong sense of moral right and justice and make the right/correct choice the majority of the time.”
First you say that everything is an opinion and that all opinions are entitled to balanced treatment – then you start making claims regarding morality and justice.
Where does morality and justice come from ?
You have proposed a scale for measuring opinions – but how is your scale not itself an opinion ?
My point above about efficiency and waste is that we can debate the morality of some complex hitherto inexperienced issue.
But if we have to debate the morality of murder as part of every single discussion – and that is where your framework leads,
then we will never accomplish anything.
“The American Public hasn’t always hit it right, but has the vast majority of the time. And we usually fix it down the road if we are wrong.”
That tends to be correct, but pretty much for the opposite of the reasons that you argue.
Because we are FREE to decide what arguments we will choose to give an ear to and which we will not. But you are NOT free to decide what others must listen too or not.
And because everyone is free to make arguments – even absurd ones.
I hear “The View” is looking for alternate commentators….. times awasting!
I didn’t used to feel this way, but after 2022 and this November – I am just going to refer to the modern left as communists; naturally to a communist, a free and open society is anathema, and it is indeed a ‘five alarm fire’ when freedom wins given their Marxist ideology, as in that scenario only the oligarchs should have any authority or say.
Any modern liberals that still think they have a Constitutional party are stupid, indeed, and we fully intend to keep handing them their a**es in both elections and public discourse until they get the point. Pretty done with this sheet. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
I will never trust the LA Times again, nor any of their colleagues, it’s far too late for that (and yes, the children they passed their torch to do deserve every bit of the scorn raining down on them, useless turds); and the only reason we are even getting a soupçon of a mea culpa is because their bottom line has redefined the bottom. They can feed there, in their natural habitat, we don’t care anymore.
James,
Respectfully, I have to disagree. The modern left, liberals, I would not lump into the same category as the far leftist Democrats. The far leftist Democrats have highjacked their own party to the far left. Traditional JFK Democrats, whom I would call people like RFK, Bill Maher, the good professor, my own sister, are in fact applauded by those who have highjacked their party. Many of them are against biological males in women’s sports, locker rooms, bath rooms. Many of them see this whole “trans” thing as wrong. They think and know it is wrong to have pornography in elementary school libraries. Many have asked where did that 20 million who voted for Biden in 2020 suddenly disappear for Harris in 2024 eluding to voter fraud. While I am not ruling out voter fraud, I think it could be equally said those 20 million looked at their own party, the Democrat party and said “No. I am not voting for crazy. I am not voting at all.” Says more to the Democrats and their failed policies. Says more that they need to take their party back and give the far woke leftists the boot!
* appalled, not applauded.
@Upstate
I don’t disagree, regarding *those particular people.*. They seem to be oblivious what has happened to their party. They really do still think they are voting for JFK and that the civil rights struggle of the 60s is still happening, and they are terrified to be on the wrong side. They have done zero to elucidate any of this to their kids in spite of their proclaimed intentions. My wife is a teacher and has been across the coasts and the country, and this is not unique.
James,
Good point. While I do not know for sure, I believe my sister may have not voted for Harris but has stated that she will down vote for Democrats. This is in despite she has had a few Democrat friends tell her she is “wrong” in her thinking when it came to the “trans” thing, biological males in women’s sports, pornography in elementary school libraries. What was interesting was these were a mere handful of Democrats among a hundred or so sane and normal JFK like Democrats. They had a louder voice over the silent majority and used the threat of -ism to silence the majority.
@Upstate
That’s the kicker though. Why not for POTUS? Sounds like someone’s TDS is alive and well (and my brother is the same, no insult intend).
If such a person can’t acknowledge the rest of the many, many lies, what’s the point? 🤷🏽♂️ What the heck, given it’s the highest office in the land, makes the presidency *less* important?
Modern liberals are so fully indoctrinated I don’t think there is a cure. There is NO ‘democrat’ party in 2024, period. Just the Marxist one.
