Questionable Motives

May 11, 2020

Is the Trump Administration the First Postmodern American Regime?

Filed under: Uncategorized — tildeb @ 2:59 pm

Postmodernism - english

No matter how much I wish this were not so, I think there’s a very strong argument to made that it is. But at what a cost!

James Lindsay does just that in his article/podcast at New Discourse called Age of Narratives and The Postmodern Democratic Regime. He explains far better than I ever could what Modernity means in the creation and maintenance of liberal secular democracies by way of shared values and how Postmodern beliefs in action relentlessly attack those values with the effect of causing great harm to liberal secular democracies, harm to science, harm to reasonable discourse based on mutual respect for what’s true, harm to mutual respect for the rule of law, harm to the mutual respect for regulated capitalism, for free speech, and so on. The evolving result in which we find ourselves living , as postmodern ideology becomes ever more institutionalized as public values, is the Trump Administration. It’s not a Right wing/Left wing problem at all but a Postmodern problem under populist leadership. Because we know this Administration effortlessly uses and discards as needed the partisan political divide to its own disruptive ends to gain ever more political power over the narrative, while at the same time politicizing everything into narratives it can spin to its own support regardless of truth or facts, we have difficulty making sense of it. Why don’t facts matter? Where did the concern for respecting what’s true go? Why don’t good reasons and compelling evidence have any sway?

Casting the Trump Administration as an example of postmodernism in action, however, lifts this veil of confusion completely and we can see what’s really going on. As Lindsay says, “Modernity is built upon a few pillars: science, reason, rule of law, liberalism, capitalism. Postmodernism hates all of them.” As does the Trump Administration and it attacks all of these values constantly.

So the key to understanding what’s going on, I think, lies in understanding how the postmodern core value of narrative, of personal truth over knowledge, of lived experience over data, takes center stage, why and how truth and facts lose credibility to the point where they simply don’t matter. The resulting insanity that is postmodern ideology in action has come home to roost. And the disease isn’t Trump; it’s postmodernism as a political ideology. Lindsay’s article/podcast provides what I think is a very compelling case for you to consider. And it is timely.

Lindsay ends with what I think is a call to arms for all people who think what’s true matters, that facts matter, that reason matters, that rule of law matters. He says,

We figured out how to tell what’s true once in human history, during the Enlightenment that ended the premodern Dark Age of superstition that preceded it. We can figure out how to do it again, hopefully soon enough to stop postmodernism from turning the lights out on us all again. I think this is our project, and we’ve all got some work to do.



  1. I have hope that this Trump-Cataclysm will ultimately produce good. We have been taken to the edge, seen the abyss, but have a chance now to step back, reassess and reconfirm allegiances, values, goals.

    Comment by john zande — May 11, 2020 @ 5:48 pm | Reply

  2. That would be a terrific legacy but I honestly don’t think all these Bernie supporters grasp that it’s the same ideology in play they are championing, the same anti-enlightenment sentiments driving what they are trying to make into public policy. I wish I could be as hopeful as you, but I don’t think this is the case because Trump is highlighted as the problem – or it’s the far Right, or it’s the far Left, or it’s the extremely religious – when, I think, it’s really the seepage of postmodernism ideology into mainstream politics, mainstream public institutions, mainstream enough to swing that centrist voting block towards the problem of dismantling enlightenment values altogether… under the guise of championing all these victims. It’s everywhere, JZ.

    Comment by tildeb — May 11, 2020 @ 6:52 pm | Reply

    • Step One: Acknowledging that Corporatism killed Capitalism decades ago.

      Comment by john zande — May 13, 2020 @ 9:08 am | Reply

      • Agree. It was a travesty when corporations were legally recognized as ‘individuals’ with all the rights but few of the responsibilities. (No mass protest and public outcry when Lee Raymond retired from Exxon as C.E.O., in 2005, having earned a reported six hundred and eighty-six million dollars.) The level of dysfunction corporatism has wrought on real people in real life is profound and shifting the focus of government away from those who need it most to those those least in need is – or should be – a crime.

        Comment by tildeb — May 13, 2020 @ 9:25 am

  3. I think the group labels have been used by very clever people to manipulate the debate and create confusion. The anti-enlightenment crowd rebrands every 30 years or so – but their goals are generally the same.

    Comment by The Pink Agendist — May 11, 2020 @ 7:11 pm | Reply

    • Absolutely. And the result, as Lindsay talks about, are people who honestly say they do not know what’s true anymore. Mission accomplished.

      Comment by tildeb — May 13, 2020 @ 9:29 am | Reply

      • Tactically speaking, it’s a brilliant move. Have you been watching Mrs. America? It’s a drama but it shows how Phyllis Shlafly almost single-handedly created the “facts don’t matter” model that’s used so successfully by Trump today.

        Comment by The Pink Agendist — May 13, 2020 @ 10:03 am

      • No. We can’t stream Hulu but I will when I can.

        Comment by tildeb — May 13, 2020 @ 11:02 am

  4. I think Mr Lindsay’s assessment is somewhat off base.
    Just this week, Betsy Devon has overhauled Title IX regulations restoring accused rights and restoring basic sanity to a process that has succumbed to what can only be described as total madness brought to you by postmodernism.
    Recently revealed transcripts of under oath hearings in regards to “Russian Collusion” Have revealed what most sane people have known for years in that the whole thing was completely baseless.
    The framing of General Flynn is the latest travesty that is going to reveal how utterly corrupted intelligence agencies (namely the FBI) were. What some of these people have done is close to committing treason. Obama is about to lose all of the sheen on his halo.
    I see this as quite the opposite. Leftism and Postmodernism is the disease, and Trump, however crude and inarticulate he may be, is the cure. The media have been working overtime trying to portray him as the devil reincarnated, discrediting themselves even further in the process. Trust in media institutions has never been lower. There is a very god reason for that and it’s not because Trump is evil and all of his supporters are stupid.
    The Democrats have gone completely insane, to the point where they think replacing the current president with a dementia patient with credible MeToo allegations against him is the lesser of two evils. I beg to differ.

