Trying to Work, but This is a Big Deal

Ford was NOT the only unelected President, we now have Biden as well. Other than that, very astute and well done.

27 thoughts on “Trying to Work, but This is a Big Deal

  1. That’s quite a conspiracy theory.

    Once you decide that there was a conspiracy all you have to do is figure out which details you want it to explain (leave all other details out). Then everything can fit together so nicely.

      1. Did you bother to check ANY of Tucker’s claims, or do you just swallow them at face value because:

        1) you trust his authority
        2) his theory fits well with your conspiracy mindset.

        He got even the most basic of facts wrong, let alone ignored a ton of facts that make his conspiracy highly dubious.

        Why do you just suspend any disbelief when something fits your ideological predisposition?

        Did you forget that Frank thinks you’re intrinsically skeptical?

      2. This is good:

        “Bob, please get me the names of the Jews, you know, the big Jewish contributors of the Democrats. All right. Could we please investigate some of the cocksuckers?”

  2. Constructing an argument is not only about what facts to include, but which to exclude.

    One fact omitted: Gerald Ford was the GOP’s “Minority Leader” in the House of Representatives for a decade before becoming Veep. Nixon beat McGovern in 1972 by a landslide, but had such “short coat tails” that Republicans did not “slide” along with him into control of the House, but picked up only 12 seats, leaving Ford almost 40 seats (votes) short of leading a majority. It was nevertheless Minority Leader Ford and GOP President Nixon who led efforts to enable 18 year olds federal voting rights in 1969 and 1970, (among related efforts to secure BLACK voting rights with patches to LBJ’s defective 1965 “Voting Rights Act” ) and when the age issue was (properly, in my opinion) ruled unconstitutional*, Nixon, Ford and the bi-partisan Congress sent a 1971 draft amendment to the states for ratification. The minority leader was known and respected, if not liked, on both sides of the party divide. And Ford was POPULAR, to the extent that Congressional leadership or the GOP had any general public support at all. Given that Congress and the public would have raised hell had GOP Veep Agnew been replaced by a Democrat, Ford was a nearly inevitable choice. I’m saying (for anyone inclined to miss the point) Ford had Congressional support in his pocket long before the succession question was raised.

    That is not to say that the CIA was innocent of any number of conspiracies in the 1950s through 1970s…

    *Oregon v Black. The case may be interesting if the vote-‘fraud’ illness draws attempted cures from the federal level.

    1. Dis you happen to see the ‘preponderance of evidence’ comment in the recent supreme court statement about not finding the leaker?

      I thought that odd.

      1. I went and looked, taking your suggestion seriously.

        I suspect the community on, in, around the court has a most likely culprit under suspicion. But no two witnesses or informants have decided to join in tilting the balance (prepondering) from rumor to formal accusation.

        I suspect, too, the community of journalists has heard the same rumors. Undernews, as Micky Kaus calls it. Maybe a Matt Drudge type will break it open, or maybe not.

  3. > Constructing an argument is not only about what facts to include, but which to exclude.

    No doubt. Tucker didn’t include many salient considerations (as I said, “leave all other details out”).

  4. I can see where you guys would disagree with Tuckers conclusion and how he attaches it to modern day corruption, however, what do you think about the fact that 4 of the 5 Watergate folks were in the CIA?

    I don’t see much to disprove his conclusion, other than Nixon looked like a chump who wanted to go along with it, so I am curious.

    1. I don’t understand your question. I guess iure talking about the Plumbers – a White House investigative unit that conducted covert criminal operations on behalf of Nixon, like breaking into Daniel Ellsberg’s office to dig up dirt on him.

      1. “On behalf” is different from “At behest”.

        The cover-up, much later, seems to be where Nixon himself started taking (arguably illegal) actions.

        1. At behest is fine with me.

          Arguably illegal? Really?

          I guess it depends on your premise. Nixon’s of course was “When the president does it, that means it is not illegal.” .

          I’m my view, if happens under the presidents watch he’s responsible.

  5. what do you think about the fact that 4 of the 5 Watergate folks were in the CIA?

    I think it’s a network effect, Kevin Bacon and degrees of separation, all that. Your rando average citizen wants to organize a “thing” and considers his circle of trusted advisors. One of whom thinks maybe “he knows a guy who knows some guys”. About three levels away THAT guy recruits the rest of the task force from only close, familiar, trusted, associates. If the first stage organizer at Committee to Re-Elect had known-a-guy with contacts at the, say, private Pinkerton Security Corporation the final team might also have all been Pinkertons. Or so I think.

    That WOODWARD appears to have come to journalism from a background as a spook is news to me. But it epxlains much about his later writing…

    How much explanatory value lies in the Harvard/Catholic nexus of SCOTUS judges?

    Circling back to a marginally related discussion, in my opinion, Trump got (what I consider) great advice on SCOTUS nominees while generally got bad advice on what pool of candidates from whom to nominate DOJ/FBI/other law enforcement officials. The diplomatic/military pool was rather a mixed bag. Given the over-sized government and the thousands of appointments any one president has responsibility to make — actually a candidate (DeSantis?) should start selecting his team before even announcing his entry to the contest years later.