There are no “missing 20 million”. Total turnout from 2020 to 2024 declined by only 3.3 million.
Abraham Lincoln was a monumental, historic, and resolute president.
____________________________________________________________________________
Proclamation 80—Calling Forth the Militia and Convening an Extra Session of Congress
“On April 15, 1861,…President Abraham Lincoln issued a proclamation calling forth the state militias, to the sum of 75,000 troops, in order to suppress the rebellion. He appealed ‘to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union.’”
Proclamation 92—Warning to Rebel Sympathizers
“[On] July 17, 1862,…I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do hereby proclaim to and warn all persons within the contemplation of said sixth section to cease participating in, aiding, countenancing, or abetting the existing rebellion or any rebellion against the Government of the United States and to return to their proper allegiance to the United States on pain of the forfeitures and seizures as within and by said sixth section provided.”
_______________________________________________________________________________
President Donald J. Trump MUST now pull a full “Lincoln” and close the border, impose martial law, prosecute a war against the communist rebellion without a formal declaration, shred the Communist Manifesto and irrevocably extirpate all principles of communism in America, implement the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution and Bill of Rights including absolute freedom, absolute free enterprise, absolute free markets, and absolute private property including a fully constitutional dearth of taxation and regulation, eliminate the Departments of Labor, Education, Agriculture, Energy, HUD, and EPA, issue the “Deportation Proclamation” deporting all illegal aliens, past and present, including those who illegally pursued citizenship as criminal border crossers and “asylum” seekers who all made false and fraudulent claims of phantom, nonexistent persecution as foreign citizens with no U.S. rights, establish coherent voter qualifications by State legislatures per the Constitution, declare English the sole official language of the United States, suspend habeas corpus, smash opposition printing presses, networks, podcasts, social media platforms, etc., and throw anyone and everyone who opposes him in prison to Save the Union until America is placed squarely back on the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
@George: “President Donald J. Trump MUST now pull a full “Lincoln””
George, you vicious lying Marxist thug: you hate Trump with the heat of a thousand burning suns and lie about him endlessly every day. You hate him almost (or perhaps more) than you hate Lincoln for not “deporting” black Americans born in America after your party could no longer own them as property, as slaves.
So weekly, you post that Lincoln was actually a commie like Marx and Stalin whose theology you worship at. And that Trump should follow the lead of Lenin and Stalin, the commies whose Pravda you style your apparatchik attempts on.
Bezmenov warned us about fraudulent “constitutionalist” commies like you, George. You are a contemptible cheap fake commie American. At least sign an organ donor so we can hope you make some marginal contribution to this great country at some point in your otherwise meaningless failure of a life.
Yuri Bezmenov – A Brief Summary Of George’s Communist Ideological Subversion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJnRmvqTdEQ
721:58 07/12/2024FULL INTERVIEW with Yuri Bezmenov: The Four Stages of George’s Ideological Communist Subversion
“It’s the [law], stupid!”
– James Carville
___________________
In fact:
– The Constitution does not prohibit secession
– Secession is and was fully constitutional
– Lincoln must have been impeached and convicted for denying the constitutional right to secession to Southern States and committing multiple other flagrant crimes of high office
– Lincoln had no authority to commence a war of aggression (i.e. not common defense) against a legitimate and sovereign foreign nation
– Lincoln had no authority to impose martial law
– Lincoln had no authority to suspend habeas corpus
– Lincoln had no authority to confiscate private property and to “take” private property for public use without just compensation
– Lincoln had no authority to issue a “proclamation”
– Lincoln committed an egregious crime of vote tampering and fraud when he “fixed” the election of 1864 which would have ended his “Reign of Terror” against the United States.
