Through the Tweeting-Glass

I think the fascinating thing about these two Trump tweets regarding Roy Moore is the window they give us into Trump's priorities. The problem with Roy Moore isn't that he's a racist, homophobic, pedophile whackadoodle--gosh no.  He could work with that.

The problem is that he's a loser. It's the unforgiveable sin.

Is That Scoundrel Roy Moore Still Here?

Roy Moore files a complaint to block the Alabama Senate result https://t.co/gfW48uSq6G pic.twitter.com/fwFAVaxRME

— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) December 28, 2017

Roy Moore would like to file suit to delay certification of the Alabama Senate election results because he believes there is FRAUD! (In a state with voter ID laws, no less!) And he found a conspiracy theorist who does MATH! that agrees with him! He's also taken a lie detector test that shows that he doesn't think he did anything sexually inappropriate so people should stop SAYING BAD THINGS! And he'll have to stop fundraising if the election is really over, and then he'll only have his charity-grift.


And he can really go away now. He was a terrible candidate and he lost despite endorsements from Steve Bannon and the President and a bunch of fairly awful evangelical people who should feel bad about themselves and won't.

UPDATE: The lawsuit was rejected because sometimes a loss is just a loss.

Merry Christmas. Mister Trump!

In the vein of Twitter diatribe that I think of as "Trump Going 'Boom!'" the Peerless Feeder had to engage with social media to soak up likes and retweets and outrage and whatnot--again. So, in his recent obsession, the FBI is chockfull of wacky liberals out to get him who for entirely partisan reasons tanked the email investigation against Hillary Clinton and ginned up the Russian hacking investigation that his campaign/administration got swept up in (because of all the Russian contacts people in the Trump orbit actually had and the ridiculous mendacity they chose to use to half-assedly hide it)-which now makes career professionals like FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and FBI Counsel Jim Baker his targets for cranky Twitterage.

It's adorable, really--he once pretended he fired James Comey because he was too hard on Clinton (is she supposed to be the phony--or was the investigation?) and now Trump is pissed that the investigation didn't go far enough? The little joys of an extended interobang ( ?!!!) to imply that FBI Deputy Director McCabe might not outlast the period of time he indicated before he retired (when he would be eligible for pension). Does this sound like Trump is going to fire a man before he is eligible for pension--out of sheer spite? To me, a little!  And Trump also says he is learning that James Baker is being reassigned from Fox News. Because he isn't in the loop on personnel and learns everything he needs to know from "the shows" despite never watching tv?  Ah!

Also, he now thinks official reporting of the unemployment rate is spot on despite calling it fake news during his campaign, and doesn't realize that the news covers the stock market on the daily. And he conveniently forgets the robocall and the rally he himself personally held for Roy Moore, the pedophile, whose name will now be associated with Trump's desperate support because his hand in Congress is weak! "Good Republican candidates will win BIG!" for a value of "Good" that means they win and a value of "BIG" that means he will fake it later.

I don't know why he had to explode on Twitter just now, when we are finally able to say "Merry Christmas" and mention "Jesus Christ" and all that. Maybe he's worried about some spirits regarding former associates, or the past, or maybe his present, or maybe he's thinking about Christmases yet to come.

Anyways--Merry Christmas, Mr. Scrooge  Trump!

Omarosa out

Secret Service deactivates Omarosa's White House pass a month before her last day of work https://t.co/qJ72Gpjua8 pic.twitter.com/2AOlHz6hWH

— The Hill (@thehill) December 14, 2017

I'm somewhat interested in hearing Omarosa Manigault Newman's side of her "firingnation" or possibly "resiring" (I'm not sure which portmanteau better describes the condition of signing a resignation with the unspoken understanding that one's posterior has the qualities of a ruminant's primary sustenance), but deactivating her access card definitely implies that she will receive her office personal effects by post. I don't think her job, as publically undefined as it was, could be easy; being ostensibly charged with African-American outreach for the Trump Administration, she was in a position not unlike Hell's outreach to snowballs.