    Comment by Ashley — May 12, 2020 @ 9:13 am | Reply

    • Your comment about Flynn is rather remarkable. You seem unaware of the facts but more than willing to go with the Administration’s spin on it. Are you aware, for example, that 2000 former Department of Justice employees (of both parties) signed a letter to demand Barr’s resignation over the Flynn case? Why would they do that, Ashley? Are you aware that lawyers arguing on behalf of the Administration advocate that Trump should be held unaccountable to any legal oversight while in office but free to release names of any federal agents that investigate it? Are you aware that Judge Emmet G. Sullivan who is listening to this case said he would receive briefs from interested third parties to offer opinions about the case? This means that all those 2000 former Department of Justice employees can now be heard. In court. It will invite public scrutiny of the case, and means the case will not get swept under the rug. Trump has opened Pandora’s box here in his quest to shift the narrative to Obama as a criminal to cover up his own criminality when he intentionally invited foreign powers to interfere with the national election on several occassions while at the same time demanding immunity from exactly the same actions he wants to take against his political rivals! Anyone trying to reveal the truth about his criminality is, by his definition, therefore a criminal. And you seem quite willing to swallow this bullshit hook, line, and sinker. Accepting that bullshit narrative is not good for the country in that it is deeply anti-patriotic and, as an immunity precedent, could potentially destroy anyone foolish enough to stand up to the bullshit. That you don’t seem to know any of this – and don’t seem to care to know any of this – demonstrates a significant factual weakness to your opinion and reveals it to be just blatant narrative support ejecting any need for what’s true or factual. This is why this postmodern bullshit about accepting narrative is so deeply pernicious.

      Comment by tildeb — May 13, 2020 @ 9:47 am | Reply

      • You must be joking right now.
        Bullshit narrative?
        There has been, for 3 solid years a muh Russian Collusion narrative, followed by a witch hunt “investigation” that was entirely predicated on lies. Trump never invited anyone to “interfere” with the 2016 election. That hoax has been thoroughly debunked.
        Your TDS has clouded your judgement.

        Comment by Ashley — May 13, 2020 @ 8:44 pm

      • “Impeach Trump. It’s not too early to start.” — New York Daily News (Mar 02, 2016)

        It’s safe to say the intent was already there and they’ve been looking for a reason ever since.

        Comment by Ron — May 14, 2020 @ 9:47 am

      • Ashley. I’m guessing by this thread you have not read a single word of the Mueller report

        Comment by john zande — May 14, 2020 @ 7:12 pm

      • Not sure if this’ll work, but this is a good Twitter thread that details the connections that more than warranted an investigation.

        Comment by john zande — May 14, 2020 @ 7:14 pm

      • Well, as I said, if you don’t care about what’s true then your opinion is valid. But if you do, then… well, this guy says it better than I.

        Comment by tildeb — May 13, 2020 @ 10:11 pm

      • Oh, I know you don’t want to believe anything anyone has to say contrary to the faith-based beliefs you have about Trump, but maybe you’ll listen to this one guy….

        Comment by tildeb — May 13, 2020 @ 10:16 pm

      • Where are you getting the “faith based beliefs” nonsense that you keep regurgitating?
        We have transcripts of hearings, the results of a 2 year investigation and released notes from FBI operatives proving that their intent was not in good faith in that their goal was to get Flynn to lie so that they could prosecute him. Nothing about this is remotely disputable. And now you’re arguing that the fact that a judge seems to believe that he can order 3rdparty briefs so that he can proceed with a trial against Flynn even though the DOJ has dropped the case against him is evidence of anything other than an activist judge? What kind of judge does this? The DOJ has dropped its case because it was brought, quite clearly, in bad faith but the judge refuses to accept it!
        There is no sane universe in which it is up to a judge whether or not charges are brought against a defendant or whether or not a case against a defendant can be dropped for lack of evidence, or in this case, an outright fabrication of a case against a defendant. This is the Jurisdiction of the prosecution (the DOJ) as to whether or not a case is brought. Period.
        You need to stop watching MSNBC and CNN and start reading “news” sources other than NYTimes and Wapo.

        Comment by Ashley — May 14, 2020 @ 3:09 am

  5. I tried to leave a comment on here earlier, at least I thought I did…

    Comment by Ashley — May 12, 2020 @ 9:44 pm | Reply

    • Hey Ashley, good to hear from you. Thanks for letting me know; I checked spam and thar she blows!

      Comment by tildeb — May 12, 2020 @ 11:22 pm | Reply

  6. I think Lindsay’s contribution here is to identify the same tactics used against enlightenment values from both side of the political spectrum, that seeing things in this old fashioned binary framing leads one around the mulberry bush without addressing the source of the problem as postmodernism itself… regardless of which side of the aisle it comes. It’s a neat trick, don’t you think?