    1. Lol. I love how he’s never responsible for making bad decisions. Even appointing someone who conspired with communists to commit voter fraud and steal the election to be the head of the country’s entire law enforcement apparatus. It’s perfect – he can never do anything wrong.

      Lines right up with the unfalsifiable “It’s when they deny there’s a conspiracy that you know for sure that there’s a conspiracy.” Lines eight up with no matter what he did he’s a victim of the press – he’s never responsible for the press coverage he got.

      Why did he take advice from people who gave him bad advice?

      1. He’s never responsible for the coverage he got, but he’s also a genius ’cause he manipulated the press so well.”

      2. Here’s an old news narrative summarizing an even older news farrago, written by a guy who hates Hates HATES Donald Trump as much as anybody; but who has the facts about the “Deep State”, the ties between the FBI (Texas Rangers, other law enforcement agencies) and the media, and the difficulty of getting the story before the public.

        The thing is, no member of the rank and file of a bureaucracy is likely to be either the public face or the behind-the-scenes puppet master of that bureaucracy. The people at the lofty peaks of the pyramid are differently-skilled. There are few of them. They mostly know one another. They protect themselves, by protecting each other. And they see elected, policy-making, figures not as authorities or representatives of the public, but as interlopers, fly-by-nights, amateurs and idiots. But this is the pool of candidates from which any president must draw his staff.

        Jimmy Carter tried to surround himself with what was then derisively (in the North East Press) called the “Georgia Mafia” — people who didn’t come to their desks with a personal rolodex of contacts in D.C. and so had difficulty getting in touch with the right people to get anything done. G HW Bush did have his own Rolodex — mostly overseas, met via his time with the CIA. Peggy Noonan tells a story about how Bush I couldn’t get a car and driver for her, after she volunteered to come in for a late meeting. No trustworthy staff. Nixon famously DID have people he trusted — RoseMary Woods, for instance — but all came into his orbit before his presidency and he had little ability or inclination to grow the circle of trust during his terms. Trump had issues, of the same sort and of little greater scale, but under a much harsher spotlight. And now Biden has similar issues while his team — Klain now — spends most of the time keeping the Biden agenda hidden, or walking-back the orders. I suspect the horribly botched and mis-timed Afghanistan with drawal arose from Biden, in frustration, sending orders around his advisors. History may tell us more.

        Anyhow, the reality of a permanent Deep State civil service bureaucratic self-interested cabal of unelected unconstitutionally-empowered officious hidden puppet masters creates the environment in which incorrect, even fictional “Conspiracy Theories” are mooted about. Conspiracy Conjectures, if you like. Untested by experiment. But reality is real and heuristic means of working around the problems will continue.

        If called to serve on a jury, do. If asked to help on a school committee, do. If the city or county is organizing a neighborhood watch, join. The system depends on competent agents at the foundations. No villain, or idiot, or champion, at the top of the pyramid makes as much difference as the members of the mob the Davos-dwellers hate.

        1. I think that in general presidents have far less impact on our country then they are generally credited – either in favor or against. They’re primarily figureheads. Trump had more actual impact than most.

          But none of that means Trump didn’t have responsibility for such major decisions as who he appointed to be top level officials. A mistake in one maybe could be named in bad info. But according to people like Jeff he made a ton of world class bad appointmentsz like appointing someone to AG who joined forces with communists to steal elections.

          If he took bad advice, then he has responsibility for turning to bad advisors for advice.

    2. You are correct about DeSantis. The idea that others can’t run these giant bureaucracies is just silly. There are plenty of folks who can come right out of business and run the FIB just fine. the FIB won’t like the result one bit though.

  6. Nothing is better than when people who complain about Democratic Pastuy authoritarian government overreach defend this guy.

    Discussing the domestic turmoil produced by the Vietnam war, the former President rationalized that the so‐called Huston plan to spy on dissidents, the creation of the White House “plumbers” unit and the White House‐sanctioned burglary of the offices of Dr. Daniel Ellsberg’s former psychiatrist had been logical extensions of Presidential authority to maintain internal order.

    In retrospect,” an apparently incredulous Mr. Frost asked, “wouldn’t it have been better” to have sought legislative remedies rather than “adding another crime to the list” of charges that drove Mr. Nixon from office?

    “The proposition you’ve just stated in theory is perfect,” Mr. Nixon replied. “In practice, it just won’t work.”

    He said it “would not only have raised an outcry” if he had asked Congress for approval of warrantless wiretaps or burglaries as devices to deal with dissidents but would also have thwarted such covert operations by alerting “potential targets” that the Government meant to spy on its citizens.


    “An action’s either going to be covert or not,” Mr. Nixon said.

    1. The president can have the FBI, the CIA, do whatever he wants them to do covertly ‘if he thinks it’s in the best interest of the country.

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