Jumping Ship

Refreshed from his Adirondack vacation, Jonah begins today’s Ruminant with an update on the January ...

By

Refreshed from his Adirondack vacation, Jonah begins today’s Ruminant with an update on the January 6 hearings and a rant on the strange phenomenon of “capture the flag” media coverage. He also explores the merits of the MAGA republicans testifying in Congress, the silliness of the idea that there’s a “right side of history,” and the general awfulness of Steve Bannon. Stick around until the end to hear why you should subscribe to The Dispatch if you haven’t already.

Show Notes:

– The Remnant with David Bernstein

– The Remnant with Brent Orrell

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
By
Comments (66)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    I was a first year student at UVA when that story came out and I’ll be honest, I wasn’t sure what to believe. I went back and forth a bit but my parents thought it wasn’t credible and my RA and hallmates mostly didn’t but students didn’t know what to think. A lot believed it. And not just woke (that wasn’t the word then) types who believed crap like “20% of college women are raped.” It took a while even for some people in the Charlottesville community to believe it was false and I occasionally had friends and relatives say something to me months or years afterwards that indicated they still thought it might be true.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    I was a first year student at UVA when that story came out and I’ll be honest, I wasn’t sure what to believe. I went back and forth a bit but my parents thought it wasn’t credible and my RA and hallmates mostly didn’t but students didn’t know what to think. A lot believed it. And not just woke (that wasn’t the word then) types who believed crap like “20% of college women are raped.” It took a while even for some people in the Charlottesville community to believe it was false and I occasionally had friends and relatives say something to me months or years afterwards that indicated they still thought it might be true.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Kevinonline

    Secret Service - The mission is always first, whether it is Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, W, O, Trump. Of course they deleted tweets that could be used against a President. Of course 1/6 Congress is not calling them to testify. Everything coming from the secret service must be interpreted as their wanting the “next” guy to give them complete trust. How much damage politically did the Secret Service ever cause for Clinton - and how much did do they actually know about him and ML? Its the mission.
    1/6 Investigation - minor damage to Trump at the margins currently but headed for a political backlash. I think unless there is an indictment from DOJ and federal marshalls headed to Mar A Lago this is a win for Trump - “DOJ did not prosecute, I was exonerated by Biden’s DOJ.”. I also think a picture of Trump being arrested would really damage him politically.

    Collapse
  4. Joe1776

    I never deleted any texts at all. So I agree that if texts are deleted that what would be key texts are deleted and we are not given a full explanation reasonable people should call bs.

    But one thing that I may be all alone on is whether these article 1 bureaucracies should be considered "non-political."

    1)No doubt your typical fbi agent working in the midwest should not be hired or fired due to their political allegiance. But I think at the top it is obviously political and to deny that is just to bury your head in the sand.

    2) by saying they are non-political we tend to put these people on a pedestal and make them immune from being fired for incompetence. And we have seen quite a bit of incompetence from the heads of these agencies.

    3) These bureaucrat heads stay in power way to long and that breeds corruption. (we supposedly learned this lesson from J Edgar hoover but even 10 years is too long and then congress will extend it) We need fresh eyes looking at the work of these bureaucracies much more regularly. And people heading these agencies should assume that they will have someone new (and maybe even somewhat politically adversarial) looking over their own work in a few years. Yes this may make these bureaucracies more limited in what they do but that is a good thing. These article one bureaucracies our becoming a sort of politburo.

    4) Democracy. The president should be able to have who he wants at these positions. We shouldn't have a situation where the president is complaining about the CDC or the FBI or CIA etc. (oh gee not my fault we got bad information about Weapons of mass destruction, oh gee not my fault the cdc made a huge blunder by turning down covid tests early on, oh ghee not my fault I guess we were funding labs in china, oh gee I can go on and on. ) They are the president's departments! If the president doesn't like how they are run then the president should put people in place to run it correctly and we should hold the president accountable come election time. This should all be on the president. If it is too much for one person then we should start reducing the power and scope of these agencies.

    The administrative state acting under the facade of non-political is a farce and a dangerous one. Its time we accepted the reality because denying it is too dangerous.

    Sorry it if it seems like I always disagree with you because that is not the case at all. You are definitely one of my favorite pundits. I am just the sort of disagreeable person that only takes time to post my contrarian views.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Kevin Johnson

    Well, just as some right to life folks are honest and say “no abortions, no exceptions”, some pro-choice folks are honest and say “abortion any time for any reason.” You can see their signs at protests. Others write about “shout your abortion” movement. You can google if interested. When exceptions for the life of the mother or threats to a vital bodily function are proposed, PP and now Dems in house reject that. Since Roe, Casey, etc. the mental health exception has meant basically, the woman wants it, and denying the abortion would cause her anguish and maybe worse. This means de facto abortion on demand until birth. That is a coherent position since forcing a woman to carry a fetus/ child against her will is traumatic. I understand why some want and lobby for abortion on demand. This is one logical interpretation of exceptions for mental health, since PP knows “abortion on demand” isn’t a popular slogan, yet. You may have another interpretation. I just want the exception interpretation to be interrogated, in Ohio and in NY, and the House. That way folks can vote on real laws rather than slogans.