    One of the simplest examples is that everything Trump does is political for his own self-aggrandizement and power – for political reasons alone – and the way this is done is to use lying and deceit and bullying using political power from the OFFICE being held as a tool for deconstructing what is true and then replacing it with a narrative… absolutely unconcerned with what’s true. This is no different than transactivists trying to be accepted as the opposite sex… by creating an irrational gender narrative piggybacking on the gay rights movement even though it’s diametrically opposed to the enlightenment principles this movement championed. This is no different a method/tactic than pretending Flynn, to use your example, did not accept half a million bucks to further Turkey’s interests when he admitted he did and agreed that failing to reveal this before taking public office was actually a conflict of interest. Then he was caught flat out lying about being in constant contact with the Russians during the 2016 election and admitted it. Twice. Under oath. To mitigate his criminal sentence. He admitted he was feeding the Trump administration information from Russia regarding Clinton. The intent was to use a foreign power to discredit a political rival not with what is true but with a narrative around what they could find. None of this is disputable because it’s factual… but look at how the narrative is now being put forward, by taking an agent’s words completely out of context and using them to try to create a fictional narrative about Obama. What’s true simply doesn’t matter. Only its crafted political effect of the narrative matters. The evidence doesn’t matter. Facts don’t matter. The only thing that matters is spinning the narrative to political advantage and hoping that enough people can be motivated to go along with it and to cause intentional and directed harm against anyone who dares complain or criticize the net negative effect on the country, on anyone who points what’s true that the rule of law is being undermined with this execrable tactic, that national interests and security are being intentionally undermined to benefit one narcissistic man, that elections are being undermined, and so on. This is postmodernism’s wet dream in action, to make citizens of one formidable country see and treat their domestic political rivals as the greater enemy than the foreign powers actively trying to harm and reduce the influence of their international political rivals.

    Comment by tildeb — May 12, 2020 @ 11:51 pm | Reply

  7. Ashley, I don’t watch any broadcast news and I am not partisan. I am concerned with what’s true. To the best of my knowledge, the facts do not align with your beliefs. Beliefs not based on arbitration from reality I call ‘faith-based beliefs. I think by accepting the narrative you do, you are disregarding what’s true, and so you maintain and defend your beliefs over and above wanting to know if your beliefs might be wrong. This is a very bad sign. So I say this because the best account I have come across – fully supported by primary source material for each fact listed – by reputable historian Heather Cox Richardson is nicely summed up here and does not comport with your opinions. So let me quote for your edification:

    On July 31, 2016, the FBI, then directed by James Comey, opened a counterintelligence investigation into whether people in Trump’s campaign were coordinating, intentionally or by accident, with the Russian government. What sparked the investigation was information that campaign member George Papadopoulos had boasted that the Russians had damaging information on Trump’s opponent Hillary Clinton.

    At the same time, CIA Director John Brennan was bringing together officials from the FBI, CIA, and NSA to investigate Russian interference in the election.

    The FBI investigation, named Crossfire Hurricane, focused on people with known ties to Russia or Russian oligarchs. That included former General Michael Flynn, who had worked as a consultant for Russian companies (as well as Turkish ones). Flynn had sat next to Russian President Vladimir Putin at a formal dinner in Russia in December 2015, for which he was paid at least $45,000, but he skipped the clearance a retired military official should have had to do accept payment from a foreign government. Flynn began to advise the Trump campaign in February 2016, and at the Republican National Convention led the crowd in chants of “Lock Her Up!”

    On November 10, President Barack Obama warned Trump against hiring Flynn for a sensitive position, but eight days later, Flynn became Trump’s National Security Advisor. On December 29, Obama expelled 35 suspected Russian intelligence agents from the U.S. in retaliation for Russian interference in the 2016 election. That day, Flynn spoke on the phone with Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak, whom he had known since 2013. U.S. intelligence agencies routinely monitored Kislyak, and they briefed Obama administration officials, who thought the call sounded like Flynn and the Russians had a secret agreement.

    The FBI interviewed Flynn on January 24, 2017. He lied about the content of the call. This sent acting Attorney General Sally Yates rushing to Trump’s White House Counsel Don McGahn to warn him that Flynn was possibly open to blackmail by the Russians. On February 8, Flynn denied speaking to Kislyak about sanctions, but when intelligence officials indicated that he had, he claimed that “he couldn’t be certain the topic never came up.” Flynn resigned at Trump’s request on February 13, 2017.

    The next day, Trump met with Comey and asked him to drop the case against Flynn. Comey refused. Trump fired him, then told Kislyak “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.” Trump’s Attorney General Jeff Sessions had to recuse himself from the case because he, too, had met with Kislyak. The Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein (appointed by Trump) then appointed Special Counsel Robert Mueller, former head of the FBI, to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election, including whether Trump campaign officials had worked alongside them….

    And, as our intelligence agencies had, Mueller concluded that yes, the Russians attacked our 2016 elections, and that members of the Trump campaign accepted their help, although his report did not go so far as to assert they were deliberately working in tandem.

    So, too, did the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, which is due to issue the fifth and final volume of its investigation in the next few weeks.

    When Trump continued to insist that the Crossfire Hurricane Investigation was illegitimate, the inspector general of the Department of Justice, Michael Horowitz, investigated and concluded that it was indeed legitimate (although he excoriated the FBI for mistakes agents made in the reapplications of wiretapping authorizations for one of the people they were investigating, Carter Page).

    In the midst of the Mueller investigation, Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, and after cooperating with the Mueller investigation, has been awaiting sentencing.

    Enter “Obamagate.”

    Last Thursday, the Justice Department, now under strong Trump supporter Attorney General William Barr, asked the judge to throw out Flynn’s case, reiterating that the Russia investigation was not legitimate, and therefore that his lies were not material. This has led close to 2000 former DOJ officials to call for Barr’s resignation.

    The idea appears to be to turn the tables and claim that those investigating Russian interference were the criminals, while those caught in the investigation are victims. Thus Obama and Vice President Biden, along with the career intelligence and justice officials who tried to defend the country against foreign interference, are all part of a “Deep State” conspiracy to injure Trump.

