Ancient history

Mueller reveals tenuous link between Manafort charges and Trump by Byron York – “It’s often been observed that special counsel Robert Mueller, assigned to investigate alleged Trump-Russia collusion in the 2016 presidential campaign, has yet to charge anyone with a crime involving Trump-Russia collusion in the 2016 presidential campaign.”

“In any event, Mueller has not suggested that Donald Trump was involved in any of the actions outlined in the Manafort charges. The two Lender D loans are, apparently, the only connection between the Trump campaign and the broad array of criminal activity, some of it more than a decade old, alleged in the Manafort indictments. And Trump himself played no role in it.

Was a special counsel needed for that?

How Perkins Coie Plan to Get Congressman Jim Jordan by R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. – “The “inappropriate” behavior supposedly occurred 30 years ago.”

“Ohio State has hired a legal firm, Perkins Coie, to investigate Jordan. But wait. Did not Perkins Coie work for Hillary Clinton on the dirty dossier? Is not Jordan from his House committee investigating such matters? How did Ohio State settle on a law firm employed by Hillary to investigate Jordan, and why has no one suggested another law firm.

A number of wrestlers have come forward and testified on Jordan’s behalf, though they are rarely mentioned in the press.

I remember my first conversation with Jordan over dinner a few years back. Yes, he wanted to talk politics, but first he wanted to compare Ohio State’s training program with Indiana’s swimming program and he was particularly interested in our coach, the innovative Doc Councilman, swimming’s greatest coach. As the unnamed witness said, even after 30 years Jordan was “all business.” To a two-time NCAA champion, training came even before politics.

How is it that we have arrived at this bizarre point in our history? We are harassing a world-class athlete about vaporous charges going back 30 years when he was an assistant coach. Even if the charges are true, it is not clear what he could have done about them. Thirty years ago, things could not have been more different. When Michael Alf says his teammates “joked” about their randy doctor I have a good idea what he is talking about. Does anyone born after, say, 2000 have any idea?

Yet we cannot expect clear thinking from today’s Democrats. Jordan has become a powerful figure in investigating the “deep state’s” misbehavior.

Maybe the left should answer some questions instead of Kavanaugh by Jack Hellner – “Greg Sargent of the Washington Post, Senator Chuck Schumer, and others on the left are trying to trash President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, in as many ways possible.”

“The first question that Sargent, Schumer and other leftists of this state of mind should be asked is which law Trump broke? What’s more, how would some garden-variety stealing-or-lying charge, whatever it is, somehow make it to the Supreme Court? And more to the point, how would that cause any Supreme Court justice to let him off? Supreme Court justices are independent. They answer to no one. It appears that these Democrats, including the media, are still pretending that there was Russian collusion.

I would then ask Schumer why Obama got off without being charged with any crimes, since we know he illegally spied on thousands, and illegally communicated with Hillary Clinton on a non-secure personal computer.

Jazz Shaw has two columns in this vein. Democrats plunge forward with bill to abolish ICE – “Despite numerous warnings from within their own ranks, several Democratic representatives in the House are moving forward with a bill to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).” Dems to Kavanaugh: If we lose, you must recuse … on Mueller – “Senate Democrats signaled yesterday that Brett Kavanaugh should prepare for the kitchen-sink treatment with a ridiculous demand for a recusal.”

“None of that applies to Kavanaugh in this instance. He has done no work on the Mueller investigation, nor did he do any work for Donald Trump either before, during, or after the campaign. Democrats are ginning up a connection to Mueller in an attempt to smear Kavanaugh, in part by deliberately distorting Kavanaugh’s advice to Congress on the potential for limited presidential immunity, six years before Trump ever decided to run for office.

The only recusals needed here are those by Booker, Blumenthal, Schumer, and anyone else who peddles this noxious nonsense.

Schumer: It’s time for Supreme Court nominees to dump the Ginsburg standard and tell us their views on legal hot buttons by Allahpundit – “This makes twice now that he’s been hobbled by a Democrat setting a judicial precedent which seemed clever at the time, only to have it detonate later right in the party’s faces. In fairness to him, though, this isn’t the most desperate thing he’s done in his “throw everything at the wall and see what sticks” attempt to block the nominee.”

Somebody At DOJ Isn’t Telling The Truth About Rosenstein’s Subpoena Threats Against Congressional Staff by Mollie Hemingway – “Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein denied under oath he had threatened to subpoena congressional aides’ communications, but a DOJ spokesman had already admitted that was true in statements to multiple news outlets, claiming it was justified.”

“The media praised Rosenstein for his handling of Jordan’s question, particularly his pedantic claim that phone calls can’t be subpoenaed, which elicited laughter from the gallery. It was obvious that Rosenstein was familiar with the media report his office confirmed, if spun to be less disconcerting, and that the term phone call was a reference to phone records, which are frequently subpoenaed or otherwise obtained by law enforcement authorities.

The Strange Career of White Privilege by Victor Davis Hanson // National Review – “Rich whites invent minority pedigrees to gain advantage while they condemn poor and working-class rural whites as racist.”

“What exactly did “white privilege” mean in an ethnically diverse society?

Mere appearance? Yet many Arab Americans and Latinos were indistinguishable from fifth-generation Southern European Americans or Armenian Americans. Politics had something to do with skin color, but how and why was inferred rather than defined. If a white-looking second-generation Arab American put on a head scarf and declaimed against U.S. policy, and if she had a name that was clearly not European in origin, then she too was a “minority” and could advance claims against “white privilege.” But should she dress in assimilated fashion and voice support for the state of Israel, then she probably possessed “white privilege” and joined the victimizers rather than the victims.

Intermarriage is increasingly common, if not the near norm. Millions of Americans are one-quarter something, one-half something else, and again one-quarter something still different.

But even if we were all to wear DNA badges and could agree on a magical non-white percentile that qualifies us for minority status, contradictions would still surround the construct of “white privilege.”

In sum, the terms “diversity” and “white privilege” have now been stretched to denote so many things, and yet they encompass so many paradoxes and contradictions, that they have become words that mean nothing much at all.

How odd that the current revolutionary mode is to keep these reactionary Byzantine classifications and programs that no longer sync with reality, and to damn as reactionary the truly revolutionary act — which would be to start treating people as unique individuals whose appearance is a secondary consideration.

Tribal is so ancient history.

Comments are closed.