“In a development largely ignored by the press...” has been an ongoing problem for quite some time. We have stories about Ron DeSantis wearing lifts in his boots taking precedence over President Biden’s handling of multiple crises at once. Biden is also in the unenviable position of being blamed for things that are essentially out of his control, while not being given adequate credit for his remarkable accomplishments. It’s just infuriating.
Civil discourse is breaking down. This week, I read an exceptional, but very long, article that is essentially a meta-analysis of details available about the rocket or missile that hit the hospital in Gaza, causing hundreds of casualties. The article was published on Substack late last week by Seth Abramson, an independent journalist and former journalism professor. Because his analysis leads to the conclusion that it was an IDF missile or rocket that hit the hospital, while IDF continues to dismiss this, he received an abundance of hate male, including comments on his Substack site that said he, a Jew himself, was cheering on the deaths of Israelis. He continues to stand by his analysis, and I respect him for that.
It is making them less relevant for people who have alternative sources and look at their information critically. Unfortunately too few people are doing this.
Thanks, I read Judd’s newsletters. He is another investigative journalist I deeply respect. He’s also really good at revealing people and organizations who are funding various candidates.
Huh. When the "healthy democracy" dies because of the media's lack of skillful unbiased but truthful journalism, the media empires will br forcefully taken over by the fascists and there will be no one left to stand up for them. And those faithless money hounds will, no doubt, be utterly astonished.
I don't always agree with Seth, but I did appreciate his view on this horrific tragedy on the hospital. Israel is using a similar strategy as Russian in my opinion except they lie about where the safe areas are. They tell the Palestinian citizen to go south for safety. The area gets bombed. Go here for safety away from Gaza, and that place gets bombed. The focus of missiles on hospitals, housing units, and other places of help and shelter. I understand that HAMAS uses the tunnels for hiding among the innocent citizens, but the amount of children this country has makes the consequences of war even more horrendous.
I’m uncomfortable with unsupported allegations of lying about such a serious matter.
I have a more generous hypothesis about this: lack of coordination among Israeli units. It’s possible that a high-level unit urged Gazans to move to the South, but didn’t coordinate with units that actually drew up attack plans and executed them. That would be incompetence, not lying with intention to kill civilians.
Incompetence is not an excuse, but it isn’t the same as killing intentionally.
I agree with everything you wrote here. I think Seth provides some of the most comprehensive independent journalism available today. It’s incredibly difficult to report on a war from thousands of miles away, since Israel is not allowing any journalists into Gaza. What Seth does is curate reports and articles from all over the globe, and he tries to make sense of them in his detailed analyses. He also studies videos that are available. It took me over two hours to read through this report, but it was well worth it.
Hi, Janet. Thanks for clarifying what Seth does--he is commenting on the work of other journalists. You are a better person than me; I gave up after 45 minutes of trying to wade through Seth's detailed review of the reporting sources on the explosion at hospital. I kept waiting for the proof that Israel was responsible for the explosion. I gave up when I started to click through to his underlying sources, which seemed to conclude that the PIJ was responsible. See, e.g.,, this BBC analysis he cited: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clqHa1PP0TQ&t=80s
If you read the entire article, can point me to the evidence that he relies on for his conclusion that an Israeli missile was responsible for the damage, I would really appreciate it. I made a good faith effort to follow Seth's argument, but it never seemed to get to the point. Perhaps it does, and I just didn't have more than 45 minutes to spare. Thank you!
Hi Robert, I almost gave up on reading as well, because what he does in the beginning is say that it is more than likely that this was an Israeli strike. He explains his conclusions up front, but then he goes through a detailed history of all the potential and likely mistaken reporting. He then goes into a detailed description of the inconsistencies in the IDF’s public statements. It isn’t until near the end that he draws his conclusions. He also includes long pieces from his Threads account that led up to his conclusions. I actually had to read this over two days allotting half hour slots to it in order to get through it. But I was determined to see this through to the end because I was so curious to see how he arrived at this conclusion. I archived the article, but I will go back to it now and try to find the location where the summary begins that shows his definitive conclusions. The other thing about Seth is that he seems to have an unusual understanding of military jargon and also what various rockets and missiles are capable of. I’ve never seen a journalist write in such detail about the capacity of various rockets and missiles. I think one of the commenters asked him to do an executive summary, but he refused to because he said that is not his journalism style. I’ll come back to this post as soon as I can with the location of his concluding remarks.
Yes, I do read his newsletter. Perhaps not as frequently as this one, but I do like his work. I’ve been reading all his stuff on the Gaza-Israel war. This particular article I was referring to here is an in-depth analysis that would take anyone at least two hours to read, if not more.
Yes, all true. But accusing a long-time, respected journalist of cheering on the death of Israelis because he has clear evidence showing that the rocket was fired from the Israeli side is not really all that civil. It may, of course, provide some people with release. There’s a way to express opinions without accusing people of bad behavior.
Hi, Janet--this is what I am looking for in Seth's article but did not see. Can you point me to it? Thanks: " he has clear evidence showing that the rocket was fired from the Israeli side."
Hi again, Robert. I responded to your other post under my other comment. I went back into Seth’s article, and if you scroll all the way down to a heading that reads “The Shocking Twist: The Artillery Theory,” you’ll get a good understanding of how he arrives at these conclusions. There is then a summary after that section that explains more and has some interesting links, including a statement from former President Obama that I did not even know existed until reading this. Just a warning that even reading the segments I mention here will probably take over a half hour, if not longer. But I tend to be a slow reader.
I find that it is generally the case that when one person declares they have uncovered something that no one else seems to have uncovered and that even after they "unveil the truth" they are still the only one who sees it, that we're in Tin Hat Territory.
He’s not saying that, Alan. He has done a search of sources published all over the globe, including in the United States, and including a new analysis from the New York Times. He basically conducted a meta-analysis, looking at videos and myriad other sources to put together this piece of work he published. He’s not saying that he’s absolutely right; he’s just saying the likelihood of his proposition is high based on the data. I haven’t drawn any conclusions. I just read through the whole thing because I found it rather intriguing. I’ll go into my archive and search for the link to this in case you want to read it; but just a fair warning that it will probably take over two hours to get through it. It’s more of a thesis than a newsletter.
Oh, then I misunderstood you. My apologies. I think this journalist did a fine job of breaking through the fog and doing a very detailed analysis of this hospital debacle.
There is a story in a book of Nassredine the Sage who was a fool. A fool asks Nassredine how long it will take to get to a town. Nassredine doesn't answer. The fool takes some steps, and Nassredine says, "At this pace it will take two hours." I thought of this because if we don't clearly call when we see bias being acted on, the time it takes to get to where we want to go will not be only two hours.
(Mais a peine avait-il fait quelques pas que Nasreddine l'appela et lui dit calmement: Si tu marches à ce rythme, il te faudra deux heures.)
There is SO much to think about in today’s post. At the moment, I have one simple question as the rest seems overwhelming and impossibly difficult. Why did some Democrats vote to not expel Santos? I can’t begin to understand that they think he should keep his seat in the House.
Here is the text of Raskin's statement for those who do not use Twitter:
I’m a Constitution guy. The House has expelled five people in our history, three for joining the Confederacy as traitors to the Union and two after they were convicted of serious criminal offenses. Santos has not been criminally convicted yet of any of the offenses he has been indicted for that were cited in the Resolution nor has he been found guilty of ethics offenses in the House internal process.
“This would be a terrible precedent to set, expelling people who have not been convicted of a crime and without internal due process. If and when Santos is convicted of these serious criminal offenses or ethics charges, I will certainly vote to expel him. Until then, it’s a very risky road to go down and we have to stick by due process and the rule of law, as obvious as the eventual result seems. In these times of war, chaos, insurrection, division and lawlessness, the rule of law is a lifeline for us.
“I can think of four or five Democratic Members the Republicans would like to expel without any criminal conviction or adverse ethics findings tomorrow simply because they hate their politics. Indeed, the same New York Republicans who want to expel Santos now because he is a complete political albatross for them acted to vigorously defend him in the spring because they wanted his vote for their party on the floor. If Members are not going to be expelled for purely political reasons, we need to stick to due process and the rule of law.
“Back in the spring, the Republicans promised action within 60 days on the sprawling Santos ethics investigation, but nothing has happened since then. Now, they are promising action by November 17. Good, it’s about time
I appreciate your sending this link - thank you. Its hard to keep straight these days who we know to be guilty from who's been proven in a court of law to be guilty. I'm guilty of conflating the two! And mostly because our wheel of justice can turn so slowly and it feels like too many escape it all together if they have enough time and money to outlast. Ruskin is right -- such a smart guy. Patience . . .
The Santos situation is simple. By not voting Santos out knowing he will probably not be re-elected and letting the courts decide the Democrats appear to be non political and don’t set a prescient thst could come back to haunt them. It’s smart politics.
Because that would devolve expulsion to a simple yes/no vote. What if next month MAGA Mike moves to have Adam Schiff, or Jamie Raskin expelled on a simple vote? Sanots needs to be removed from Congress, either by a conviction in his corruption trial or the old fashioned way, via the ballot box.
Prior to 2016, I was a lifelong Republican. I was careful not to criticize any Republican candidate because, even though I might disagree with them on an issue, I still preferred them to a Democrat. Trump changed my view. I am now a Democrat.
I do not understand the left's obsession with dividing their party into factions when the ONLY thing that matters right now in this country, is defeating Trump in 2024. For me personally, it doesn't matter what Biden does or doesn't do. What matters is defeating the most corrupt criminal to ever run for president. If the left keeps this up, Trump will be president again. Is that what they want? I hope not.
Most days it feels like the Democrats are constantly in hand to hand combat with Republicans on multiple fronts over a wide variety of issues and concerns. As an example “the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has scored the House Republicans’ bill to provide $14.3 billion in aid to Israel and to “offset” that spending with $14.3 billion in cuts to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). As those of us who have followed the economics of adequately funding the IRS predicted, the CBO found that the cuts to the IRS would cost far more than they save. As it is currently constructed, the bill would add $26.8 billion to the national budget deficit” . How many voters know about this and where is the extensive media coverage. The challenge is most Americans have no idea what the “ national budget deficit” is and could care less. I think the challenge the Democratic Party has is how to adequately address the multiple issues created and supported by Republicans that most Americans do not support in a simple and clear hard hitting message everyone will understand.
Complex issues require complex answers, and they aren't always easy to understand. Republicans dumb everything down for their base, which is why Johnson’s flippant comment about spending cuts and deficits is probably perfectly logical for them. A friend of mine in Drive-By Truckers, Mike Cooley, wrote a song about it called “Made Up English Oceans”
“'Cause only simple men can see the logic in whatever
Smarter men can whittle down 'til you can fit it on a sticker
Get it stuck like mud and bugs to names that set the standard
They'll live it like it's gospel, and they'll quote it like it's scripture”
Speaker Johnson’s new spokesperson will be crafting messages for the base.⬇️
“Shah, a veteran GOP operative who served in the Trump White House, also happened to spend four years as Fox’s “brand protection” expert before leaving in disgrace this past June after the right-wing network settled Dominion Voting Systems’ defamation lawsuit for a massive $787.5 million.”
I'm in no way advocating for Democrats to take this approach, by the way, it’s not conducive for a healthy democracy, but that’s not a concern for Republicans.
Re the ongoing Tommy Tuberville fiasco, are there grounds to challenge any of the several anti-democratic Senate rules (holds, filibuster, etc.) in court? It seems self-evident that these rules deprive millions of Americans of the representation to which they’re entitled. I know it’s a stretch, but I’m curious. Robert? Another reader?
The filibuster rule is plainly unconstitutional and should be abolished, entirely. The Senate was designed to be antidemocratic by giving small states equal representation. Exacerbating that undemocratic feature by piling on the filibuster is wrong and unconstitutional. Senators representing 17% of Americans can stop most legislation under the filibuster. The Framers would revolt if they thought that outcome was being promoted by the Senate.
I believe there is a silent majority who are saddened about the tragedy on both sides. We feel horrible about the terrorism of Hamas and the loss of civilian life in Gaza. It is frustrating to watch it unfold every day.
At the same time we have the Republicans (Mike Johnson and Tommy Tuberville) doing their best to stymie our progress. This is what makes me angry.
I support Biden all the way and trust his judgment that he is working on these issues behind the scenes.
I got a good, much needed laugh at Robert’s comment about MTG having difficulty “thinking and understanding words in the English language.” There is a long list of basic human functions with which Marjorie has problems.
The irony is stunning. Biden is the ONLY leader who could wisely handle (not solve) the dreadful Hamas war and now Biden being vilified for it.....when his opponent would be a complete disaster in the same situation. The progressives who don't like Biden would prefer xxxxxxx, really?
Spot on, Carole! It's a matter of expectations. Everybody expects President Biden to be better, while everybody expects the Defendant to be awful. Guess which bar is easier to clear.
I'm pretty sure it was Rebecca Solnit who first crafted the remark about personal voting (I've been quoting her in my GOTV letters I've written through Vote Forward to voters in VA recently) that says: "Your vote is not a Valentine; it is a chess move for the world that you would like to see." I may be slightly mis-quoting here -- anyone's free to check my work -- but this is the gist and something we all need to take to heart in the upcoming elections. As you've said, there's no problem w/disagreements within a party, there's no reason to 100% think that any president is a godlike figure who can do no wrong/not fulfill our expectations, and there's every reason in the world to support Biden in this election cycle. Unlike the GOP, we are not fractious toddlers who can't handle not getting our way all the time.
To Robert's point, the GOP has essentially split into two parties united in name only: the traditional interventionist/Reaganomics wing and the MAGA isolationist/populist wing. That's not just disagreeing on one issue. It's having two diametrically opposed world views.
Also, if you look back to World War II, there were progressive groups in the US and UK who were virulently opposed to Allied bombing of German cities that caused civilian casualties, even though the Germans were bombing civilian targets in London and other cities in the UK. Dr. Goebbels (the Nazi propaganda minister) and his minions did their best to stir up these protests, releasing horrific photos of dead children and families and the like. Since all press reporting in Germany was subject to scrutiny by Goebbels, he was able to control that narrative.
So nothing new under the sun and all that.
Finally, I think primarying certain Democrats who do the party more harm that good is perfectly justified, especially where the constituents do not feel that the member of Congress is adquately representing their district. That threat is what keeps our representatives accountable.
ETA: Remember too that the vast majority of those "I am not voiting for Biden" young progressives on social media (a) do not vote anyway and (b) live in very very very deep blues areas like the Bay Area and Brooklyn where Democrats are in no danger of losing.
Alan, I always appreciate your balanced perspective.
I live in a red county in Fl. The local Dem precinct chair had a next door neighbor with much Trump signage including a huge F@#@ Biden Flag. When I commented on it she said he wasn’t even registered to vote.
Those types of voters are not found in swing states in numbers large enough to make a difference.
Again- look at the links at the top of my comment. This was a whole media narrative in 2020, that Biden would lose because "young progressives" would not support him.
And then that turned out not to be true.
Not that hard to understand either. "Young Progressives Reject Biden" headlines generate far more clicks and thus far more ad revenue than "Democrats Still United Behind Biden" headlines.
Agreed, Robert Hubbell. Democrats need to grow up and realize that what binds us together is so much greater than what divides us. Like many, I am appalled at Israel's callous and seemingly indiscriminate use of violence against Palestinian civilians. My heart aches for them and for the Israeli civilians who have been kidnapped or killed. But, we don't know all that has been done behind the scenes by Biden, Blinken, and others to temper Israel's fury thus far. Abandoning Biden would be handing Trump the Presidency in all likelihood, as his base would be even more energized by our defection. We need to stay the course because the alternative is the demise of our democratic society and our freedoms as we have known them, and even possibly martial law, the thought of which is chilling.
Lastly, the only part of your clinical assessment of what the GOP would do if they regained the White House is your statement that "science will be replaced by Biblical teaching." As a Christian, I have to defend the actual contents of The Holy Bible. It is those who manipulate and distort God's word who are anti-science. In actuality, a fair-minded reader would find that The Bible is not anti-science at all.
Pat, thanks for your comment. I agree that the Bible is not anti-science. It is not science. It deals with matters of faith and morals.
I was referring to those who use the Bible to teach articles of faith as science. People of faith are certainly free to believe that God created the earth in seven days six thousand years ago. As a matter of religious faith, that is fine. Teaching that theory in science class is wrong.
Mr. Hubbell, I 'm just now seeing your reply to my post. Thanks for responding and for acknowledging that the Bible is not anti-science. As a retired biomedical researcher myself, I agree that the Biblical explanation for creation is not proven science, although there is some scientific evidence to support it. On the other hand, the theory of evolution of individual species has been scientifically proven. But of note, Darwin's concept of a single originating source for all living creatures, including mankind, has not been definitively proven.