    Trump’s appointees are helping him create this disinformation. His acting Director of National Intelligence, Richard Grenell, who has been vocal about his conviction that Russia did not attack us in 2016, recently declassified a list of U.S. officials who called for the “unmasking” of the individual mentioned in intelligence documents, the man who turned out to be Michael Flynn. Requests for such “unmasking” are common; names help officials understand the significance of the reports they are reading. Indeed, unmasking has increased dramatically in the Trump administration. But in Trump’s narrative, the unmasking of Flynn was a “massive thing” that shows the unfairness of those investigating the Russian connections in 2016.

    Today, three Republican Senators released the names of those who asked to unmask Flynn. The Senators are: Ron Johnson (R-WI), Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), and Rand Paul (R-KY). The list included more than three dozen Obama White House officials, including Biden, Comey, Brennan, and former Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper. Paul has called for hearings on the matter, much like the many, many hearings Republicans held about Hillary Clinton’s emails, and much like the investigation Trump wanted Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to announce.

    While requests for unmasking are common, there is something interesting here: the requests are mainly from BEFORE Flynn’s call with Kislyak, and come from Treasury, NATO, and intelligence officials. “If you want to be transparent and fair, show us the document that led all these senior authorized government officials to request this information, that freaked them out all at the same time,” national security lawyer Mark Zaid commented to the Washington Post.

    Still, today on the Fox News Channel, Trump said, “This was all Obama. This was all Biden. These people were corrupt. The whole thing was corrupt and we caught them. We caught them.”

    Then, tonight, we learned that the FBI served a search warrant on Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) for insider trading in stocks in the early days of the coronavirus pandemic. A warrant for a senator would have had to be approved at the highest levels of the Department of Justice, where Barr holds sway. Burr is not the only senator who made exquisitely timed stock trades after hearing a private briefing for senators on the dangers of the coronavirus; Georgia Senator Kelly Loeffler (R-GA) did, too, along with one or two others.

    So why Burr? Remember I mentioned that the Senate Intelligence Committee agreed with the Mueller investigation, and that It was due to release the final volume of its report soon? Burr is the chairman of that key committee. If he is discredited enough to lose his chairmanship, McConnell will get to choose his replacement. And it’s a pretty safe bet the committee will no longer support the conclusions of the Mueller Report.

    Still, the game is not over. Judge Emmet G. Sullivan has appointed a former judge, John Gleeson, to oppose the request of the Justice Department to drop the case against Flynn and, in addition, to see whether Flynn has committed perjury. This might well rehash the evidence about Russian interference in our affairs that seems to have been pushed aside by the Ukraine scandal, impeachment, and now the pandemic.

    In any case, it should help to combat the disinformation campaign intended to convince us that down is up and up is down, and that the Russia scandal belongs to anyone but Trump.

    That last sentence applies directly to you, Ashley… and should be clear enough and cause enough for you to reevaluate your beliefs for their truth merit now rather than motivate you only to lash out at those who you assume must be partisan and therefore wrong to disagree with you – when, in fact they do so for compelling evidence-based reasons you are currently waving away. You are acting and sounding like a evangelical warrior thinking he or she is defending the faith armed with a counter-factual narrative believed to be above reproach no matter what evidence stands against it and a full supply of righteousness.

    Comment by tildeb — May 14, 2020 @ 10:29 am | Reply

    • “Ashley, I don’t watch any broadcast news and I am not partisan. I am concerned with what’s true. To the best of my knowledge, the facts do not align with your beliefs”
      Again, these are not “beliefs” These are facts. We know FOR A FACT, that the Russian Collusion narrative was a complete hoax. Publicly, people like Adam Schiff has been stating, for at least 2 years, that they had “proof” that Donald Trump and his campaign “colluded” with “Russians” to somehow “rig” the election. How? Dunno, because there has never been a remotely plausible explanation as to how this “collusion” with “Russia” or “Russian agents” swayed the election in Trumps favor. We have sworn testimony that has been released that directly contradicts those assertions. James Clapper, Susan Rice and Loretta Lynch among others, all testified that they had no direct evidence tying Trump to any kind of “Russian Collusion”. We know FOR A FACT that through recovered documents that FBI’s agents notes reveal the purpose of their questioning of Flynn was to entrap him. This is not speculation. This is not a “belief”. We know this for a fact. This is the reason why the DOJ has moved to drop the charges. Again, it is not a Judge’s job to determine who gets prosecuted and for what crime. This is entirely outside the scope of their purview. I don’t know why you consider this to be evidence of anything other than a partisan activist judge vastly overstepping his bounds.
      The entire basis for this Russian Collusion narrative has been shown to be a complete lie. This was proven by the release of Mueller’s report and has been further corroborated by the recent release of the transcripts from House Intelligence Committee hearings, of which Adam Schiff is the chairman. How badly in denial are you? There’s nothing there. Stop pretending there is.
      You’re the one living in bizarro world, where up is down and black is white.

      Comment by Ashley — May 14, 2020 @ 2:44 pm | Reply

  8. ” We know FOR A FACT, that the Russian Collusion narrative was a complete hoax.”