    And the Gutmacher Institute (pro choice);reports around 10,000 late term abortions a year with a majority not for threat to the woman’s life or fetal abnormality. A small percentage of abortions but significant to many Americans. Neither extreme wants to face that most Americans want easy abortion early in pregnancy and lots of restrictions or bans with few exceptions late. Examining state laws can help us address this reality rather than the slogans the extremes hurl at each other. I don’t want the Ohio AG or House Dems to get away with euphemism or deception. Thanks.

    Collapse
    1. Alan

      I would argue that most Americans position on abortion is easy access to abortions for good reasons. With the words easy, and good reason being basically translates to “when I want an abortion it will be for a good reason” “whatever is easy for me based on my income etc”

      No one likes late term abortion until they feel they need one. The question becomes what is the worth of 10000 fetuses? It isn’t infinite (just like my or your life isn’t worth infinity). At the same time the health, life, and yea convenience of the person getting the abortion isn’t worth 0. So how many late term abortions are worth not having the chilling effect of young girls having babies etc?

      Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Kevin Johnson

    Well, a senior right to life official came right out and said we should help the child see why carrying the child was the right thing…honest, if appalling. If you are correct, it would be useful (in my view) to examine and expose the AG’s position rather than just assert it. The people of Ohio and others evaluating abortion laws in their own states would benefit from nailing officials down on what exceptions (if any) the law provides for. We often have disputes over what laws mean, and clarifying that is useful, I think. For those on the two extremes: “ no abortion, no exceptions” and “abortion any time for any reason” there is no need for specifics about laws such as the one in Ohio and elsewhere. They know exactly what they want. But most Americans are between these two extremes, so defining and arguing about exceptions is vital. I will be watching Florida’s law, and care about what exceptions there will be and how they are interpreted. So I would like to see non-partisan media interrogate the position taken by the Ohio AG and others. If your analysis is right, I’d like to see that demonstrated. Thanks for your views.

    Collapse
  7. AHenry

    The Secret Service destroyed texts is baffling.

    Any place concerned with security and controlling data on their employees' phones uses a mobile device manager (MDM). The Secret Service must use this because it is the only way they can enforce any kind of centralized security rules.

    This MDM can and should be used to enforce a uniform data retention policy that keeps texts on phones for a specified period of time, then archives them, then deletes them (typically seven years).

    As soon as the inspector general was called in ALL text messages on all phones should have been locked in place and then copied to a location where the IG could inspect them.

    Failing the ability to do this all phones should have been collected immediately.

    I've gone through similar exercise for medical manufacturers when we were being sued.

    This is all standard stuff. That it was not done calls into question the integrity and security of the Secret Service.

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Kevin Johnson

    Thanks much for clear, concise input. Without myself contesting your conclusion, I would like TD to interrogate contrary assertions by credentialed folks who disagree. I think that would be useful for many people dealing with claims and counter claims about what specific laws mean in order to best evaluate these laws.

    A clear example might be the abortion law just passed by the House. Some partisans describe it as just “codifying Roe.” Others claim it goes far beyond Roe. Clear language allowing abortion at any time up until birth to protect the “mental health” of the woman may, or may not (depending on interpretation and case law on what “mental health means”, )de facto allow abortion until birth for any reason. Both sides loudly saying their interpretation is clearly right isn’t enough, in my view; it is helpful in my view to consider the other side’s best argument, even if to dismiss it.

    Personally, I am thus far convinced by Sarah on the Ohio law, but would welcome examination of what Ohio officials base their claims on. Similarly, I think Planned Parenthood and House Democrats do favor abortion on demand for any reason until birth, with “mental health” being the “exception” which delivers that de facto result while pretending abortion can be restricted after viability. In fact, any woman forced to continue an unwanted pregnancy, no matter how far along, would clearly find a health care provider willing to say the anguish facing the mother affects her mental health…because it would!

    My point is not to prejudge the substance, although I reveal my leanings, but to urge serious attention to competing claims. Of course, after doing so it is appropriate to point out which claims are not, if fact, serious. You make a strong argument on the Ohio case. Thanks again.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Kmregan7

      Why do you put mental health in quotations? Mental health is a real healthcare need. And why are so many skeptical that doctors are so willing to perform abortions on healthy pregnancies based on your skepticism (apparently) of mental health needs? I think PP and House Democrats trust women and doctors....whether that truly means "abortion on demand for any reason" is, I guess up for interpretation. Some people really seem to think women are walking into a clinic and demanding abortions of healthy pregnancies right up until labor which is blatantly false. ACOG has guidelines about that. Trust women and trust doctors.....

      Collapse
  9. John Townson

    Jonah, you asked for recommendations. The debate that Declan hosted on the “ don’t say gay” bill was great and I really thing Dispatch should host more of that, way more. Informative, civil, just awesome!

    Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    KP

    Regarding “Too good to verify”, all I have to say to my friends on the left is “Justice for Juicy”. Everybody needs to be humble, cause nobody’s hands are clean.

    Collapse
Load More