– Lincoln had a duty to support and enforce all legislation that was duly passed
– Lincoln had a duty and legal obligation to secure the border and enforce immigration law – then the Naturalization Act of 1802 which was in full force and effect
– All subsequent acts of Lincoln and his socialist-cum-communist successors must have been and must be struck down and corrected including, but not limited to, the “Reconstruction Amendments” engendered by Karl Marx
_____________________________________________
[The workingmen of Europe] consider…that it fell to…Abraham Lincoln…to lead his country through…the RECONSTRUCTION of a social world.”
– Karl Marx Letter to Abraham Lincoln, 1865
________________________________________________
“These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert, to fleece the people.”
– Abraham Lincoln, from his first speech as an Illinois state legislator, 1837
_________________________________________________________________________________
“Everyone now is more or less a Socialist.”
– Charles Dana, managing editor of the New York Tribune, and Lincoln’s assistant secretary of war, 1848
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“The goal of Socialism is Communism.”
– Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
_________________________
“It’s the [law], stupid!”
– James Carville
Winner winner chicken dinner. Lincoln was a traitor and got exactly what he deserved.
…Liars like Litman need to do ‘Journalism 101 remediatiion’…but then again, can a rabid, ignoranti actually be rehabilitated from a very bad case of a$$holism????
He can write anything, anyway – as long as he doesn’t call it journalism
Jonathan: You are hardly the legal opinion writer to throw stones at Harry Litman. He has a POV that doesn’t coincide with yours but that doesn’t make him “one of the most unabashed lawfare warriors”.
For example, in many LA Times op eds, on MSNBC and in his podcasts, Litman made the point that the Mar-a-Lago docs case was the easiest to prosecute against DJT. Why? Because the former president stole top secret national defense docs and hid them from the government. It was a slam dunk case against the former president. DJT knew it and so did most legal experts, including Litman. And you even recognized the legal problems for DJT in a column when Jack Smith first indicted DJT.
But Judge Eileen Cannon, appointed by DJT and in his back pocket, took the advice of Clarence Thomas and dismissed the case–on the spurious pretext that Jack Smith was not properly appointed as special prosecutor. Smith appealed Cannon’s decision to the 11th Circuit where it now sits. Absent DJT’s election victory most legal experts believe the Court of Appeals would overturn Cannon’s decision and even appoint a new judge. But now all bets are off. After DJT gets his new AG the Mar-a-Lago case will be deep sixed. That’s a travesty of justice because DJT will not be held accountable for his flagrant violations of the law.
In resigning from the LA Times, Litman has pointed out the obvious. With DJT back in charge the LA times, MSNBC, CNN and the other corporate media don’t want to be on the outside looking in. They won’t cover DJT as hard as they did before because they fear retaliation by DJT and his FCC. DJT has already threatened to revoke the broadcast licenses of NBC and CBS because he calls them “fake news” outlets. So it’s no wonder that Litman is no longer welcome at the LA Times. The Chinese owner of the Times doesn’t want to cross swords with the new president who is well known for retribution against anyone who criticizes him. Under DJT the corporate media will not stray far from the “official line”.
None of this is good for a healthy democracy where criticism of government policies should be welcomed. It reminds me of what happened after Hitler took power. His minister of propaganda shut down independent newspapers critical of the Nazi regime. Any newspaper that did not adhere to the Nazi ideology was either prosecuted or had to leave the country.
So it is strange you would welcome Litman being forced to resign from the LA Times because, in your words, he practices “advocacy journalism”. Isn’t that something you do every day in your columns? But have no fear. It is clear that in the next four years you will toe the MAGA party line!
“the former president stole top secret national defense docs”. The trolls often repeat this lie, but that does not make is so. The President of the United States cannot “steal” national security documents. He has more than anyone to every classified document the executive branch holds.
After Trump office, the question was whether the Natioal Archivist, mobilizing the resources of the FBI, could unilaterally claim the right to take possession of some or all of Trump’s documents under the PRA. This issue was never resolved, but probably could have been resolved by negotiation if the Democrats had wanted it to be resolved.
The argument is especially absurd because SC Smith explicitly in court filings repeatedly asserted that he is NOT claiming that any documents illegitimately found their way to MAL.