But despite reports that suggest her departure was untidy and possibly vulgar, there is a part of me that wonders with what abrupt dispatch her orders to get herself hence were made in the wake of the loss of the Trump-endorsed Republican Senatorial candidate when I am genuinely unsure what intervention could even be made to detoxify the image of a whirling jackass, who indicated that the "good old days" were back when we had slavery, in the eyes of black people. I also doubt that Chief of Staff John Kelly "let her down gently" from what I can glean of his style and their working relationship. Maybe what is being described as a "tantrum" was exacerbated the way she was treated--although I do think it interesting that she felt that her friend Donald Trump (not the POTUS Trump, but possibly just...as her friend) could be called upon to intervene on her behalf.

I don't pretend I have any insight about this. But as with previous White House firingnations, it's sort of hard to tell what is just a matter of unsuitability between office-holder and job (a failure to appoint "the best people") and some kind of reality-show political drama.

This is exactly the sort of thing that makes me miss "No-Drama Obama" a little more. His White House was not for the gossip-sheets or reality TV.

Trump can Only Be Failed

This is exactly the Tweet I was expecting. 

Alabama Dougies, Moore is Nay Nay

I was on pins and needles with this one, folks, and felt fully resigned to the idea that maybe, there were people who were just great with voting for a potential pedo, but a really good guy who will work hard for the people of Alabama has apparently won in that special senate election, and Roy Moore, who is a terrible person, hasn't conceded because Jesus hasn't told him he lost yet, or something. Anyway, I think that a day when the prosecutor of the Birmingham church bombers and the Olympic Park bomber wins over a person who seemed to be backed by people who might have been pro-segregation and pro-abortion clinic bombing, is a good day.

See, I have thought that Yo'anti-Semite-y Sam was a weird cartoon of conservatism, and not actually a qualified candidate, since well before this sub-genius ever ran for the Senate. I don't get how Steve Bannon decided this wanker was his wanker, but mostly because I am "anti-having wankers for candidates" in the first damn place. How Donald Trump threw himself into supporting Moore at the last gasp should actually be embarrassing for him. He supported Strange in the primary, who was at the very least, a not-screwed-up individual that certainly never grandstanded about the Decalogue whilst being about adolescent upskirts. He went in for Moore well after the damaging sexual assault allegations. And the whole special election never would have taken place if he had not tapped the already-compromised during the campaign Sen. Jeff Sessions for his Attorney General. 

Trump is all over how a loss of a Senate seat for Republicans became possible. But the voter turnout of POC voters, especially women, is what made it happen.  And this despite ongoing attempts to deny the franchise to POC voters in Alabama. 
 

Roy Moore the Eyesore

I've taken a few blog posts in the past couple of months to point out what a scoundrel I think Roy Moore is, but I think the subject deserves just one more before the election.

President Trump has thrown his strong support Moore's way, and the feeling is apparently mutual. And it looks like Vladimir Putin has thrown some support to Roy Moore, and it sounds like the feeling is mutual, there, too. (Maybe this explains why Nigel Farage is about; I can hardly keep straight all Vlad's puppets anymore. If you were interested in talking about the opinions of carpetbaggers.)  The RNC has renewed their financial support of him, even if this move angers and alienates some Republicans who find Moore repugnant.  But I find the most recent campaign events to be very fascinating--

A pro-Trump superPAC has had the candidate sit down with an unlikely interviewer--a 12-year old girl. I'm not sure what the optics were supposed to be--here's a nice young lady that Moore doesn't perv on? (Not likely he would be pervy on camera, anyway, right?) 

At this evening's campaign rally, supporter and former Trump aide Steve Bannon said that there was "a special place in hell" for Republicans who didn't support Moore. He was consciously mimicking Ivanka Trump's comment that there was a special place in Hell for people who prey on children. One could possibly derive an opinion from that that Steve Bannon doesn't give a damn about the well-being of children when the agenda of the party is at stake, but the enhanced quote reveals he could give a fuck about the establishment GOP as well. I really have no idea what Steve Bannon gives a fuck about and find I give a vanishing amount of fucks about that. 