    No. We don’t ‘know’ that, Ashley. You believe that is the case IN SPITE OF compelling evidence to the contrary. There are many staffers of the Trump team pre and post election that had and continued to have close contact with Russian officials. The ‘entrapment’ you are spouting IS the narrative; the facts do not support this. It’s like police officers asking an arrested person at the scene of the crime, “Did you do this?” That’s not ‘entrapment’. Flynn admitted not once but twice that he blatantly lied – under oath – to FBI agents about having his five conversations with the Russian foreign minister. He wasn’t ‘trapped’ into admitting he lied, other than his attempt to get the charges of collusion reduced. The notes you are referring to is from an agent who is asking if more should be sought. You believe otherwise because another Trump official lies about this to justify – for the FIRST TIME IN HISTORY – to drop an admitted perjury charge!
    Barr is not the “DOJ” as you grant him this representative power; he’s one guy who 2,000 other people say is undermining the rule of law by abusing the power of the DOJ. That’s also why 1200 judges decried what’s going on at the DOJ. That’s why I keep saying you’re not concerned about what’s true; you’re concerned about sticking to believing the narrative you’re being fed over, and in spite of, compelling facts. You are deluding yourself to think 2000 employees in the Justice Department just up and decided to quit one day, and, oh, by the way, that Barr fellow is a handmaiden enabler of Trump and just so happens to be undermining the rule of law, should anyone care to inquire. Well, certainly not you! You don’t seem to be concerned in the slightest. I mean, wow. That’s way down the rabbit hole to be that unconcerned.
    So rather than grant this remarkable action by so many DOJ officials and high ranking members of the State department and military and CIA and FBI and NSA any importance whatsoever when they try to warn us of what’s going on, you don;t hear or see or say anything – because YOU happen to ‘prefer’ to believe the one person who caused it! Barr. To me, that speak very clearly to your motivation and it has zero to do with what’s true or you might just pay some attention to it; instead, you’re just doubling down as any true ideologue or True Believer would when reality disagrees with your beliefs about it and restating your belief as if this is the only reasonable conclusion with, “The entire basis for this Russian Collusion narrative has been shown to be a complete lie.” Obviously, you didn’t read the Mueller Report or you would know this is unmitigated bullshit you’re spouting here that it is nothing more than the reality-denying narrative Trump’s administration is selling to you as is the idea that everyone who disagrees with Trump and his lackeys busy dismantling every public institution is in the wrong and ONLY Trump and his lackeys are justified by the facts that they say is true but doesn’t match with reality.

    Ashley, you’ve drunk the Kool-Aid on this one and your brain isn’t working. There is no critical thought in your comments yet. There’s just narrative. There’s just you 100% belief in it. You need to fix that.

    Comment by tildeb — May 14, 2020 @ 4:53 pm | Reply

    • Yes, we do know that. We have public statements going back 3 years from many Democrats including Adam Schiff that he had “evidence” for “Russian collusion”.
      Within the last week, we had released, sworn testimony to a senate intelligence committee that no one is in possession of anything that could be considered evidence for such claims.
      I don’t care if there are 2000000000 former DOJ employees saying that Barr has undermined the credibility of the DOJ. That doesn’t make it true.
      What we do know, is that the DOJ has decided to drop the case against Flynn. They have decided to do this, because there is no evidence on which to proceed. They have decided to do this, because revealed notes clearly indicate that the FBI’s sole intent was to frame a Flynn for lying.
      No matter how much pain you want to put on that, you’re never going to make that not be true. I note that other than mention how many people wanted Barr to resign (as of that fact is of any relevance to anything) you haven’t offered a fact yes in any of these posts. You haven’t even proposed a mechanism by which this supposed rigging was accomplished. No one has.
      There contains not one shred of evidence in the Mueller report, (which is readily apparent that Mueller neither wrote nor read) that Trump colluded with anyone, Russian or otherwise to rig the election in his favour. This is a fantasy that only exists inside of the most deeply deluded and/or partisan Democrats at this point.
      You’re the one drinking the Kool aid. You’re the one who so desperately wants Trump to be guilty of something when there isn’t anything on which to base that belief on. All the facts are against you, and you can certainly expect further proof to be forth coming in the not to distant future about the serious misdeeds of the FBI.

      Comment by Ashley — May 14, 2020 @ 5:39 pm | Reply

  9. They quit BECAUSE it wasn’t a ‘they’ at the DOJ who dropped the charges or redacted and then intentionally misrepresented the Mueller Report, Ashley. It was a ‘HE’ and the he is Barr. You credit HIM with being the DOJ and cast aside every lawyer, every judge, every federal agent who says this ONE MAN is undermining the entire legal institution. The ENTIRE team assigned to Flynn quit. Again, you just don’t care about any of this and are rationalizing your decision EXACTLY the same way a religious wingnut justifies their religious proclamations. Why doesn’t this concern you? Have you had a recent brain trauma?

    Comment by tildeb — May 14, 2020 @ 5:58 pm | Reply

    • Yes, yes, yes… heard that from religious fanatics forever when challenged. I’m really disappointed in you, Ashley. I thought you could see the really poor reasoning others propose and could apply it to your own. Only in this regard am I wrong. At the very least, you should be always doubting your own beliefs in case better evidence comes forward and you wish to align your beliefs with evidence rather than faith.

      Comment by tildeb — May 14, 2020 @ 6:02 pm | Reply

    • Yes I do cast those people aside. Why you ask?
      Because they have NO PROOF that he’s undermined the entire legal system. And again, you seem absolutely determined to ignore the fact that we have hard evidence that clearly indicates that the FBI intentionally framed Flynn. Withholding of exculpatory documents, notes indicating the purpose of interviewing Flynn was to entrap him.
      THIS is why the case was dismissed, not because of some oogah boogah conspiracy theory that William Barr can single handedly “undermine the rule of law”, whatever the fuck that means. The Entire team assigned to prosecute Flynn quit, because they were caught using a “confession” obtained under false pretences and with malicious intent to falsely entrap Flynn.
      Get your head out of your ass.