That is part of the reason that Cannon could not dismiss the case on JW Vs. NARA grounds – atleast not before DOJ completely fleshes out its case.
You are further correct that the PRA is at the core of this. Though there is a separate classified document issue that also Tanks the case for very similar reasons.
So lets clarify some things regarding the PRA.
The PRA was passed because there was a fear after Watergate that Nixon would not be able to fund his library and that his documents might be lost.
In response Congress passed legislation that directed NARA to take CUSTODY of anything that the outgoing president did not choose to take with them.
NOTE the word CUSTODY – custody is NOT ownership.
The WH documents of a president belong to that president. it has ALWAYS been that way.
The PRA specifies that the president can choose to take documents with them – the law provides a set of criteria for that choice.
The Courts have UNIFORMLY read the criteria in the PRA as not binding on the president – because if the criteria were binding the PRA would be unconstitutional.
While most of us have focused on JW vs. NARA as that is both the newest case and the most directly equivalent. Those on the left are deliberately deceptive in pretending that JW v. NARA is a outlier. There are myriads of cases since the late 70’s that address aspects of this.
They ALL run ONE WAY.
Presidents can claim whatever WH docs they wish as personal property.
Even those documents in NARA’s custody are STILL the property of the EX president and the current administration MUST go to court to ACCESS them.
Though as a rule only the weakest claim is needed top gain ACCESS.
ACCESS is NOT posession.
Dennis McIntyre is not dissimilar to a wounded dog with head injuries after a traffic accident running in circles barking incoherently in a state of utter confusion.
You lost little doggie, and you remain lost.
Someone call the Humane Society—have it retrieve Dennis’ sister Gigi also—and provide them both solace and comfort.
“Someone call the Humane Society—have it retrieve Dennis’ sister Gigi also—and provide them both solace and comfort. ”
The Humane Society should then conduct an evaluation of whether their condition requires euthanasia.
@Dennis: “Jonathan: You are hardly the legal opinion writer to throw stones at Harry Litman.”
Dennis, you are hardly a credible source to either defend the demagoguing liar Harry Litman. Or to defend the vicious police state fascist criminals Joe Biden and Barack Obama. Both of whom did incredible damage to classified national defense intelligence with years of felony mishandling of that data.
Clinton/Obama/Biden were the best deep intelligence moles Putin, Communist China, Cuba and the rest of our enemies could have ever dreamed of having.
Both of your totalitarian presidents were eyeballs deep in years of crime emanating from their offices in the White House YEARS before Trump ran for office.
And rather than post your outrage about their criminality and abuse of their offices, you smiled and cheered for every minute of it.
You don’t care about years of REAL crime coming from the White House. You intend to lie about DJT’S alleged crimes from the White House..
This is one of those few times when it is actually educational to read how delusional Dennis and leftist Democrats are. As the good professor has noted, MSM is losing audience/subscriptions. Since the election, MSM have lost close to and in some cases over 50% of their audience in the coveted 18-54 year old demograph. Dennis tries and fails to spin it that MSM does not want to be on the outside of a second Trump admin, looking in. News flash Dennis, what this election has proven is that like you, MSM has become irrelevant. People have stopped watching MSM. They are switching MSM off. Neilson ratings tell us the story. The WaPo bottom line cannot be sugar coated, it is in the red. No one is reading them. NPR had to lay off some 10% of their staff. MSNBC is on the for sale block. Elon Musk has joked about buying them. Joe Rogan volunteer to take Rachel Maddow, who’s ratings are also in that illustrious 50% drop, time slot, will wear the pant suit, the glasses and continue to lie to Americans. More and more people are switching off MSM and their DNC propaganda for alternative media. They are willing to pay for quality journalism, something that MSM is NOT delivering. I know I do. I have a paid subscription to The Free Press.