In response to claims that Roy Moore is anti-Semitic over comments he had made regarding George Soros,  Moore's spouse Kayla has come up with a fascinating rejoinder: One of their attorneys is a Jew.  Oh. Well. Enough said.

And as an amusing anecdote that shows Roy Moore's colorful side, an old military buddy recounted the time that they "accidentally" happened by a brothel in Vietnam that had very young prostitutes, sex slaves, really, and stranded some guy there overnight to do whatever...

Which is exactly the story one does tell on a person accused of groping teenagers. 

It's a shitshow, but to be exact, if this rancid bigoted weird creature is elected to the Senate, this eyesore will be Alabama's monument--and no one should really want to see that. 

UPDATE: And then there's his respect for the Constitution, as in, except for the modern bits, and some of the old bits, he nearly thinks it should be upheld. Things like ending slavery (such as we had in what Moore consideres "the good old days") and women voting are what he would consider "problems".  I think he is a problem.

Jimmy O'Keefe Gets Paid For What, Exactly?

So, I get that Project Veritas alleges that they are trying to entrap the lamestream media in the midst of their biases by means of dildo boats and whatnot, and that there was an actual minute when they thought that the Washington Post might actually pay 1000$ to them for dirt on Roy Moore because biasssed! But since this actually totally fell through for them, just like all the other fails, I have to ask--why are they fundraising off of a fuck up?  See, I think this is so that James O Keefe III gets paid a six figure salary for self-promoting, propaganda, and pretending to be a journalist, but that doesn't seem like an investment I'd be totally thrilled with if the whole entirety of things O'Keefe ever did was kill ACORN, and be an embarrassment to three generations of O'Keefes. That doesn't even sound like a real job. That right there, is wingnut welfare. 

Why are the conservatives giving this poor manchild a handout hammock? You are stunting his productivity by rewarding him for limited output. I think this is a crying shame, and maybe a little austerity might help clarify his purpose. 

Also, trying to malign people who come forward in a sexual harassment or assault matter by promoting the idea that accusers are liars is really gross, and not unsurprising from this corner of the fake-news-producing world. 

The Stress of Their Disregard

The reckoning we've been having over sexual harassment has been piling on names and stories of harassment and assault in a way that that can tend to enervate.  For some, it's a reminder of their own assault, harassment, or other abuse; for others, a discovery that the world is populated by too many abusive men entrusted with too much power over others' livelihoods; or maybe it's a mixture of both. It can be a shock to recognize the blind eye that has been turned to the abuse of others from people who considered themselves protected, or to come to terms with the degree that people with quite clear vision aided and covered up the exploitation and dismissal of the humanity of other people for their own personal reasons. 

It's a fucking lot to accept, although a lot of people who have been through it kind of already knew. The insult added to all this injury is the commentary of people who either haven't grasped the pain and waste of all this cultural sexual/sexist bullshit, or will happily lay the blame for all this at the feet of the victims. 

A lot of the handwringing has been about how the allegations against powerful men will now derail their careers and cast a pall over whatever work they've done--there's a better point to be made (as Caroline Framke at Vox has done) about how abusers have been gatekeepers that have hounded out and silenced good talented people from their fields. They could have brilliantly mentored them, building teams and encouraging fledgling enthusiasm, but chose to just be petty and treat them with a kind of disregard. I think of Charlie Rose, saying that he felt that he was "pursuing shared feelings". He, the celebrated interviewer--could not be bothered to ask the women what they felt? No--he disregarded them. Their feelings did not matter. The good, productive journalism they could have assisted in did not matter.

I feel the same sort of recognition regarding the allegations against Rep. John Conyers.  This employee was disregarded. The patterns of protection from his circle against the accuser's claims just seem too familiar to discount. Her ability to do her job was jeopardized by the very person she was working for. How can that be productive? Whatever good Rep. Conyers has done, I have to consider this sort of thing very seriously because it speaks to his effectiveness as a public servant. 

