"The files will contain the sausage making of various
political issues that can be cherrypicked to destroy careers (not just
Biden’s). Of course Trump people want to expose everything Biden did as a
senator. Media outlets are salivating to get into the papers for their own
reasons: can you imagine the stories detailing rivalries from the thirty years
Biden was in the Senate? It would rival the hay made off the stolen emails from
the Democratic National Committee in 2016 which, after all, revealed nothing
illegal, but embarrassed Hillary Clinton and the DNC....
"The pressure on Biden to release his papers strikes me
as the bad faith use of an important political conversation to score political
points. It is vital to uncover the truth of what happened between Biden and
Reade, but that’s not what’s going on here. Observers are demanding the release
of material that has been donated in good faith for future researchers, to
uncover information that we know full well would not be stored there. But it
would certainly weaken Biden as a candidate....Please follow me here: I am not
speaking of the claims of Ms. Reade, which are a separate conversation. I am
talking about the use of her story to control our political narrative. The
attempt to get Biden to jump through hoops Trump ignores is classic
gaslighting. It keeps Biden on the defensive and makes sure he is reinforcing
Trump’s narrative, thus strengthening Trump even as Biden tries to carve out
his own campaign. It is precisely what the Trump campaign, abetted by the
media, did in 2016."
The comment is from "Letters from an American," by Heather Cox Richardson, who sends a daily letter on our current dilemmas: You can sign up for her free newsletter at heathercoxrichardson.substack.
I guess she lost me by using "sausage making" and "cherry picking" in the first sentence.
ReplyDeleteI also don't know why it is "vital" to find out what happened" between Reade and Biden. I sure don't care.
And there is nothing new about Trump's m.o. of deflecting criticism by going on the attack.
Maybe private papers are an aphrodisiac to some investigative journalists hoping to find private scandals that prove ... what?
I like to think the covid19 outbreak and the debacle that is Trump has hit the reset button on how most Americans set priorities in choosing a political candidate.
It seems to me that a 30-year public record of position papers and Congressional voting would be a fine place to start analyzing who Joe Biden is.
Can we think of the sausage making and cherry picking as an old Hungarian recipe for a juicy stew?
DeleteJean, I definitely agree with your last sentence. And while we're at it, Trump also has a record going back 30 years (though not of being in public service). It tells who he is as well. I hope it will also be subject to analysis.
Delete"Juicy stew." My Gramma used to make Michigan cherry glaze for her ham. It would probably be good on sausage. Man, I sure am getting hungry. But looks like pork shortages are on the horizon, and the news indicates beef and pork hoarding are revving up.
DeleteAbout what happened between Reade and Biden, Margaret nailed it in the previous thread about Biden when she said, "If such charges will stand up in court and a district attorney will bring the case, then we'll have something to think about...til...then"
ReplyDeleteI believe Heather Cox Richardson is right when she says the story is Trump's attempt to control the political narrative. Of course he is using the 2016 playbook, because it worked. But things are different now. I'm hoping that fighting yesterday's war is a losing strategy.
I put my mail-in ballot in the post office box before Trump and the Repubs exterminate the post office. At least I got my Bernie vote in. But the Dimmycrat voters has spoken. Go, sleepy Joe. Sleepy Joe at least won't tell us to shoot up Pine Sol.
ReplyDeleteAbout the mail in ballots, what is the deal with the Base trying to discourage their use? I'm seeing all these social media posts, saying, "If you can distance at the grocery store, you can distance at the voting place. Say no to voting by mail!" What difference does it make? It's not like Democrats are the only ones who can vote by mail. About two thirds of our state's voters who usually turn out have already requested their mail in ballots. Not that our May 12 primary is going to matter much. But it surely makes sense at this time to do it by mail. And the ship has sailed, young people like our kids have been doing it for the past several elections. Some states are sticky anout you have to have a "reason". Well, now everyone has a reason!
DeleteMail-in ballots = voter fraud! Trump said it, ergo it is solid gold wisdom. What I find incredible is that they are screaming voter fraud ABOUT AN ELECTION THEY WON.
DeleteBrandon Hall, one Lansing protest rally organizers and Trumper, was convicted of election fraud in 2018. I guess when you're a crook, it's easier to believe everyone else is. The crud. https://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/2016/12/a_month_in_jail_for_gop_politi.html
We in California have had the right to request, on a on-time basis, mail-in ballots and then automatically receive them for each and every election. I live across the street from my polling place and still mail in my ballot. The only disadvantage is that, if something happens at the last minute to cause me to want to change my vote, then it is too late. Small price to pay for convenience and, this year, social distancing.
DeleteI think some people have this desire for the Norman Rockwell moment of showing up at the school gym or church social hall that is their polling place and having the poll workers, whom they know, match their name off the voting list. My mom and my grandma used to be poll workers, from opposite parties. Our polling place is the local Eagles Club, the workers are parishioners. But we are doing mail-in this time. Our kids, who live in Omaha, have no such nostalgia. Urban voting is a hassle and a pain, and no one is going to offer you a donut. They always do mail in, if they vote at all. They would do online if they could.
Delete"If you can distance at the grocery store, you can distance at the voting place." If that's what they are saying, they lose. Almost no one keeps his distance at the grocery store.
ReplyDeleteI think what Richardson is getting at is that Biden's papers, which may one day be a happy hunting grounds for historians (or not), could be mined for other "issues" that Biden would have to "explain," but, of course, no explanation is possible when there is an "issue," as BenghaziBenghaziBenghazi clearly demonstrated.
But if Joe does want to be a stand-up guy, here is a deal we should all go for: Access to Biden's papers in return for access to The Don's tax returns.
BTW, now that the cork is out, the oh-so-even-handed Rs who insisted that Biden be treated like Brett Kavanaugh can climb down from their high perches. And remember Kavanaugh is now a justice for life.
Breaking news! (as they always say when it isn't).
ReplyDeleteI can't tell you who gave it to me, but it is said to hot from the Biden papers at the U of D. Cut & Paste.
https://youtu.be/TkU1ob_lHCw
This has been a bonanza for novelty song writers! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPDPzbLFeP4
DeleteLOL! Both songs are great.
DeleteSo well executed.
DeleteWhile I try not to underestimate the potential of Trump and his campaign to be nefarious, this Biden / Reade imbroglio is what salespeople call a "bluebird" - a gift which fell into the Trump campaign's lap through no planning or effort of their own.
ReplyDeleteI don't blame the Trump campaign at all for seeking to exploit it. Any presidential campaign from either party would do the same.
The idea that the Trump campaign is somehow coordinating or directing the media's interest in the story doesn't seem very believable. Trump and his minions have been at war with the mainstream media for 4+ years now. That reputable news outlets are pursuing the story is to their credit; presumably, there are very few individuals in those organizations who would wish Trump to be re-elected.
It seems the perception right now is that Biden and his campaign are stonewalling efforts to review his archive at the University of Delaware. Whether that's proper or not, I don't know; but it's got to be catnip for investigative reporters. Heaven knows what's in those archives; but it seems to me that the appropriate criterion for determining whether or not the contents should be considered off-limits to reporters is: does making these documents public compromise national security? That opening the archive would make future historians' work more complicated, or might embarrass friends or colleagues (or family members), strike me as a considerably less compelling justifications for keeping the record sealed. Biden has a very long track record, and when one runs for president, that record, all of it, becomes fair game for public vetting. Surely these risks were top of mind for Biden when he was weighing whether or not to run.
I suppose Biden shouldn't feel compelled to reveal the contents if he doesn't want to; but then one can hardly blame the public for concluding that he has been less than fully forthcoming. Nor would I blame the Trump campaign for feeding that public perception.
"That opening the archive would make future historians' work more complicated, or might embarrass friends or colleagues (or family members), strike me as a considerably less compelling justifications for keeping the record sealed."
DeleteThat is truly barbershop thinking. There wouldn't be any archives if the possessors of the records couldn't set the opening date. Everybody would shred everything private (as Trump tries to do with records that, by law, are supposed to go to the National Archive) if they knew their beloved colleagues were going to find out what they think about them while there is still time for payback. Even Dorothy Day's papers, which went to Marquette University after she died, had a date certain for opening. And the Vatican gets to sit on its diplomatic records for more than 50 years. Simply put, there would be no archives if someone could get into them anytime. That would not only be "inconvenient" to historians, it would be injurious to history.
I'll stand by my previous offer: Joe's notes on No Child Left Behind and whatever else for Trump's tax returns. Seeing the tax returns might embarrass The Don's family, friends or colleagues, but that strikes me as a considerably less compelling justification for keeping the record sealed if they could tell us who he owes money to and what is the actual rate a billionaire (if he is one) pays at.
"That is truly barbershop thinking."
DeleteIf only! You should see my hair!
Seems there could be ways to allow the archives to be gone through by a trusted third party in search of items specific to Reade's complaint, without necessarily airing all the dirty laundry or letting reporters track mud all over them.
I'd be in favor of your offer. In fact, I don't know why Trump releasing his tax returns needs to be contingent on anything.
Yes, my hair, too. And I had to pass my shuttered barber shop on the way to the Post Office! The trauma was so great, I took a different route home.
DeleteWhat would be in Biden's papers, though? A diary saying, "I took a shot at one of my aides today. Dumb. I'll probably get in trouble for that the first, second or maybe third time I run for president"?
"What would be in Biden's papers, though?"
DeleteAs he said about eight times in that interview with Mika Brzezinski, he expects that there is nothing in there. I don't know why Brzezinski kept after him so hard about it - someone must have planted the idea in her ear that it needs to be looked at.
Speaking of haircuts (a subject that is driving me crazy. I tried the Bertolt Brecht look. My wife informed me I am NOT Bertolt Brecht.), did anyone else stay til the end of "60 Minutes" last night? Leslie Stahl thanked the hospital folks who took care of her Covid-19, and it looked to me like Leslie really needed her hairdresser's scissors. First time I've noticed that on TV. I assume that people with agents also have hairdressers, but maybe not.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete