The conventional wisdom: Syria, Alex Jones

Scott Ritter, 2006

ITEM: Mark Evanier wrote:

“Once upon a time, weapons inspector Scott Ritter warned us that Saddam Hussein did not possess Weapons of Mass Destruction and we should not go to war there on the belief that he did. Ritter was widely denounced as foolish and gullible, and his warnings were ignored. He is now warning that Trump’s claims of chemical weapons in Syria are a lie that could be used to justify another war build on a false premise. Maybe someone oughta at least consider that this man could be right again.”

There are people who will dismiss what Scott Ritter says, based on issues having nothing to do with his expertise. But I heard him speak in June 2002 at an Albany United Methodist Society dinner. He said what was going to happen in the lead-up to the Iraq war in March 2003, and he was 100% correct.

ITEM: States refuse Trump commission request for U.S. voter data, as well they should. But it was the conservative Red State who writes that it is “simply another conspiracy theory that he’s bound and determined to use his office to pursue.”

ITEM: One of my good buds blasted NBC for the Megyn Kelly interview with the vile Alex Jones, “almost certainly the most prolific conspiracy theorist in contemporary America,” calling it “noxious behavior in service of the dollar.” And I didn’t see it that way at all.

I thought she pressed him on his bs. I’m not sure whether she “vivisected the bloated conspiracy hog”, but she gave it a go.

Does Alex Jones merit an interview? I like to know the enemy, so I say yes. And perhaps only Kelly, among the MSM folk, could have gotten it, a “Nixon goes to China” scenario.

Part of the problem was the tease from the previous week, which gave some the impression that the former FOX “News” personality was going to be buddy-buddy with this schmuck. I understand that, as a result of the backlash before the piece even aired, NBC re-edited it to be “tougher.”

ITEM: When a certain orange person said, “Comey better hope there are no tapes,” and then said there were no tapes, that is not a lie. (Unless there ARE tapes, in which case…) It was merely him saying words. It was an empty threat that, by itself, won’t reach the level of obstruction of justice.

The man should be held accountable for every ACTUAL falsehood he’s perpetrated, and they are SO many. But let’s pick the real prevarications.

ITEM: I was SO oversaturated with email, from both sides, regarding the expensive House race in Georgia’s 6th CD. And as If Jon Ossoff Wins… or Loses notes, the response to the outcome was predictable.

Advertisements

James Comey testimony as entertainment

I guess I’m not zeitgeisty enough – no, I don’t think it’s a word – because the anticipation over former FBI director James Comey’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on June 8 made me oddly uncomfortable.

As an old poli sci major who sat in front the TV set for HOURS taking in all the nuance of the various committees investigating Richard Nixon’s Watergate scandal back in the 1970s, I suppose I should be happy that the American public is interested in a civics lesson.

But it was more like theater, specifically a movie theater, where comedian/late night host Stephen Colbert is seen eating from a bag of popcorn. As the Boston Globe put it, “Comey’s testimony puts Washington in party mode.” As some conservative website noted, “The hearing was treated like a major sporting event by D.C. locals, who lined up to gain entrance to local establishments for standing-room only viewing parties.”

And it wasn’t limited to the District of Columbia. “Festivities” seemed to be particularly popular on the West Coast, with folks at bars in time for the 7 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time event.

At the end of the day, almost no one was convinced of anything they hadn’t been thinking before except that Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) seemed befuddled. Those who dislike the regime think that impeachment is just around the corner. Those on the other side believe they’re, in the words of Lou Dobbs, “No crime, No evidence.” Comey was just a “disgruntled employee.” I saw that specific description a lot.

At the end of the day, it’s what Bob Woodward, Washington Post editor, and one of the reporters who helped bring down Nixon said on CBS News This Morning: “We know 5, maybe 10 percent of what we will know” when the various investigations are over.

No, there was no smoking gun, yet. Nor was the regime “vindicated”; saw THAT word a lot, especially on the Twitter feed #MAGA, where I actually read:
“He is bringing back respect and class to this country
#proudAmerican #TRUMPPENCE2020 #MAGA #BUILDTHEWALL #YESTRAVELBAN #DTS#JOBSJOBSJOBS #OBAMASFORPRISON2017 #CLINTONSFORPRISON2017 #STOPTHELEAKS#STOPFAKENEWS #CNNVERYFAKENEWS #MSNBCFAKENEWS #CBSFAKENEWS #ABCFAKENEWS#NYTIMESFAKENEWS #WASHINGTONPOSTFAKENEWS #LATIMESFAKENEWS #USATODAYFAKENEWS#GOOGLEFAKENEWS #YAHOOFAKENEWS”

Regardless of the results of the investigations, his secret isn’t that he lies. It’s that he crowds out the truth. “The question isn’t whether you’re winning the argument — it’s whether you’re dominating and driving the coverage of the argument.”

I will acknowledge that clearing the room of other people, then being asked by a person in a superior position if you would consider taking a particular action reeks to high heaven, to my mind.

Watergate took a LONG time to unravel, over two years from the break-in to the resignation. This Russia influence/election rigging thing is going to take awhile too. It won’t be solved with a few hours of testimony, but people want more rapid gratification when it simply not how these things work. Or, as some folks interviewed on NBC News this week acknowledged, “It’s too complicated.”

I think, like those in the slow cooking movement, we ought to take our time and let the facts simmer, with the evidence determining the results of the investigation. Because no one still supporting the regime will convince those who don’t of a damn thing, and pretty much vice versa.