With the politicization of sexual harassment,  sexual abuse, and rape claims, the defenses are not a great look for any culture. We learn that Congress really has created a system where sexual malefactors never learn from their fuckups.  We learn that anti-gay activist Tony Perkins is okay with same-sex sexual harassment, if the perpetrator is also vocally anti-gay and in the process of gathering political power.  These are examples of disregard--people not caring who is harmed. 

In the defense of former Judge Roy Moore, the arguments go further: Pastor Flip Benham claims Roy Moore may have favored underage girls because older women were either married or tainted. It's disgustingly reminiscent of the abstinence lessons that compare a woman who has lost her virginity to chewed gum.  It disregards a woman's value as being about anything but what is between her legs. Pastor Earl Wise performs an astonishing act of victim-blaming, managing to cite the young girls being pursued as having asked for it and looking like they were 20 years old, anyway.  I would be interested to know if Pastor Wise has made this mistake about the age of young girls, himself, and whether he ever felt himself the prey of their "sweet dreams". 

What I don't hear in any of these arguments is any empathy for why these accusations are being made, or any acceptance that Moore may have behaved inappropriately at all. The accusers are disregarded. But of all shocking defenses, I have to go to Stephen Moore--who equated Roy Moore's underage predation with...being pro-choice.  Of all the nonsensical claims that could be made his has the worst math. Both the issues of reproductive choice and not getting raped rely on a respect for bodily autonomy and the world where support for reproductive liberty equals child molestation only exists where one divides both sides by the proposition that women have no rights that a man need respect.  This is horrific. Women, their right to and ownership of their bodies, are disregarded. For the sake, as near as I can tell, of tax cuts. 

And of course, President Trump likes Moore too. And he would.

This is the disregard that stresses us; the claims that we are liars when we talk about our abuse, or that our abuse doesn't matter because we are taking things the wrong way. This is the narrative that we don't know what is best for us, and the lie that our careers are only made possible by support of "great men". This is the dismissal of children's innocence. This is the blame that falls on victims. This is sexism and class war.   This is religion reinforcing a cultural crime. 

And while I hate it all, I am glad we are finally airing it out, even though there will be lies, and bullshit, and tears all around. Because too many people have been disregarded and we need to stop and recognize we all benefit when we all can live our potential. 

The above scene is Bernini's Apollo and Daphne. Daphne was a nymph pursued by Apollo who chose to be a tree rather than succumb to his advances. Things happen in mythology for reasons.  The title of this post is a call-back to the novel by Tim Powers, The Stress of Her Regard. Who got his title from here. 

I'm Not Saying Roy Moore's Attorney is a Scoundrel, But...

Roy Moore's Attny. Trenton Garmon suggests Ali Velshi's "background" would help him understand why Moore would date underage women — @AliVelshi is from Canada pic.twitter.com/e061tiz9Nx

— MSNBC (@MSNBC) November 15, 2017

I think the amazing thing about this is I'm trying to imagine the POV of a person who thinks it is OK to reference someone's apparent nationality of origin to presuppose they are capable of understanding the moral relativity of perving on underage girls, because, you know. Like arranged child marriages n' shit. It is possible this individual has really failed to ever leave the bubble of his own culture this hard? I almost want to see how this spectacular televised bigot-fail even made it into production from a somewhat-educated individual's head, and I just can't.

Look, deep down, I try to not be the liberal coastal elitist queer working-class anti-racist commuter-college BA having atheist that red state folk might have difficulty understanding. And yet, such is my life. I get I'm not accessible on all levels to all readers. 

But this guy is amazeballs opaque to me. Here's an actual site his lawfirm owns-- botchedabortionlawyer.com. It's different. He claims to care about female-bodied people's abortion experiences and admits that the harm from the procedure is rare, but is stating:

If you, a friend or loved one has been the victim of a botched abortion, we are here to help. Our firm has extensive experience in preparing and litigating cases on behalf of injured victims. We will evaluate your claim free of charge and there will be no fee unless we collect compensation on your behalf.