What is really funny is Dennis tries and fails to spin it as if none of the COVID, Twitter files and all the evidence of collusion between the Biden admin, the DOJ/FBI to censor anyone who strayed from the COVID “official line.” That it is not good for a healthy democracy where criticism of government policies should be welcomed. You know. That was the original intent of the media, the fourth estate in our Republic. To hold the government accountable. But here we are. With a MSM that is completely and totally in the grip and grasp as the official propaganda machine for the DNC. They look a heck a lot more like the Nazi regime. But there is is good news! Over half of Americans reject that propaganda. How? They voted for Trump. They voted for Republicans in the House and the Senate. They switched off MSM. They canceled their subscriptions. They are turning to alternative media as they no longer want DNC propaganda. And as Americans, that is the way to do it! Dont vote for them! Dont support them. Dont watch them. Cancel the subscriptions. Let the free markets ring!!! If and when MSM gets a clue, might be after some massive lay offs, staff reductions, pay cuts and a return to objective journalism, MSM just might win back some Americans. I would not hold my breath. But it is going to be fun to watch in the meantime! A year or two from now, what will MSM even look like? A consolidation of various MSM outlets into one or two holdings, that has a equally small audience? What about some of MSM stars of yesteryear? Will they no longer be on the air but meeking out their sorry existence like Litman is attempting on Substack, a alternative to MSM site?
How marvelous!
“.[Litman] has a POV that doesn’t coincide with yours but that doesn’t make him “one of the most unabashed lawfare warriors”.
Correct – it is not holding a different view that makes in an “unabashed lawfare warrior” – it is holding a view that advocates unabashedly for lawfare.
He is no different from those on the right that are seeking revenge against the left right now.
There DOES need to be a house cleaning.
There does need to be consequences.
But the house cleaning and consequences need to be driven by the ACTUAL law, not by politics and revenge.
I absolutely want a deep house cleaning.
I also want those who violated the law to face consequences
But they should face consequences because they violated the law, not because they are ideologically on the left.
“Litman made the point that the Mar-a-Lago docs case was the easiest to prosecute against DJT.”
And he is OBVIOUSLY WRONG ON THE LAW.
I have pointed out the decision in JW vs. NARA dozens of times to you.
There are TWO critical aspects of that decision.
The FIRST is that was the state of caselaw in 2020 – and THAT means that the burden of trying to change that rests on NARA, FBI DOJ.
If The Biden admin wanted access or posession of documents classified or NOT that A former president posessed, they were REQUIRED to go to court to do so.
That is the FIRST step. One they NEVER took.
Had they done so there are 3 possible outcomes.
1). The most likely – the Biden Admin would have been granted ACCESS but not POSESSION of material posessed by a former president.
2). Had they sought posession they would likely have LOST and they could have then appealed and eventually had the sipreme court decide.
3). Or had they managed to judge shop and get a judge that rejected JW. Vs NARA – Trump would have appealed and again it likely would have been decided by the supreme court.
All of the above MATTER – and that is why the MAL case is about LAWFARE.
Missing from Litman – and even often Turley is the understanding that at the core of this is the constitutional seration anf felegation of powers between congress and the exectutive.
The Reason that JW. Vs NARA was decided as it was, is because any other reading of the PRA infringes on the powers that the constitution gives nearly exclusively to the president.
JW. vs. NARA is in the context of a political fight between a conservative watchdog group – Judicial Watch, and the less conservative Clinton being defended by the Obama administration.
But the ISSUE that decided the outcome was the powers the constitution delegates exclusively to the president.
I am not personally happy that Judge ABJ decided that ex president Clinton could keep classified information in his sock drawer.
But ultimately she decided correctly based on the constitution that we currently have.
While JW. Vs. NARA is NOT a supreme court decision, and it is not binding outside of the DC circuit.
It is both correctly decided and it is certainly within ex president Trump’s legal and civil rights to rely on it.
I beleive that you need to change the constitution to change that.
But at the very least – the Biden admin needed to GO TO COURT.
The existing caselaw was against them – and still is.
NARA, DOJ, FBI, Biden and the courts are NOT free to ignore that.
In Gideon the courts decided that the bill of rights text guaranteed a defendant in a criminal case has the right to a lawyer, and they right exists even if they can not afford one.
Is DOJ FBI, The Biden admin or my local courts free to ignore that requirement – because they think that the caselaw is wrong ?
I personally think that JW vs. NARA was decided correctly. But I did not think that in 2013. But even if I still beleived JW vs. NARA was decided incorrectly,
it is STILL LAWFARE to ignore JW Vs. NARA and concoct a criminal case against someone because they relied on the rights that the current caselaw gives them.
No the MAL case was not EVER strong. It has been garbage from the start.
And if you do not like expresidents keeping documents classified or not from their presidency – then you either need to take the issue to SCOTUS and get them to reverse JW VS NARA,
Which is HIGHLY unlikely, or you need to amend the constitution.
I would note the core presidential immunity decision was 9-0 – and that decision has direct bearing on the classified documents case.
Because the core issue in both was the constitutionally exclusive powers of the presidency and the extent to which congress can through legislation control those powers.
While I think SCOTUS screwed up the immunity decision – not because presidents do not have vast immuntiy – they MUST. but because the constraints on presidential immunity are impeachment and removal – not SCOTUS or other courts. SCOTUS correctly found that presidents have vast immunity. They INCORRECLY determined that the courts where the proper place to weigh the limits of that immunity.
Regardless JW VS NARA and the MAL classified Docs case is even more fundimentally about infringing on executive powers, because national security is the exclusive domain of the president.
And it MUST be whether the president is Trump or Biden or Obama.
“Because the former president stole top secret national defense docs and hid them from the government.”
And yet that is CLEARLY not what happened.
There are litterally dozens of cases since 1972 where the current administration has sought ACCESS to the documents of a prior president.
Several things are universally true.
FIRST – unlike the Biden/Trump case, the current administration has GONE TO COURT to gain ACCESS.
Why ? Because all prior executives understood – the documents of a prior president are the property of that prior president NOT the government.
The courts have need universally given them ACCESS.
But there is not a single case in the entire history of the united state in which the courts have EVER given POSSESSION of the documents of a prior president to anyone other than that president.
Whether you Litman or the left like it or not Trump OWNS the documents he took with him.
In point of fact he also OWNS the WH documents that he allowed NARA to take custody of – something ALSO fully supported by the case law.
“It was a slam dunk case against the former president.”
Only by those like you who disregard the law and the constitution.
“DJT knew it and so did most legal experts, including Litman.”
That would be the same legal experts that have been WRONG about every single other one of these absurd lawfare efforts against Trump.
The idiotically stupid emoluments cases were all dismissed.
The idiotically stupid A14S3 case was ultimately tossed – 9-0.
The idiotic claims that presidents do not have criminal immunity was ultimately tossed 9-0.
What exactly have all these legal experts you cite been RIGHT about ?
“And you even recognized the legal problems for DJT in a column when Jack Smith first indicted DJT.”
Correct – even Turley has been atleast mildly wrong on the MAL issue.
Though I would note that Turley has NEVER to my knowledge said that the Documents case was a slam dunk.
In fact he has been highly skeptical of the base documents case and has generally found there was a stronger case for obstruction.
The problem their being that obstructing justice actually required DOJ/FBI/NARA to be following the law.
They were NOT.
“But Judge Eileen Cannon, appointed by DJT and in his back pocket, took the advice of Clarence Thomas and dismissed the case–on the spurious pretext that Jack Smith was not properly appointed as special prosecutor.”
Cannon and Thomas are supported by TWO former US AG’s – AG Mease and AG Mukowski both with far more legal stature than nutjobs like Litman.