      Comment by Ashley — May 14, 2020 @ 7:04 pm | Reply

  10. One last kick at the can… it’s not hard evidence and it wasn’t a frame of Flynn. Both of these assertions you are making are not facts and not supported by facts but is a narrative that has been intentionally shaped to convince those without the means to think critically to repeat endlessly no matter what. The case was dismissed not because of legalities but because Barr has commanded it be done and has intentionally selected certain information, reframed it as if ‘fact when it’s clearly not, and sold to right wing talk radio. You are just regurgitating it. That’s it. That’s all you have and you dismiss anything and everything that does not comport with the narrative. And its this narrative that I am saying makes Trump the first postmodern president where what’s true doesn’t matter. You exemplify the very best of being a mindless soldier, utterly convinced that you have the real story (and not the partisan one), that you have the real facts (and not those fake ones), that you have the right opinion (and not the unpatriotic ones that holding and expressing makes one the enemy of the State). Seriously Ashley, you’ve lost the thread of being rational.

    Comment by tildeb — May 14, 2020 @ 7:28 pm | Reply

    • The power of an echo-chamber is on full display here with Ashley. It really does make me sad to see someone so utterly lost in the woods.

      Comment by john zande — May 14, 2020 @ 7:36 pm | Reply

      • The echo chamber is for people like you and Tilden, trying desperately to cling to a Russian collusion fantasy despite no proof whatsoever and actual sworn testimony that there was never any evidence of such collusion.

        Comment by Ashley — May 14, 2020 @ 8:31 pm

      • There was a massive Russian campaign to elect Trump in 2016, and there’s a massive Russian campaign today to re-elect him. Russian secret police were involved, which means Putin. Directly. Was there direct coordination between Donald Trump and Putin? No. THERE DIDN’T HAVE TO BE. In fact, it would be quite stupid is there was! Trump is enormously in debt to the Russian mob. That is why he won’t release his taxes. He is compromised, and enormously compromised at that. Look no further than Helsinki to see that. To Putin he is a useful idiot. He has done more damage to the US in 3 years than the KGB could do in 50. You, Ashley, are an unwitting Russian agent.

        Remember, we still haven’t seen the entire Meuller Report… you know, the one you so clearly haven’t read a word of. Trump is fighting tooth n’ nail to KEEP THAT SECRET.


        Comment by john zande — May 15, 2020 @ 6:21 am

      • That’s great stuff John.

        The only way Trump was elected and will be re elected is because of Russian interference. I’m an “unwitting” Russian agent now.

        You’ve officially lost your marbles.

        Comment by Ashley — May 15, 2020 @ 9:51 am

      • I didn’t say the only way. Why put words in my mouth?

        I said, and it’s a known fact, they ran a MASSIVE campaign (disinformation, fake news, trolls, bots, etc.) to help get him elected by fuelling divisions and right wing conspiracy nuts already present. As it was, just 80,000 odd votes spread across three states won him the electoral college.

        And, they are running a massive campaign once again.

        Putin doesn’t love Trump. He HATES the US and NATO. Trump is his useful (thoroughly compromised) idiot. You, Ashley, are also Putin’s useful idiot.

        But you haven’t answered my questions. Please do:

        Why won’t Trump release the full Meuller report?

        Why won’t Trump release his tax returns?

        Comment by john zande — May 15, 2020 @ 11:19 am

    • No, this is not a “narrative”. Actual notes, by FBI agents working on the case. Literally asking the questions “is the purpose of this meeting to get him to lie?” That’s as hard evidence as it gets. You keep hand waiving this away as “narrative” and insisting on “mug Russian Collusion” like you’re filling in for Rachel Maddow.
      This is the bullshit narrative. There is no Russian collusion. There never was.
      Intelligence committee transcripts what the Mueller report already told us.
      Stop living in a fantasy land and embrace reality.

      Comment by Ashley — May 14, 2020 @ 8:29 pm | Reply

      • What “Intelligence committee transcripts”? Paste them here, I want to see what, exactly, you’re talking about.

        FBI intentionally framed Flynn

        Framed? LOL. They already KNEW he’d lied. He was the one talking to Russian agents who were under surveillance.

        1) No one *knew* it was Flynn talking to Russian agents under surveillance. It could have been you.

        2) Why was Flynn talking to Russian agents under surveillance… and lying about it when questioned?

        Comment by john zande — May 15, 2020 @ 7:28 am

      • Sally Yates:

        “MR. GOWDY: With respect to the intrusion itself, is it fair to say you did
        not see evidence the candidate himself was involved prior to the intrusion of the
        DNC server and/or Podesta email?
        MS, YATES: Yeah, l– I don’t recall seeing facts indicating that he had
        directed that or that he had been involved with the Russians in directing that that
        intrusion occur. Yes, that’s correct”

        Click to access sy57.pdf

        Susan Rice:

        “MS. RICE: So, to repeat the question, do I recall seeing any intelligence
        prior to my separation from government that indicated or suggested that Donald
        Trump per se conspired with Russia?
        MR. GOWDY: To interfere with or influence the 2016 election.
        MS. RICE: I don’t recall intelligence that I would consider evidence to that
        effect that I saw prior – of conspiracy prior to my departure.”

        Click to access sr44.pdf

        You guys need to face reality. This Russian Collusion story has been thoroughly debunked.
        You do realize this is completely backwards right? Me proving to you that someone had no evidence to pursue any kind of criminal matter? The way it works in a civil society, is that there is a crime committed and then the investigation is initiated and evidence collected.