Often times the mother who consented to the abortion is not even aware that her unborn child may have had a heartbeat, could feel pain or even had brainwave activity at the time the doctor ended the child’s life. Despite many state’s requiring a sonogram be done and/or a waiting period complied with, often times the abortion clinic staff and medical doctor are more concerned with performing the abortion rather than informing the mother or ensuring that the conditions are sanitary and to the appropriate standard of care. Others viewed sonogram pictures of their child which were nearly unreadable and others were subject to unsanitary conditions such as unclean rooms following prior procedures, often times against numerous state law.

Look at this. "State's" with an unnecessary apostrophe, and "numerous state law" not being plural? How do people alleging to be professionals at law, making their living from words, not try harder at advertising themselves as familiar with the language they are supposedly arguing cases in? It seems like the specificity of the URL "botched abortion lawyer" indicates that they have a specialty in weird and rare Kermit Gosnell-like conditions, but these are in fact exactly that. Weird and rare. Also, I have to wonder about the "heartbeat" and "sonogram" language, because I do not believe that any woman has ever not known what she wanted an abortion for, or failed to understand what that fetus was, or would be persuaded that the presence of a heartbeat or a picture of the fetus would necessarily be more than an annoyance. This is the fake abortion clinic level of concern about women's choice and health.

So--he's defending a person alleged to have sexually harassed or assaulted six or so people as a person who would sort of whaambulance-chase mostly non-existent abortion regretters? Yeah, this is the right guy, alright. I do not understand how this is the attorney of someone trying to establish they have their shit sufficiently together to be a US Senator.

Roy Moore is Still a Scoundrel

The RNC has pulled its support from Moore, and once-dedicated backer Steve Bannon now supposedly has qualms about the controversial candidate.  I don't know what the next poll numbers are going to look like when they drop, but the local news media have gotten mighty nostalgic over Moore's "back-when". Kayla Moore was apparently a classmate of one of Moore's accusers according to Twitter. That's...something. She has also tried to spread false information --

City directory confirms Ole Hickory House stood at 305 East Meighan Blvd in Gadsden in 1977. Site now has Rally’s. pic.twitter.com/5SG707uwJp

— WilliamThornton (@billineastala) November 14, 2017

Which has been debunked.

Also the Moore campaign seems to have fished out the canine ocarina with a somewhat anti-Semitic robo-call purporting to be a "Bernie Bernstein" from WaPo offering 1000$ for dirt, and Moore's own amusing rhetoric about "creating new rights in 1965" . (Why are all these dogs barking?*)

If he's going down, it's going to be ugly. If he's staying up, man, that's ugly, too. There's supposedly a letter from a lawyer suing local AL media on the Moore family and their charity's behalf, but it looks almost too absurd to be real. (Unless it isn't--threatening to sue WaPo but then going after small fry with no money is a tactic I wouldn't put past these bozos. But no professional would write legal demands while coming down from peyote buttons and that thing their veterinarian friend said would get a caribou off. But then again, Trenton Garmon, the lawyer in question, did go on TV and call CNN's Don Lemon "Don Lemon Easy Peezy Lemon Squeezy" so I don't even know. Maybe he's just foolish.)

Which isn't even to say Moore is a dead cert to lose. But what I am looking at is not something the national Republican party should want tied to them like a creepy, Bible-beating albatross, either.

UPDATE:

I think this is awful but relevant, this is Trenton Garmon rambling about why talking about hating on gays is okay.



He's got some issues, there. If it isn't politically incorrect to say so, I hope he gets the hell over his glaring problems. It might be a mote, and it mote not. But I sense a need for serious ocular lumber removal.


*UPDATE: A good argument circulating on Twitter is that he was referring to Griswold v. Connecticut, which makes more sense. So, not civil rights, just birth control and abortion.