While I think that Cannon shoudl have dismissed the case on the substance – that the documents are constitutionally the property of the ex-president and that NARA/DOJ/FBI can go to court for ACCESS to them, but that the right of POSESSION belongs exclusiovely to the ex-president – whoever that may be.
Regardless the FACT is that Smith (and Mueller) were CLEARLY unconstitutionally apoointed (on MULTIPLE grounds).
“Smith appealed Cannon’s decision to the 11th Circuit where it now sits. Absent DJT’s election victory most legal experts believe the Court of Appeals would overturn ”
This would be the same legal experts – like Litman that have been WRONG by the numbers about EVERY Trump case.
There is a reason it is called LAWFARE – because it is basically the extension of TDS to the law and constitution.
It is the idiocy that Trump is the one that is the threat – and a threat so great that extra legal and constitutional measures are justified.
“Cannon’s decision and even appoint a new judge.”
Wishful thinking. Cannon’s decision was long enough ago that had the 11th cir ct of appeals wanted to rule they could have.
I would suggest that you need some different legal “experts” to reply on – ones that are actually correct.
Had Trump lost the election – I think it was less than 50:50 that the 11th Cir would have reversed Cannon.
While there is an unresolved issue regarding the appointment of special counsel’s – The appointment of Durham, and Weis and pretty much every Special counsel ever is unconstitutional. At the same time we do actually need some means to conduct investigations and prosecutions when there is a conflict with DOJ/ WH.
But Smith and Mueller were not even close calls. They were NOT appointed by the President, they were NOT confirmed by congress, they were NOT inferior offices of the united states, and they were NOT lateral transfers of people who Were appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate.
There is little doubt that SCOTUS was going uphold Cannon’s decision. What is less predictable is whether SCOTUS would uphold the appointments of SC that were US Attorney’s immediately prior to appointment.
There is about zero chance that the 11th cir was going to remove cannon – had they tried to do so SCOTUS would have bitch slapped them.
Removing a judge from a case is an extraordinary step. You can not do so merely because you do not like the decisions of that judge.
“But now all bets are off.”
All bets have ALWAYS been off. Har Harris been elected – it is HIGHLY LIKELY all these cases would have been dropped. Because they are all LOOSERS, and it is better to drop them than lose them and set precedent.
“After DJT gets his new AG the Mar-a-Lago case will be deep sixed. ”
Your not paying attention – the MAL case has ALREADY been Deep Sixed.
“That’s a travesty of justice because DJT will not be held accountable for his flagrant violations of the law.”
Correction – DJT will never be held accountable for Pissing off the left.
But the LEFT WILL be held accountable for LAWFARE.
“In resigning from the LA Times, Litman has pointed out the obvious. With DJT back in charge the LA times, MSNBC, CNN and the other corporate media don’t want to be on the outside looking in. They won’t cover DJT as hard as they did before because they fear retaliation by DJT and his FCC. DJT has already threatened to revoke the broadcast licenses of NBC and CBS because he calls them “fake news” outlets. So it’s no wonder that Litman is no longer welcome at the LA Times. The Chinese owner of the Times doesn’t want to cross swords with the new president who is well known for retribution against anyone who criticizes him. Under DJT the corporate media will not stray far from the “official line”.”
Obvious BS. LAT … all did INCREDIBLY well during Trump’s first term.
While you are absolutely correct that the MSM is in DEEP trouble. That is not because of some threat by Trump or the FCC.
That is because unlike 2017 people are NOT clocking back to the MSM for their endless anti-Trump rants.
The MSM is the boy who cried wolf.
You are absolutely correct that the MSM must change or DIE, But the threat is NOT from Trump. It is from their own viewers.
Gutfeld has 3 times the ratings of ALL Fallon, Colbert, … combined.
Advertisers pay for eyeballs.
LAT, NYT, WAPO have had a LONG decline in viewers. The Owner of the LAT and WaPo are TRYING to send a message to nut jobs like Litman that they can say whatever nonsense they want – so long as they SELL PAPERS. But when they have lost so much credibility that no onw reads them – they can Change their approach or LEAVE. Litman Left,
He is off on Substack now. Which is fine, I suspect there are enough head in the sand left wing nuts like you to provide him with a comfortable living.
But he will NOT have the stature he had at LAT – before he ruined his credibility.
“None of this is good for a healthy democracy where criticism of government policies should be welcomed. ”
ROFL
Really ? From you and your ilk – who repeated have been censoring anyone who disagrees with you ?
Regardless there will be PLENTY of criticism of Trump over the next 4 years.
But much less of that will come from left wing loons suffering from TDS whose core argumet is Trump did it therefore it is wrong.
Regardless Litman has moved to Substack. There are MANY very influential people on Substack, Weis, Stone, Greenwald, Taibbi, Shellenberger, …..
Litman COULD be incredibly successful as an independent journalist – IF he can attract an audience – but as the LAT, NYT, WAPO, and MSM are discovering holding an audience requires NOT lying to them over and over.
The magnitude of Litman’s success on Substack will be determined by his credibility. Just as LAT was introuble because it bet on the credibility of too many like Litman.
“It reminds me of what happened after Hitler took power. His minister of propaganda shut down independent newspapers critical of the Nazi regime. Any newspaper that did not adhere to the Nazi ideology was either prosecuted or had to leave the country.”
I expect lots of changes in the MSM – but not because Trump shuts anyone down, but because adverrtisers will not pay for journalist who have lost their audience.
Can we dispense with the stupid Hitler nonsense – it is the LEFT today that has been drowning in censorship.
If Trump actually did to you what you did to him, then yes we could see the Government quietly censoring the MSM.
But that will not happen – because it does not need to.
The MSM – people like Litman and LAT are failing right NOW under a fawning left wing regime. They are failing because no one thinks they are credible.
I have no idea if Litman was shown the door or chose to leave.
I do know that he is gone because LAT is not going to continue to push faux left wing nut nonsense that only a tiny number of readers like you are interested in.
There is a market for left wing loons – like you and Litman.
It is a tiny market not capable of supporting a paper like LAT.
LAT (and the rest of the yellow left wing press) is failing right now – not because Trump’s FCC is going after them – but because even under a fawning left wing regime they have lost readership because they have lost credibility.
The markets ALREADY have spoken. And at LAT and Wapo and Comcast we are STARTING to see those businesses that do not want to go under listening.
Litman is being Forced to resign because
“You Don’t matter anymore”
Dennis, you, Litman and all your purported legal experts have been 100% wrong on all these cases.
Litman is out as no one beleives LAT becauxe it has been wrong so much and Litman is a factor in that.
This is not about Trump or the left, or censorship
It is because claiming you are a legal expert havefter repeated back to back 9-0 SCOTUS rejections of your claims is farcical.
Conversely though Turley tends to leave himself a fari amount of wiggle room, he is right the overwhelming majority of the time.
But as we are addressing “legal expertise”.
Nearly All the posters on this blog that you consider to be part of the cult of trump have not only a far better track record than Litman,
but a better record than Turley.
I have been RIGHT about what the supreme court would decide almost perfectly.
I have SOMETIMES been wrong on their reasoning.
I have alo been wrong in instances where they have ducked difficult cases using standing.
But when SCOTUS actually makes a decision – I am nearly always right about who will prevail.
THAT is the ACTUAL criteria for being a legal expert.
Litman and those you cite have been wrong about most everything.
Being constantly wrong means you are NOT an expert.
You may be the champion of some legal ideology,
But you are most definitely NOT a legal expert.
Being an actual expert requires being RIGHT nearly all the time.
* Littman leaving…good for him. Let me know when the view shuts down , when old movies are restored and not jimmied for DEI, when music is restored and Isaac Perlman is originals arecavailablevand all other old music isn’t off key, when music no longer reflects the droning rap thoughts of droning flat lined minds and yowling cat fights….
Let me know
So long…