        This entire Russia Collusion story has been a bullshit witch hunt from minute one. It’s all out there, all over the news.

        Comment by Ashley — May 15, 2020 @ 9:48 am

      • “Trump per se”

        enough said

        Comment by john zande — May 15, 2020 @ 11:49 am

      • “At the time that ! was at the Department of Justice, it was at the beginning stages of when the FBI was looking into the issue of, were there any U.S. citizens that were involved with the Russians and the Russians’efforts to impact the election?” Not the candidate himself, Ashley. We’ve gone over that. You keep coming back to it. The issue is about Putin influencing the election and Trump’s campaign team promoting that influence.

        ” Certainly, there was a conclusion on the part of the lntel Community that the Russian Government at the highest levels – in fact Putin had directed that those intrusions occur. And so then there were facts that were beginning to develop about whether or not there were individuals associated with the campaign that were having communications about the dissemination of that information. That’s where I remember the fact pattern being at that point.”

        Now, you claim over and over that that was NO Russian collusion, that there is only a Russian collusion fantasy, a complete hoax, and so on. You are dismissing the facts. Let me quote that testimony again for you, Ashley: “And so then there were facts that were beginning to develop about whether or not there were individuals associated with the campaign that were having communications about the dissemination of that information.” Those fats, involved several people from Trump’s election campaign asking for and receiving RUSSIAN intel and then lying about using this foreign source.

        So for you to call all of this some kind of conspiracy to get Trump that has no facts or evidence to back it up is absolute, unmitigated bullshit. Kindly, I have been calling all this a ‘narrative’, a counterfactual creation that is being disseminated by good little soldiers without any concern or regard for what’s true. You fit this definition PERFECTLY. You don’t read what you quote, you don’t comprehend what is written, you assume knowledge where you have none, and think yourself justified to then disregard facts and evidence no matter how ell supported or by whom in positions of authority who had access to this information, to these facts, to this evidence, because you claim they must be bullshit by definition. Well, you’re wrong.

        Comment by tildeb — May 15, 2020 @ 11:24 am

      • I’ll leave you be to your fantasy where Muh Russians clandestinely rig elections.

        Comment by Ashley — May 15, 2020 @ 11:12 pm

      • Manafort gave internal polling data to Kilimnik (former Russian Intelligence Officer with ties to the GRU) in May 2016. When questioned, Gates said the polling data “included discussion of ‘battleground’ states, which Manafort identified as Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota.”

        3 of those states got Trump elected with just 80,000 votes.

        Directed individual social media targeting by Russian troll farms and GRU generated stories…?

        Why won’t Trump release the full Meuller report?

        Why won’t Trump release his tax returns?


        Why did Trump steal the translator’s notes from Helsinki?

        Why so much hiding?

        Comment by john zande — May 15, 2020 @ 11:45 pm

  11. Hey, look at those internal FBI notes re: Flynn.

    See if you can figure out a way to hand waive that away.

    Comment by Ashley — May 15, 2020 @ 9:57 am | Reply

    • Ever talked to a prosecuting attorney or detective? This is exactly the common procedure. You have compelling evidence but before showing it, you ask the suspect questions about their account to see if s/he’s telling the truth or is lying. You then admonish the suspect with reminders about laws and penalties about lying and ask if they wish to change their testimony. You THEN reveal your evidence and see what happens. With Flynn, he was presented with his own words from five different conversation with the Russian foreign secretary specifically about email hacks by Russians of Hillary’s server right after he denied ever having contact with the Russians and so THEN he admitted he had just lied. He admitted the same later… because he did! That’s what’s true. Why on earth doesn’t this hold any sway with you? Well, the only rational explanation is that for whatever reasons you may have you do not have concern with what’s true.

      You are more concerned about clutching your pearls to excuse illegal activity by a Trump campaign person while pretending that the real issue is that an investigator allowed Flynn the opportunity to lie. This is clear evidence that YOU are more concerned with upholding the false narrative you believe is true that allows the abuse of the DOJ by a Trump lackey named Barr than you are about what’s true, that Flynn on behalf of the Trump campaign really did use a foreign government to cause real influence in the election and then really did lie about it. And he wasn’t alone. There were many such Trump enablers as the Mueller report established.

      What is the matter with your brain, Ashley? You think the DOJ and FBI and CIA and NAS and the State Department and the military are all more of an enemy to the US by telling the truth than are the Russians and Trump supporters who collude with foreign governments to do this and who then supply the means to create a false and divisive narrative that vilifies Trump’s political rivals. You look with favour on US Trump supporters who carry this interference out, who actively undermine elections and then lie about it. That’s why I say, “Wow.”

      I mean, seriously, Ashley, your counterfactual narrative has no redeeming value other than it helps only the enemies of the US including those Americans busy dismantling its institutions… with you cheering them on and thinking yourself virtuous and righteous for doing so while vilifying people who call you on it. Again, what is the matter with your brain?

      Comment by tildeb — May 15, 2020 @ 11:49 am | Reply

      • Now,

        You can either watch this video, where a fellow Canadian Lawyer explains in plain language that this whole thing is a complete sham, reading from actual court documents, and accept reality.


        You can plug your ears and shout Orange Man Bad over and over.

        Your choice.

        Comment by Ashley — May 17, 2020 @ 7:47 am

      • And after you’re done watching the first video, you can watch this one, with Robert Barnes (who had the opportunity to actually become Flynn’s lawyer but didn’t)

        This is an unbelievable corrupt abuse of power.

        Comment by Ashley — May 17, 2020 @ 12:24 pm

  12. The way to get fired by Trump is to not to commit but investigate wrongdoing. Let the Ashley’s of the world rationalize this tactic. Another Inspector General is fired on a Friday night news dump.