As a Christ follower, I don't believe the Bible was meant to be a science textbook. Some very interesting thoughts can be found in the book, "Making Sense of the Bible" by Adam Hamilton. Be aware that Hamilton is a United Methodist pastor.
This is sort of like the main stream media giving such negative press to Biden. They only focus on the fundamentalists and white supremacists instead of those who truly follow the Bible to shape public opinion. Another treat for the MAGA’s.
Is my observation that VP Harris is being involved more, recently, on point? If she is to be his running mate again (and of course she will) then she needs to be perked up, for sure.
And I'm also wondering whether it would ever be appropriate for the President to host a "conference" for the congressional democrats - really for the purpose of responding to the objections of those who believe his Israel policy is against Palestine. I'm imagining that he would "hear" them and then might even modify his policy in response or at least point out how he is already trying to intervene in behalf of the Palestinians (which it seems he is) but he might ask them for suggestions about what further he might do. They need to be heard, by him, in order for there to be more coordination and unity among the Democrats
Robert is absolutely right. There is much more that should unite us than what divides us. We should continue to have discourse, respectfully, and seek to achieve understanding and consensus.
In many matters, there are no right answers. We must seek to find the best answers to serve the greater good. That, to me is a bigger difference than policies between Democrats and Republicans. We stand for the greater good; they stand for every person for themselves. We are one for all, and they are all for one.
It seems to me that the kind of bills that Biden is passing, as well as his executive orders, are all forward-looking actions that should benefit the youth of America, the people who will be running this country in the future. There will always be people who criticize even a very good president. I’m just hoping that young voters begin to see how Biden’s accomplishments are going to have a positive affect on their futures. This is what his campaign needs to be focusing on. So many things he has done, especially protecting Native American sacred lands, creating national monuments, etc., are completely flying under the radar.
You're right, Janet. We need to find a way to cut thru the noise and reach those young voters somehow. And we need to frame our own messaging in a more positive and forward-looking way. I've mentioned a few times that I'd like to see President Biden do a version of a fireside chat. It could be monthly, and should be in formats that reach everybody (TikTok, Facebook, X, Instagram, TV, etc.). I think it could be really good for the country and the world.
I think it's the perfect medium for him, and could help to calm things. I just sent him a letter today suggesting it. I seriously doubt that he or anyone close to him will see it, but they certainly wouldn't if I didn't sent it!
I follow David Hogg and Victor Shi on X (Shitter now) as they are young and definitely on the Biden-Harris wagon. Hogg was a student in the Parkland shootings. Both are brilliant and they also promoted the wonderful Maxwell Frost to run for Congress. He is the youngest member in history to win a seat. There are many young women and men running for everything from city council to mayor to their State Assemblies, and onto Congress. Don’t discount the youth! In fact, Taylor Swift is to be commended for her ability to influence her young fans to register to vote by a 23% increase. 35,252 fans registered on Vote.org.
I do believe that these mainstream news reports about the youth turning away from Biden are exaggerated. I do not have a Twitter account, in fact, I don’t have any social media accounts, but I know about these young men, and I think they’re excellent advocates for Biden.
We are Democrats and Progressives; we air our dirty clothes in public, fight like Cats but in the end, will come together to reelect President Biden. Because the alternative is too horrible; an untethered Trump seeking revenge on everybody who wronged him. An example was the outrage over Democrats in the House joining Republicans to not expel Mr Santos. Twitter was aflame with criticism until Mr Raskin released his justification, then the fires died down.
And then there's the Senate, a world of obscure rules and accommodations written like a Monty Python sketch where you have to have a vote on having a vote, or let one member bring progress to a halt.
All this is a result of the razor thin margins in both houses of Government. But despite all this disagreement and rancor, President Biden forges ahead, guiding the country with a firm hand and resolve.
“In a development largely ignored by the press...” has been an ongoing problem for quite some time. We have stories about Ron DeSantis wearing lifts in his boots taking precedence over President Biden’s handling of multiple crises at once. Biden is also in the unenviable position of being blamed for things that are essentially out of his control, while not being given adequate credit for his remarkable accomplishments. It’s just infuriating.
Civil discourse is breaking down. This week, I read an exceptional, but very long, article that is essentially a meta-analysis of details available about the rocket or missile that hit the hospital in Gaza, causing hundreds of casualties. The article was published on Substack late last week by Seth Abramson, an independent journalist and former journalism professor. Because his analysis leads to the conclusion that it was an IDF missile or rocket that hit the hospital, while IDF continues to dismiss this, he received an abundance of hate male, including comments on his Substack site that said he, a Jew himself, was cheering on the deaths of Israelis. He continues to stand by his analysis, and I respect him for that.
The mainstream press is working hand in hand with the Republican Party to destroy our democracy. Popular Information discusses this today.
https://popular.info/p/why-reporters-play-dumb
It is making them less relevant for people who have alternative sources and look at their information critically. Unfortunately too few people are doing this.
Thanks, I read Judd’s newsletters. He is another investigative journalist I deeply respect. He’s also really good at revealing people and organizations who are funding various candidates.
They only care about ad revenue and engagement. Money is more important than fair reporting and a healthy democracy to them.
Huh. When the "healthy democracy" dies because of the media's lack of skillful unbiased but truthful journalism, the media empires will br forcefully taken over by the fascists and there will be no one left to stand up for them. And those faithless money hounds will, no doubt, be utterly astonished.
It's always a Leopards Ate My Face moment...
Thanks for the laugh--although the subject matter itself is not amusing
I don't always agree with Seth, but I did appreciate his view on this horrific tragedy on the hospital. Israel is using a similar strategy as Russian in my opinion except they lie about where the safe areas are. They tell the Palestinian citizen to go south for safety. The area gets bombed. Go here for safety away from Gaza, and that place gets bombed. The focus of missiles on hospitals, housing units, and other places of help and shelter. I understand that HAMAS uses the tunnels for hiding among the innocent citizens, but the amount of children this country has makes the consequences of war even more horrendous.
I’m uncomfortable with unsupported allegations of lying about such a serious matter.
I have a more generous hypothesis about this: lack of coordination among Israeli units. It’s possible that a high-level unit urged Gazans to move to the South, but didn’t coordinate with units that actually drew up attack plans and executed them. That would be incompetence, not lying with intention to kill civilians.
Incompetence is not an excuse, but it isn’t the same as killing intentionally.
I agree with everything you wrote here. I think Seth provides some of the most comprehensive independent journalism available today. It’s incredibly difficult to report on a war from thousands of miles away, since Israel is not allowing any journalists into Gaza. What Seth does is curate reports and articles from all over the globe, and he tries to make sense of them in his detailed analyses. He also studies videos that are available. It took me over two hours to read through this report, but it was well worth it.
Hi, Janet. Thanks for clarifying what Seth does--he is commenting on the work of other journalists. You are a better person than me; I gave up after 45 minutes of trying to wade through Seth's detailed review of the reporting sources on the explosion at hospital. I kept waiting for the proof that Israel was responsible for the explosion. I gave up when I started to click through to his underlying sources, which seemed to conclude that the PIJ was responsible. See, e.g.,, this BBC analysis he cited: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clqHa1PP0TQ&t=80s
If you read the entire article, can point me to the evidence that he relies on for his conclusion that an Israeli missile was responsible for the damage, I would really appreciate it. I made a good faith effort to follow Seth's argument, but it never seemed to get to the point. Perhaps it does, and I just didn't have more than 45 minutes to spare. Thank you!
Hi Robert, I almost gave up on reading as well, because what he does in the beginning is say that it is more than likely that this was an Israeli strike. He explains his conclusions up front, but then he goes through a detailed history of all the potential and likely mistaken reporting. He then goes into a detailed description of the inconsistencies in the IDF’s public statements. It isn’t until near the end that he draws his conclusions. He also includes long pieces from his Threads account that led up to his conclusions. I actually had to read this over two days allotting half hour slots to it in order to get through it. But I was determined to see this through to the end because I was so curious to see how he arrived at this conclusion. I archived the article, but I will go back to it now and try to find the location where the summary begins that shows his definitive conclusions. The other thing about Seth is that he seems to have an unusual understanding of military jargon and also what various rockets and missiles are capable of. I’ve never seen a journalist write in such detail about the capacity of various rockets and missiles. I think one of the commenters asked him to do an executive summary, but he refused to because he said that is not his journalism style. I’ll come back to this post as soon as I can with the location of his concluding remarks.
Lucian Truscott also writes about technical military stuff, among other things.
Yes, I do read his newsletter. Perhaps not as frequently as this one, but I do like his work. I’ve been reading all his stuff on the Gaza-Israel war. This particular article I was referring to here is an in-depth analysis that would take anyone at least two hours to read, if not more.
Just to be clear, the definition of “children” are those 18 and younger.
Discourse can provide release and it shows our biases and can lead to humor. Without it we become zombies.
Yes, all true. But accusing a long-time, respected journalist of cheering on the death of Israelis because he has clear evidence showing that the rocket was fired from the Israeli side is not really all that civil. It may, of course, provide some people with release. There’s a way to express opinions without accusing people of bad behavior.
Hi, Janet--this is what I am looking for in Seth's article but did not see. Can you point me to it? Thanks: " he has clear evidence showing that the rocket was fired from the Israeli side."
What I should’ve written is that he has clear evidence that it is “more than likely” that the rocket was fired from Israel into Gaza.
Hi again, Robert. I responded to your other post under my other comment. I went back into Seth’s article, and if you scroll all the way down to a heading that reads “The Shocking Twist: The Artillery Theory,” you’ll get a good understanding of how he arrives at these conclusions. There is then a summary after that section that explains more and has some interesting links, including a statement from former President Obama that I did not even know existed until reading this. Just a warning that even reading the segments I mention here will probably take over a half hour, if not longer. But I tend to be a slow reader.
I find that it is generally the case that when one person declares they have uncovered something that no one else seems to have uncovered and that even after they "unveil the truth" they are still the only one who sees it, that we're in Tin Hat Territory.
Here is the link to the analysis in question:
https://open.substack.com/pub/sethabramson/p/from-start-to-finish-major-media?r=2vk1c6&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
He’s not saying that, Alan. He has done a search of sources published all over the globe, including in the United States, and including a new analysis from the New York Times. He basically conducted a meta-analysis, looking at videos and myriad other sources to put together this piece of work he published. He’s not saying that he’s absolutely right; he’s just saying the likelihood of his proposition is high based on the data. I haven’t drawn any conclusions. I just read through the whole thing because I found it rather intriguing. I’ll go into my archive and search for the link to this in case you want to read it; but just a fair warning that it will probably take over two hours to get through it. It’s more of a thesis than a newsletter.
I was talking about this journalist. I don't think that investigating something is cheering on anything.
Oh, then I misunderstood you. My apologies. I think this journalist did a fine job of breaking through the fog and doing a very detailed analysis of this hospital debacle.
My comment was not clear.
There is a story in a book of Nassredine the Sage who was a fool. A fool asks Nassredine how long it will take to get to a town. Nassredine doesn't answer. The fool takes some steps, and Nassredine says, "At this pace it will take two hours." I thought of this because if we don't clearly call when we see bias being acted on, the time it takes to get to where we want to go will not be only two hours.
(Mais a peine avait-il fait quelques pas que Nasreddine l'appela et lui dit calmement: Si tu marches à ce rythme, il te faudra deux heures.)
Great and highly relevant parable for our times.
There is SO much to think about in today’s post. At the moment, I have one simple question as the rest seems overwhelming and impossibly difficult. Why did some Democrats vote to not expel Santos? I can’t begin to understand that they think he should keep his seat in the House.
Raskin says why he did not vote to expel:
https://x.com/mmpadellan/status/1719895271235047519?s=61&t=Wf0EVUiCLVV99ikNL0qPOg
Here is the text of Raskin's statement for those who do not use Twitter:
I’m a Constitution guy. The House has expelled five people in our history, three for joining the Confederacy as traitors to the Union and two after they were convicted of serious criminal offenses. Santos has not been criminally convicted yet of any of the offenses he has been indicted for that were cited in the Resolution nor has he been found guilty of ethics offenses in the House internal process.
“This would be a terrible precedent to set, expelling people who have not been convicted of a crime and without internal due process. If and when Santos is convicted of these serious criminal offenses or ethics charges, I will certainly vote to expel him. Until then, it’s a very risky road to go down and we have to stick by due process and the rule of law, as obvious as the eventual result seems. In these times of war, chaos, insurrection, division and lawlessness, the rule of law is a lifeline for us.
“I can think of four or five Democratic Members the Republicans would like to expel without any criminal conviction or adverse ethics findings tomorrow simply because they hate their politics. Indeed, the same New York Republicans who want to expel Santos now because he is a complete political albatross for them acted to vigorously defend him in the spring because they wanted his vote for their party on the floor. If Members are not going to be expelled for purely political reasons, we need to stick to due process and the rule of law.
“Back in the spring, the Republicans promised action within 60 days on the sprawling Santos ethics investigation, but nothing has happened since then. Now, they are promising action by November 17. Good, it’s about time
Raskin is right. If we want to protect the rule of law, we must do so even when the outcome isn't something we like or want.
Thank you for the link!
I appreciate your sending this link - thank you. Its hard to keep straight these days who we know to be guilty from who's been proven in a court of law to be guilty. I'm guilty of conflating the two! And mostly because our wheel of justice can turn so slowly and it feels like too many escape it all together if they have enough time and money to outlast. Ruskin is right -- such a smart guy. Patience . . .
That’s what you get with a trained professional!!!
…unlike all these yahoos that have gotten in to congress and are making our laws
Thank you for the link, Karen. That clarified it and I now understand it was a good call. Maybe a Dem will pick up his seat.
I don’t subscribe to X so can’t read this...
Sorry about that Janice. Did you see that Robert posted Raskin thoughts on this. I was not thinking when I linked to twitter site.
The Santos situation is simple. By not voting Santos out knowing he will probably not be re-elected and letting the courts decide the Democrats appear to be non political and don’t set a prescient thst could come back to haunt them. It’s smart politics.
Thanks Stephen - wrote my comment before reading this. Other perspectives?
Because that would devolve expulsion to a simple yes/no vote. What if next month MAGA Mike moves to have Adam Schiff, or Jamie Raskin expelled on a simple vote? Sanots needs to be removed from Congress, either by a conviction in his corruption trial or the old fashioned way, via the ballot box.
Also my question; it makes no sense. If you, Robert, or anyone out there can help make some sense out of it, please do!
I have wondered about this too - 31 dens voted to save santos, included Jamie Raskin and Katie Porter (pardon me but WTF?)!
Prior to 2016, I was a lifelong Republican. I was careful not to criticize any Republican candidate because, even though I might disagree with them on an issue, I still preferred them to a Democrat. Trump changed my view. I am now a Democrat.
I do not understand the left's obsession with dividing their party into factions when the ONLY thing that matters right now in this country, is defeating Trump in 2024. For me personally, it doesn't matter what Biden does or doesn't do. What matters is defeating the most corrupt criminal to ever run for president. If the left keeps this up, Trump will be president again. Is that what they want? I hope not.
Most days it feels like the Democrats are constantly in hand to hand combat with Republicans on multiple fronts over a wide variety of issues and concerns. As an example “the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has scored the House Republicans’ bill to provide $14.3 billion in aid to Israel and to “offset” that spending with $14.3 billion in cuts to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). As those of us who have followed the economics of adequately funding the IRS predicted, the CBO found that the cuts to the IRS would cost far more than they save. As it is currently constructed, the bill would add $26.8 billion to the national budget deficit” . How many voters know about this and where is the extensive media coverage. The challenge is most Americans have no idea what the “ national budget deficit” is and could care less. I think the challenge the Democratic Party has is how to adequately address the multiple issues created and supported by Republicans that most Americans do not support in a simple and clear hard hitting message everyone will understand.
Complex issues require complex answers, and they aren't always easy to understand. Republicans dumb everything down for their base, which is why Johnson’s flippant comment about spending cuts and deficits is probably perfectly logical for them. A friend of mine in Drive-By Truckers, Mike Cooley, wrote a song about it called “Made Up English Oceans”
“'Cause only simple men can see the logic in whatever
Smarter men can whittle down 'til you can fit it on a sticker
Get it stuck like mud and bugs to names that set the standard
They'll live it like it's gospel, and they'll quote it like it's scripture”
Speaker Johnson’s new spokesperson will be crafting messages for the base.⬇️
“Shah, a veteran GOP operative who served in the Trump White House, also happened to spend four years as Fox’s “brand protection” expert before leaving in disgrace this past June after the right-wing network settled Dominion Voting Systems’ defamation lawsuit for a massive $787.5 million.”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/speaker-mike-johnson-hires-raj-shah-the-perfect-flack-to-push-more-election-lies
I propose➡️ Funding the IRS=Defunding Tax Cheat Billionaires !
Thanks for the link!
I'm in no way advocating for Democrats to take this approach, by the way, it’s not conducive for a healthy democracy, but that’s not a concern for Republicans.
Re the ongoing Tommy Tuberville fiasco, are there grounds to challenge any of the several anti-democratic Senate rules (holds, filibuster, etc.) in court? It seems self-evident that these rules deprive millions of Americans of the representation to which they’re entitled. I know it’s a stretch, but I’m curious. Robert? Another reader?
The filibuster rule is plainly unconstitutional and should be abolished, entirely. The Senate was designed to be antidemocratic by giving small states equal representation. Exacerbating that undemocratic feature by piling on the filibuster is wrong and unconstitutional. Senators representing 17% of Americans can stop most legislation under the filibuster. The Framers would revolt if they thought that outcome was being promoted by the Senate.
I believe there is a silent majority who are saddened about the tragedy on both sides. We feel horrible about the terrorism of Hamas and the loss of civilian life in Gaza. It is frustrating to watch it unfold every day.
At the same time we have the Republicans (Mike Johnson and Tommy Tuberville) doing their best to stymie our progress. This is what makes me angry.
I support Biden all the way and trust his judgment that he is working on these issues behind the scenes.
You perfectly express my thoughts. Thank you.
The motion against Greene was dropped by the Democratic member who brought it, after her motion against Tlaib was defeated.
I got a good, much needed laugh at Robert’s comment about MTG having difficulty “thinking and understanding words in the English language.” There is a long list of basic human functions with which Marjorie has problems.
Remember her constituents love her.
Because she is sticking it to the smarty-pants in charge.
Yes, sadly. Sigh...
She is just really mad because Boobs Boebert is so much prettier than she is, and because no one wants to grope her.
Thanks for the information!
The irony is stunning. Biden is the ONLY leader who could wisely handle (not solve) the dreadful Hamas war and now Biden being vilified for it.....when his opponent would be a complete disaster in the same situation. The progressives who don't like Biden would prefer xxxxxxx, really?
Spot on, Carole! It's a matter of expectations. Everybody expects President Biden to be better, while everybody expects the Defendant to be awful. Guess which bar is easier to clear.
Maybe it’s a matter of expectations for some , or many, folks. But for many ‘progressives’, it seems to be a matter of living up to their principles.
Or down to them.
I'm pretty sure it was Rebecca Solnit who first crafted the remark about personal voting (I've been quoting her in my GOTV letters I've written through Vote Forward to voters in VA recently) that says: "Your vote is not a Valentine; it is a chess move for the world that you would like to see." I may be slightly mis-quoting here -- anyone's free to check my work -- but this is the gist and something we all need to take to heart in the upcoming elections. As you've said, there's no problem w/disagreements within a party, there's no reason to 100% think that any president is a godlike figure who can do no wrong/not fulfill our expectations, and there's every reason in the world to support Biden in this election cycle. Unlike the GOP, we are not fractious toddlers who can't handle not getting our way all the time.
Fabulous! Here is the link, and the quote: "That’s part of why I think of voting as a chess move, not a valentine." https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/the-2000-election-unleashed-disaster-on-the-world-we-cant-let-that-happen-again-in-2016/
Solnit is a brilliant writer. Your formulation is better: Your vote is not a Valentine; it is a chess move for the world that you would like to see
As always Robert, thank you.
We MUST win in 2024! No
alternative!
Some history:
In 2020, the press was also pushing the "Young Progressives Reject Biden" storyline.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/young-democrats-have-rejected-biden-and-it-could-cost-him-the-nomination/
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article242566611.html
https://www.teenvogue.com/story/joe-biden-democrats-alienate-youth-support
And then in October, the narrative switched to: https://time.com/5892826/younger-democrats-backing-biden/
To Robert's point, the GOP has essentially split into two parties united in name only: the traditional interventionist/Reaganomics wing and the MAGA isolationist/populist wing. That's not just disagreeing on one issue. It's having two diametrically opposed world views.
Also, if you look back to World War II, there were progressive groups in the US and UK who were virulently opposed to Allied bombing of German cities that caused civilian casualties, even though the Germans were bombing civilian targets in London and other cities in the UK. Dr. Goebbels (the Nazi propaganda minister) and his minions did their best to stir up these protests, releasing horrific photos of dead children and families and the like. Since all press reporting in Germany was subject to scrutiny by Goebbels, he was able to control that narrative.
So nothing new under the sun and all that.
Finally, I think primarying certain Democrats who do the party more harm that good is perfectly justified, especially where the constituents do not feel that the member of Congress is adquately representing their district. That threat is what keeps our representatives accountable.
ETA: Remember too that the vast majority of those "I am not voiting for Biden" young progressives on social media (a) do not vote anyway and (b) live in very very very deep blues areas like the Bay Area and Brooklyn where Democrats are in no danger of losing.
Alan, I always appreciate your balanced perspective.
I live in a red county in Fl. The local Dem precinct chair had a next door neighbor with much Trump signage including a huge F@#@ Biden Flag. When I commented on it she said he wasn’t even registered to vote.
Thank you Kathy. It makes me happy to hear that!
Point well taken but the swing states like NC, Az, Michigan and others the margins are different.
Those types of voters are not found in swing states in numbers large enough to make a difference.
Again- look at the links at the top of my comment. This was a whole media narrative in 2020, that Biden would lose because "young progressives" would not support him.
And then that turned out not to be true.
Not that hard to understand either. "Young Progressives Reject Biden" headlines generate far more clicks and thus far more ad revenue than "Democrats Still United Behind Biden" headlines.
Agreed, Robert Hubbell. Democrats need to grow up and realize that what binds us together is so much greater than what divides us. Like many, I am appalled at Israel's callous and seemingly indiscriminate use of violence against Palestinian civilians. My heart aches for them and for the Israeli civilians who have been kidnapped or killed. But, we don't know all that has been done behind the scenes by Biden, Blinken, and others to temper Israel's fury thus far. Abandoning Biden would be handing Trump the Presidency in all likelihood, as his base would be even more energized by our defection. We need to stay the course because the alternative is the demise of our democratic society and our freedoms as we have known them, and even possibly martial law, the thought of which is chilling.
Lastly, the only part of your clinical assessment of what the GOP would do if they regained the White House is your statement that "science will be replaced by Biblical teaching." As a Christian, I have to defend the actual contents of The Holy Bible. It is those who manipulate and distort God's word who are anti-science. In actuality, a fair-minded reader would find that The Bible is not anti-science at all.
Pat, thanks for your comment. I agree that the Bible is not anti-science. It is not science. It deals with matters of faith and morals.
I was referring to those who use the Bible to teach articles of faith as science. People of faith are certainly free to believe that God created the earth in seven days six thousand years ago. As a matter of religious faith, that is fine. Teaching that theory in science class is wrong.
And that is exactly what some Christian nationalists hope to do. In 2023, West Virginia legislators attempted to pass legislation allowing teachers to give "equal time" to creationism in science class under the guise of "intelligent design.": https://www.aclu.org/news/religious-liberty/west-virginia-lawmakers-are-pushing-public-schools-to-teach-creationism
Mr. Hubbell, I 'm just now seeing your reply to my post. Thanks for responding and for acknowledging that the Bible is not anti-science. As a retired biomedical researcher myself, I agree that the Biblical explanation for creation is not proven science, although there is some scientific evidence to support it. On the other hand, the theory of evolution of individual species has been scientifically proven. But of note, Darwin's concept of a single originating source for all living creatures, including mankind, has not been definitively proven.
As a Christ follower, I don't believe the Bible was meant to be a science textbook. Some very interesting thoughts can be found in the book, "Making Sense of the Bible" by Adam Hamilton. Be aware that Hamilton is a United Methodist pastor.
This is sort of like the main stream media giving such negative press to Biden. They only focus on the fundamentalists and white supremacists instead of those who truly follow the Bible to shape public opinion. Another treat for the MAGA’s.
Is my observation that VP Harris is being involved more, recently, on point? If she is to be his running mate again (and of course she will) then she needs to be perked up, for sure.
And I'm also wondering whether it would ever be appropriate for the President to host a "conference" for the congressional democrats - really for the purpose of responding to the objections of those who believe his Israel policy is against Palestine. I'm imagining that he would "hear" them and then might even modify his policy in response or at least point out how he is already trying to intervene in behalf of the Palestinians (which it seems he is) but he might ask them for suggestions about what further he might do. They need to be heard, by him, in order for there to be more coordination and unity among the Democrats
You are right on the money, Robert! chins up!
I love it when MTG loses a vote!
Robert is absolutely right. There is much more that should unite us than what divides us. We should continue to have discourse, respectfully, and seek to achieve understanding and consensus.
In many matters, there are no right answers. We must seek to find the best answers to serve the greater good. That, to me is a bigger difference than policies between Democrats and Republicans. We stand for the greater good; they stand for every person for themselves. We are one for all, and they are all for one.
It seems to me that the kind of bills that Biden is passing, as well as his executive orders, are all forward-looking actions that should benefit the youth of America, the people who will be running this country in the future. There will always be people who criticize even a very good president. I’m just hoping that young voters begin to see how Biden’s accomplishments are going to have a positive affect on their futures. This is what his campaign needs to be focusing on. So many things he has done, especially protecting Native American sacred lands, creating national monuments, etc., are completely flying under the radar.
You're right, Janet. We need to find a way to cut thru the noise and reach those young voters somehow. And we need to frame our own messaging in a more positive and forward-looking way. I've mentioned a few times that I'd like to see President Biden do a version of a fireside chat. It could be monthly, and should be in formats that reach everybody (TikTok, Facebook, X, Instagram, TV, etc.). I think it could be really good for the country and the world.
I’ve long favored Fireside Chats by Biden. I think it would work well with his conversational style.
I think it's the perfect medium for him, and could help to calm things. I just sent him a letter today suggesting it. I seriously doubt that he or anyone close to him will see it, but they certainly wouldn't if I didn't sent it!
I fully agree, and I fixed my typos. :)
I follow David Hogg and Victor Shi on X (Shitter now) as they are young and definitely on the Biden-Harris wagon. Hogg was a student in the Parkland shootings. Both are brilliant and they also promoted the wonderful Maxwell Frost to run for Congress. He is the youngest member in history to win a seat. There are many young women and men running for everything from city council to mayor to their State Assemblies, and onto Congress. Don’t discount the youth! In fact, Taylor Swift is to be commended for her ability to influence her young fans to register to vote by a 23% increase. 35,252 fans registered on Vote.org.
I do believe that these mainstream news reports about the youth turning away from Biden are exaggerated. I do not have a Twitter account, in fact, I don’t have any social media accounts, but I know about these young men, and I think they’re excellent advocates for Biden.
Yes, they are.
We are Democrats and Progressives; we air our dirty clothes in public, fight like Cats but in the end, will come together to reelect President Biden. Because the alternative is too horrible; an untethered Trump seeking revenge on everybody who wronged him. An example was the outrage over Democrats in the House joining Republicans to not expel Mr Santos. Twitter was aflame with criticism until Mr Raskin released his justification, then the fires died down.
And then there's the Senate, a world of obscure rules and accommodations written like a Monty Python sketch where you have to have a vote on having a vote, or let one member bring progress to a halt.
All this is a result of the razor thin margins in both houses of Government. But despite all this disagreement and rancor, President Biden forges ahead, guiding the country with a firm hand and resolve.