Roy Moore is a Scoundrel 2

These Alabama women weighed in on Roy Moore allegations: "It was common knowledge, you just steered away from him. ... You just knew that things took place," one said. https://t.co/Z95buNYJBx

— Anderson Cooper 360° (@AC360) November 14, 2017

After news of a fifth accuser came out today, we got to see and hear directly the statement of a woman who was clearly deeply affected by what she experienced and remains hurt to this day. I found the statement of Beverly Young Nelson to be credible and harrowing, but what strikes me is that she was told by him that she would not be believed because he was a DA and she was a child. The combination of abuse of his position and her vulnerability just sickens me. Well, she isn't a child anymore and I don't know what he is, but I will stick to the word "scoundrel". And I'm for every scoundrel getting their due.

The portrait that is being uncovered of Moore, as evidenced by the women speaking in the CNN clip, is not flattering to Moore, but it also shows that people knew. A recent story finds that Moore had been banned from cruising the local mall and YMCA. With this kind of information, it becomes a lot harder for him (or his backers) to sell the idea that he's being torn down by either leftists or the GOP establishment. I don't think it makes him look any better to blame anyone else for what's coming out now, and he might even do himself and his party a favor by stepping aside. Although I don't know where that takes the AL GOP from here--current Sen. Luther Strange has said he won't run a write-in campaign, and I can see where he has a couple points--for one thing, the voters had their say on him, and Moore is the guy they went with. And for another, an official Republican candidate and a write-in could just split the conservative vote based on the current poll numbers, leaving AL with a Democratic Senator anyway.

The recent revelations of a history of predation upon underage girls aside, Roy Moore's other history can't really be glossed over. The man was removed from a position as Chief Justice twice for not holding with current Supreme Court rulings on the display of the Decalogue on public property (which I've always held to be as poor an understanding of the First Amendment as it is of the First Commandment for several values of "no establishment" and "graven image") and for disrespecting the Windsor decision. He has shown himself to be indifferent to ethical concerns regarding his charity, paying himself from it without claiming the salary thereof, not filing returns, and paying a salary to his oft-jailed son, for reasons no one can quite understand.

This kind of thing makes me goggle at the letter signed by just over 50 pastors in favor of Moore's senate bid despite his infidelity to the law of the land and the Lord. I would like to think after all the recent newly revealed information, they might think better of what they signed their names to. And I will say I admire the position of GOP Senator Jeff Flake in that matter. He made it very clear that he would support a Democrat over Roy Moore:

Just to be clear. If the choice is between Roy Moore and a Democrat, I would run to the polling place to vote for the Democrat https://t.co/Ec96HRt228

— Jeff Flake (@JeffFlake) November 13, 2017

And I think that has to be sticking point for a person of conscience--do you identify as a Republican first, or as a decent person? Would I call this a modern litmus test in politics? It literally makes me feel a little hurt and astonished that anyone even needs to do a moral calculation before deciding after all, they would not prefer to support a child predator. I feel like this one should be easy.

Judge Roy Moore Is Fixing to Sue

For some reason, Alabama Senatorial Candidate Roy Moore thinks he might like to sue the newspaper of record that broke a story about women who have accused him of pursuing a "romantic" relationship with them back in the bygone era of the 1970's while they were underage.  This newspaper followed several leads to find four separate women who did not know one another, and had 30 sources. There is no way at all that cases could come together swiftly enough for actual court decisions to play a part in the outcome of the AL Senate race. But you know what could?

More credibly-sourced stories about other young ladies who might have been propositioned. Which, based on at least some of what Moore has been saying, might be some number--see, he hasn't denied chatting up girls in their teens while he was an established adult. He's admitted he's gone around with them, kissed them, and asked their mammas if it was okay.  And if a girl is young enough that you have to ask her mamma if it's okay (not to mention daddies, because he seems to have been cruising family court to see which lil' ol' gals was daddy-free) maybe that girl is too young.  But what we know about predators of the young is that they keep trying. They usually have any number of contacts. "Not generally"--the phrase used by Moore regarding his "dates" with underage girls, means "occasionally". He might not be the best "judge" of how often he offended. 

I don't know if this is a good look. He thinks it is, though, which probably just adds to the argument against him. His reasoning leaves a lot to be desired.