The 24/7 Outrage Machine

(WSJ graphic)

WSJ columnist Peggy Noonan is always a worthwhile read--not because I agree with her, which I often don't--but because I think she has a moral sensibility akin to mine. She's slow to condemn moral failings and tries to see the perspectives from all sides.

In her first column of 2020 she's very critical of President Trump ("He can’t be proved more guilty") while at the same time dismissive of the attempt to remove him ("It will be the impeachment that didn’t move the needle, that history barely remembers").

She also is not complimentary toward the Democratic Presidential field or Nancy Pelosi. But she saves her harshest words for the wokescolds: [bold added]

The past decade saw the rise of the woke progressives who dictate what words can be said and ideas held, thus poisoning and paralyzing American humor, drama, entertainment, culture and journalism. In the coming 10 years someone will effectively stand up to them. They are the most hated people in America, and their entire program is accusation: you are racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic; you are a bigot, a villain, a white male, a patriarchal misogynist, your day is over. They never have a second move. Bow to them, as most do, and they’ll accuse you even more of newly imagined sins. They claim to be vulnerable victims, and moral. Actually they’re not. They’re mean and seek to kill, and like all bullies are cowards.

Everyone with an honest mind hates them. Someone will finally move effectively against them. Who? How? That will be a story of the ’20s, and a good one.

It's hard to de-escalate, though, with so many likes.

Tolerance is an ethic that is an important part of being an adult. As more Americans live in denser communities tolerance has become even more crucial. There are ways to express disagreement without being disagreeable.

The 24/7 outrage machine has made life unpleasant for all. When tolerant people like Peggy Noonan have had enough, then the reckoning is coming.

The Decade Past: Remind Me Again?

WSJ montage: I could name about 80% without looking anyone up.

There were no World Wars or moon landings, but the past decade did have its share of memorable events that will have an impact far into the future. The WSJ's Decade in Review shows just how much happened and how much we may have forgotten.

Every year had at least eight such items. Below is your humble blogger's entirely subjective assessment of the top three each year:

2010: 1) iPad introduced; 2) Obamacare signed; 3) Deepwater Horizon explodes.

2011: 1) Arab Spring; 2) Japan quake and tsunami; 3) Steve Jobs dies.

2012: 1) Facebook IPO; 2) Xi Jinping is leader of China; 3) Obama re-elected.

2013: 1) Pope Francis named; 2) Boston Marathon terrorism; 3) U.S. #1 energy producer

2014: 1) Ferguson riots and verdict; 2) Malaysia Flight 370; 3) Trade with Cuba ok'ed.

2015: 1) Gay Marriage legal; 2) Apple joins Dow; 3) Paris Accord.

2016: 1) Brexit; 2) Trump elected; 3) 4 states approve recreational marijuana.

2017: 1) Hurricanes Harvey and Maria; 2) New tax bill passes; 3) Harvey Weinstein resigns.

2018: 11) Tariffs imposed; 2) North Korea diplomacy; 3) Wildfire destroys Paradise, CA.

2019: 1) 737 MAX grounded; 2) Hong Kong protests; 3) Trump impeached (kind of).

There is a possibility that none of the above will be regarded with importance in a few years. It may turn out that we'll all be dead from climate change by 2030 or that life extension science will enable human beings to live well past a hundred.

But very few people are betting hard dollars as if either of those are coming to pass, and neither am I.

Impeachment Advice from Willie Brown

Seasoned Democratic leader Willie Brown says the Democrats are playing with fire by holding secret impeachment hearings:

(Photo from Willie L. Brown, Jr.., Institute)

Americans inherently distrust any kind of government action that takes place out of public view, whether it’s a city council closed session or a closed-door congressional hearing.

For years, Democrats have led the charge for transparency in government, be it foreign policy or investigations into police shootings. Now these same Democrats are going behind closed doors to get the goods on Trump.

They can point to Republicans’ private interviews during their endless Benghazi investigations as justification for their strategy. But it wasn’t a good look then, and it’s not a good look now. Be better, right?

If the Democrats have hard evidence on Trump, they need to display it to the public in real time, rather than having bits and pieces and opening statements leak out without the context of the questioning that followed, from members of both parties.

Because the danger is there’s no bombshell, and Democrats replay their overhyping of Robert Mueller’s probe into the 2016 election, with no time to recover before November 2020.

The Republican theory is that the Democrats hope to damage President Trump's re-election prospects by not resolving impeachment until sometime next year, maybe even through the November election. If the Democrats had the goods they would present the case to the American people in open proceedings; because they don't, they can leak selective information from partisan "whistleblowers" to damage the President and his party. They and an anti-Trump media can bomb away without consequence; the President and the Republicans are helpless to respond to an unofficial inquiry.

The risk to the Democrats, IMHO, is that if secret proceedings carry on too long a disgusted electorate will nationalize the Congressional races more than usual. Enough Democratic seats will flip to the Republican side to limit the impeachment circus to Mr. Trump's first term.

If they open up the proceedings, Democrats have a chance of keeping the House and keeping impeachment going. They should listen to Willie Brown, but they probably won't.

Open Question

April 18: Current Mayor London Breed and former
Mayor Willie Brown at the ceremony remembering
the 1906 earthquake and fire. (MSN)

Democratic éminence grise Willie Brown: Impeachment would be suicide for Democrats.

Impeachment is a suicide mission that also puts the party on the defensive for supposedly doing an end run around the electoral process.

To be sure, ex-Assembly Speaker and former SF Mayor Brown, 85, is no fan of President Trump:

I say, plow on. Call for hearings. Go over every page, line by line, if for no other reason than to make everyone aware of every questionable act committed by President Trump and his entourage....

I’m betting Trump could still win re-election if the economy holds up, but I’m also betting Nancy Pelosi’s Democrats will hold the House and maybe, just maybe, the Democrats can flip the Senate.

Then, and only then, would Democrats be in position to take corrective action against Trump’s threat to our democracy.

Speaking of Nancy Pelosi, 79, she also urges House Democrats to go slow on impeachment:

Pelosi told Democrats on the conference call that it is important for the House to gather more facts before launching any impeachment effort. She also noted that at least a third of House Democrats are on committees that will be investigating the president.

Whether the young lions and lionesses of the Party will follow the advice of their elders is an open question.

Today's Fishwrap

...or birdcage liner.

I suppose all these old-newspaper references are lost to today's readership, because who reads newspapers anymore?

As for magazines, I use them to sop up the leaks from green "bio" bags that I store in the refrigerator while awaiting the weekly compost pickup. Case in point—-Time's cover story in the impending impeachment of Donald Trump: [bold added]

But Pelosi is actually playing a deeper game. Her aides note that she’s never ruled impeachment out. All she’s done, they say, is set a standard: increased popular support and some degree of GOP backing...

But there are already signs Pelosi’s standard could be met...Large majorities say they would favor Trump’s impeachment and removal from office if Mueller finds he authorized coordination with Russia or obstructed justice.

Now that the Mueller report has found no Russian collusion or obstruction of justice, I suppose the raison d'être for impeachment, using Nancy Pelosi's standard, has gone away.

Fortunately, I have lots of bio bags this week, so it’s not a total waste of Time.

De-fanging Mueller

Inside the Beltway the tempest du jour is whether Special Counsel Robert Mueller will find the smoking gun that will bring down Donald Trump.

Your humble blogger, for the record, thinks the President was set up. Mr. Trump thought that the special counsel would clear him of charges of Russian collusion (whatever that means). But Mr. Mueller's expansive charter, executed by high-priced Democratic lawyers, threatens not only the Administration but also Mr. Trump's business empire, his friends and his family. Given enough time and money they will find something on someone (such as lying to a grand jury about a workplace affair, the basis for the impeachment of Bill Clinton).

The Beltway folks say that he can't fire the Special Counsel, though the Constitutional arguments why he can't are above my pay grade.

Another part of the Constitution, Article 2, Section 2, can effectively fire Mr. Mueller by negating all his activities. That section grants the President unlimited power to pardon anyone of any crime against the United States. Imagine:

I, Donald J. Trump, will pardon any and all persons indicted by the grand jury(ies) convened by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. If you are indicted for failing to produce documents, I will pardon you. If you are indicted for not answering a question, I will pardon you. If you are indicted for not appearing as a witness, I will pardon you. Let's end this farce and move on.

It seems too simple, and that's why it will never happen.