    But let’s not pay attention to any that; let’s search the web for anything that seems to support the narrative that Trump dictates what reality is, that everyone and everything else that doesn’t align with that narrative is just more fake news and bad people. Ignore contrary facts. Excuse it. Keep digging for anything that we can use try to manufacture blame for bias if it’s a criticism of the narrative. Remember, you only get positive test results if you test so the solution is to stop testing and drive those numbers down. Pandemic solved, 101. That’s Trump’s common sense hard at work and it’s making America Great Again. Anything else is Obama’s fault. Now let’s all hug and kiss and get back to work and sing the praises of this Best President Ever. Ashley will lead us because he knows the lyrics, and he knows what’s true before he goes digging for confirmation. Common sense, Trump style.

    Comment by tildeb — May 17, 2020 @ 12:31 pm | Reply

    • Ah well.
      I tried.
      I will leave you to your lunatic TDS infested self.

      Goodbye Tildeb.

      Comment by Ashley — May 17, 2020 @ 3:33 pm | Reply

      • Don’t go, you never answered my questions:

        Why won’t Trump release the full Meuller report?

        Why won’t Trump release his tax returns?


        Why did Trump steal the translator’s notes from Helsinki?

        Comment by john zande — May 17, 2020 @ 4:45 pm

  13. Nice blog

    Comment by SaaniaSparkle 🧚🏻‍♀️ — July 9, 2020 @ 4:28 pm | Reply

  14. So what are the the values of the secular? I can define what it is for the religious, but find a total lack of morals and discipline from the left.

    Comment by Brian Dey — February 22, 2021 @ 10:31 pm | Reply

    • Wow, quite a black and white view of the ‘left’ and the ‘right’. Do you not think there are hundreds of millions of theists who would align themselves politically on the so-called ‘left’? Is not Jesus a balls in the air, flaming leftist?

      But if you’re so ignorant, and want a list of purely ‘secular’ ideals, then here’s one from I’d draw your attention to the line: “Moral principles are tested by their consequences.”

      The Principles of Secular Humanism
       We are committed to the application of reason and science to the understanding of the universe and to the solving of human problems.
       We deplore efforts to denigrate human intelligence, to seek to explain the world in supernatural terms, and to look outside nature for salvation.
       We believe that scientific discovery and technology can contribute to the betterment of human life.
       We believe in an open and pluralistic society and that democracy is the best guarantee of protecting human rights from authoritarian elites and repressive majorities.
       We are committed to the principle of the separation of church and state.
       We cultivate the arts of negotiation and compromise as a means of resolving differences and achieving mutual understanding.
       We are concerned with securing justice and fairness in society and with eliminating discrimination and intolerance.
       We believe in supporting the disadvantaged and the handicapped so that they will be able to help themselves.
       We attempt to transcend divisive parochial loyalties based on race, religion, gender, nationality, creed, class, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, and strive to work together for the common good of humanity.
       We want to protect and enhance the earth, to preserve it for future generations, and to avoid inflicting needless suffering on other species.
       We believe in enjoying life here and now and in developing our creative talents to their fullest.
       We believe in the cultivation of moral excellence.
       We respect the right to privacy. Mature adults should be allowed to fulfill their aspirations, to express their sexual preferences, to exercise reproductive freedom, to have access to comprehensive and informed health-care, and to die with dignity.
       We believe in the common moral decencies: altruism, integrity, honesty, truthfulness, responsibility. Humanist ethics is amenable to critical, rational guidance. There are normative standards that we discover together. Moral principles are tested by their consequences.
       We are deeply concerned with the moral education of our children. We want to nourish reason and compassion.
       We are engaged by the arts no less than by the sciences.
       We are citizens of the universe and are excited by discoveries still to be made in the cosmos.
       We are skeptical of untested claims to knowledge, and we are open to novel ideas and seek new departures in our thinking.
       We affirm humanism as a realistic alternative to theologies of despair and ideologies of violence and as a source of rich personal significance and genuine satisfaction in the service to others.
       We believe in optimism rather than pessimism, hope rather than despair, learning in the place of dogma, truth instead of ignorance, joy rather than guilt or sin, tolerance in the place of fear, love instead of hatred, compassion over selfishness, beauty instead of ugliness, and reason rather than blind faith or irrationality.
       We believe in the fullest realization of the best and noblest that we are capable of as human beings

      Comment by john zande — February 23, 2021 @ 6:09 am | Reply

    • Those that have no religious basis, of course… like the values reflected in the legal rights laid out in the Constitution.

      Comment by tildeb — February 23, 2021 @ 8:05 am | Reply

  15. I’d love to go through these one by one but do not have the time. Sorry. But that sure sounds like a religion, however, more like a cult religion. More like the declarations of Jim Jones. And if this is, then according to the left, has no place in our schools or in our government.

    Comment by Brian Dey — February 23, 2021 @ 8:16 am | Reply

  16. Further, the first amendment does not call for “separation of church and state.”

    Comment by Brian Dey — February 23, 2021 @ 8:17 am | Reply

  17. Reproductive freedom? Got it. Kill babies.

    Comment by Brian Dey — February 23, 2021 @ 8:19 am | Reply

  18. Science? How’s that worked lol. Science tells you the why , but can’t explain the how. In itself, science is built on assumptions that sound more like fairy tales..

    Comment by Brian Dey — February 23, 2021 @ 8:21 am | Reply

  19. Oh my, this explains why the left is as nuts as it is. Forgive me for laughing…

    Comment by Brian Dey — February 23, 2021 @ 8:23 am | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: