Dick Polman comments.
It’s their party and they’ll sue if they want to.
You would sue too if it happened to you.
The Huffington Post report identified five different Republicans — whose campaigns have sought to distance themselves or even fully disavow Trump — who have filed complaints with stations requesting they pull ads linking them to Trump. Some of the letters, which claim the ads are misleading, have included the threat of legal action.
In general, it’s not uncommon for politicians to try to get unfair ads against them taken down. But, as Huffington Post notes, lawmakers usually aren’t crying defamation over being linked to the presidential nominee of their own party.
What can you call them? Closet Republicans maybe?
If this were one of my kids busted at a party that got out of hand, I’d be saying, “Then you shouldn’t have gone to that party, for Pete’s sake.”
Are these clowns self-identifying as RINOs?
In the Republican washing machine, the Reince cycle is no different from the spin cycle.
In related news, the Inky endorsed Hillary Clinton. That is no surprise. I call your attention to the endorsement for the skillful way it skewered the Republicans’ Hillary Clinton scamdals (emphasis in the original).
What about Benghazi? After two years of Republican-led investigations, there were no findings of malfeasance by Clinton. That’s not to say mistakes weren’t made in how the military responded to the terrorist attacks on U.S. government facilities in Libya and how the incident was initially characterized as spontaneous by Obama administration officials. But the various investigations all concluded that Clinton wasn’t principally responsible.
What about the emails? An exhaustive investigation by the FBI concluded that Clinton had carelessly risked national security by using a private server at her home to read emails that at times included classified information — but that her actions were not criminal. That conclusion upset Republicans who had lavished praise on FBI Director James Comey, himself a registered Republican, before he announced his decision. Some continue to call for Clinton’s arrest each time more emails are released. But their tirades smell more like political gamesmanship than a genuine search for truth.
No one knows how many previous secretaries of state mishandled classified material. Colin Powell reportedly used an AOL account to correspond with foreign officials on his laptop. Who knows what John Foster Dulles, Cyrus Vance, Dean Rusk, Henry Kissinger, Alexander Haig, or James Baker did when they wanted to take their work home? Email didn’t exist. The point isn’t to excuse Clinton’s behavior, which she has admitted was a mistake, but to put it into perspective.
Follow the link for the complete editorial.
Desperate Republicans are starting to speak of writing in Mike Pence for President. Ignoring that Pence is an ideologue incompetent at governance, attempting to paint him as a virtuous alternative to Donald Trump is a daunting task; consider the company he keeps.
If you close your eyes to sin, you are one with the sinner. If you attempt to excuse the sin, you are worse than the sinner, because you know better and do not act.
The “harsh truth” (one of my college friends was very fond of that phrase) is that, so long as Republicans countenance–indeed, applaud and propagate–not nice conduct, they cannot legitimately claim to be nice people or representatives of niceness–as if questions of legitimacy have stopped them in the past or will stop them in future. The only legitimacy they question is that of elected Democratic Presidents.
The whole damn Republican party is a gang of accessories before, during, and after the fact of not-niceness. They are certainly fashionable, as Republicans do so like to accessorize.
They claim to represent niceness, of course, just as the used car salesman claims that the junker in front of you is a creampuff. That car is still a junker, and Republicans are still not nice.
“Republican Family Values” have never been anything more than a dog and pony show for the rubes.
Andres Oppenheimer wonders why it took so long:
Since Trump announced his run for the presidency in mid-2015, he based much of his campaign on the premise that most Mexican immigrants are “rapists” and “criminals.” He has repeatedly insulted Muslims, as if all 1.6 billion of them were terrorists, and has publicly made fun of the physically handicapped. And with some notable exceptions, Republicans looked the other way.
Where were McCain, New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and dozens of other high-profile Republicans who didn’t break with Trump until the Oct. 7 release of Trump’s now infamous video?
Most of them, like McCain, explained that they had made their difficult decision because “I have daughters.” Where were they when Trump demonized Hispanics? Don’t they have any Hispanic friends?
Read the rest.
*With apologies to George Orwell.
He goes on to point out that he’s writing in the morning, and no one knows what today might bring.
Meanwhile, in The Charlotte Observer, Keith Larson marvels at this coarse discourse (emphasis added–more at the link):
Solomon Jones writes of his recent interview of Tim Kaine. Not surprisingly, the Trump Tape came up as a topic. Mr. Kaine did not mince words; he minced Trump. Here’s an excerpt; follow the link for the rest.
“I think there is no doubt that the behavior described in the (Trump) video is sexual assault,” Kaine told me. “You can’t grab people’s genitals. That’s sexual assault. I mean, it is clear. And I very much dismiss a Donald Trump who’s trying to say, ‘Well, this is locker room talk,’ or a Rudy Guiliani: ‘You know, this is kind of what men do.’
“No, it’s not. It’s what sexual abusers do, but it’s not what men do.”
I wholeheartedly agree. Talking about grabbing strange women by the genitals without their permission is not locker-room talk. It’s sociopath talk.