Joe Biden accepterede endelige Trumps gentagne udfordringer til debat, mano a demonto, i en kort video, som var klippet sammen fem gange(!). Sammenklipningen er selvfølgelig for at undgå udtalelser som “Get ready Bal, you’re gonna in for a problem“, som ikke lyder særligt ‘badass’. Men, som Larry Elder spørger “How the hell is he supposed to make it through a debate if he can’t make it through a 14 second video without edits?”
Mens det dæmrer for flere og flere amerikanere, at retssagerne mod Trump – især den i New York hvor man på femte uge, stadig ikke kender anklagen og hvor kronvidnet er en “seriel løgner” og uden beviser – er juridisk krigsførelse fra Det Hvide Hus, mente Biden og folkene omkring ham, at det var betimeligt for sympatien at han forsøgte at håne Trump med situationen ved at sige “I hear you’re free on Wednesdays”. Forsøger Bidens folk, spørger Vivek, bevidst at sabotere deres præsident?
Call me cynical, but why is Biden suddenly so willing to debate? It could be because he’s desperate, or it could be because it’s a set-up. Keep an eye on the details of how all this comes together. You don’t often see a sudden 180 like this unless there’s more to the story.
“Biden has something special to worry about.” skriver Byron York
It’s a two-part problem for the president: 1) He is trailing in a lot of polls, especially in key states, and 2) a lot of voters have already made up their minds. In addition, this — right now — is a period in which the voters who have not made up their minds are getting closer and closer to doing so. So if the polls don’t change by late June, when the first debate is scheduled, Biden might be facing a large, hardened segment of the electorate that will not vote for him under any circumstances. He needs to get in front of them to make his pitch before it is too late.
In every presidential election this century except one, the candidate who was leading in the polls in late June went on to win. (The exception was 2016, when Trump was behind in the polls in June and went on to defeat Hillary Clinton.)
The general election polls, of course, are very close. The RealClearPolitics average of national polls has Trump ahead by a single percentage point, well within the margin of error. Biden’s bigger problem is this: It seems likely that Trump will win all of the states he won in 2020. If he does, he just needs to win a few key states — say, Arizona, Georgia, and any one of Pennsylvania, Michigan, or Wisconsin — to win the White House. And in some of those key states, Trump has leads that appear to be both solid and durable.
Newt Gingrich hælder mere til at folkene bag, gik i panik, da de så meningsmålingerne og fremmødet af godt 85.000 mennesker i New Jersey da Trump talte. Steve Forbes og Larry Kudlow lægger vægt på, at amerikanernes realløn er udhulet af inflation. 64% mener at økonomien er blevet værre, og det vil være Bidens påstand, at de tager fejl, mens han insisterer på at han overtog 9% inflation, selv om det var 1,4% – og at de derefter skal stemme på ham.
Der er flere der taler om at Biden ikke er vellidt af sin stab, med pludselige raserianfald og en overarbejdspukkel af kompensation for alle hans fejl. At hans hund til sidst måtte fjernes, fordi den bed alle omkring den, med flere skadestuebesøg som følge er et rimeligt tegn på almen mistrivsel i Det Hvide Hus. Blandt andre har Scott Adams påpeget, at talspersonen Karine Jean-Pierre, nærmest synker sammen i sin kropsholdning, når en journalist, som altid er Fox’s Peter Ducey, spørger til præsidentens seneste løgn, selvmodsigelse eller tegn på fysisk og kognitivt forfald. Det er for ham, sådan mental kapitulation ser ud.
Eller skal man ikke tro på noget, som inkompetence ikke kan forklare? Nate Silver mener det er en form for damage control
So Biden wants 2 debates instead of the traditional 3 and also wants them much earlier, which makes them less impactful? It’s consistent with his strategic incentives, which are that he can’t be seen as ducking debates but he’s not particularly confident he’ll win.
På den anden side, er der allerede lavet merchandise med “Free on wednesdays” påskrift, hvilket fysisk manifesterer forbindelsen mellem Biden og retssagerne mod Trump. Det ældes ikke godt. Og Biden vedbliver, trods rettelser på loyale medier, at insistere på, at inflationen var 9% da han overtog posten efter Trump, selv om den var 1,4%.
CNNs Jake Tapper er udpeget som moderator og han mindedes de foregående debatter, hvor Trump fortalte sandheder, som Biden og medierne dengang løj om, nemlig Bidens forretningsforbindelser gennem Hunter Biden. Det er klart at de ikke vil udi situationer, som dengang Trump mundhuggedes med moderator, mens Biden forsøgte at fremstamme sine tre talepunkter, og Trump fangede at han sprang en over og rettede “No, you were on number two!” – siden er Biden blevet mistænkt for at være fækal inkontinent(!)
På MSNBC kunne man både se, Republikanere der var mere stålsatte på at stemme Trump i lyset af den juridiske heksejagt og stationens egne værter sætte lighedstegn mellem at kritisere Dommer Merchan og at betvivle retsstatens principper. Flere yngre sorte mænd begynder nu også at hælde mod Trump, der ser ud til snildt at kunne fordoble antallet af sorte stemmer til over 20%.
Flere af Trumps støtter har undret sig over, at Trump accepterede debat vilkår, der skærmer Biden og stækker Trump. Dels skal debatterne ledes af Trumps fjender, dels sker de meget tidligt på valgkampen, hvor de kan nå at blive glemt af vælgerne – og giver Demokraterne en undskyldning for at skifte Biden ud på Konventet – og dels er der ikke et publikum, som Trump er så god til at animere. Dels vil en civiliseret debat kun gøre Trump mere spiselig, for de vælgere, der har det stramt med hans buldrende stil.
Men Trump skulle også slå til hurtigt, for at bevare presset på Biden, som værende den, der er frygtsom. Selv i New York og New Jersey, samler han store og begejstrede menneskemængder, og fratager Biden og Demokraterne ideen om, at de er en løve i deres hule. Ifølge Simon Ateba har Trump tilbudt endnu en debat, arrangeret af NBC og Telemundo, to Biden venlige medier, samt “a vice presidential debate hosted by Fox News at Virginia State University, a historically Black college.” (Kamala mod Vivek?) Biden har sagt nej, måske på grund af racisme? Måske på grund af affældighed?
“Fire hundrede millioner milliarder” siger Biden og Trump foreslår derfor en narkotest før hver debat. Bidens kognitive forfald, var hovedbegrundelsen special undersøger Hur gav for ikke at anbefale en retsforfølgelse for at have stjålet hemmelige dokumenter. Republikanerne vil gerne have lydoptagelserne fra Hurs interview med Biden, fordi transskriptionen ikke giver et fuldgyldigt billede af den menneskelige tragedie. Men Bidens justitsminister modsætter sig de folkevalgtes vilje fordi justitsministeriet er en bærende demokratisk institution, som det er hans opgave at beskytte
The justice department is a fundamental institution of our democracy. People depends on us to ensure, that our investigations and our prosecutions are conducted according to the facts and the law and without political influence.
We have gone to extraordinary lengths to ensure that the committees get responses to their legitimate requests. But this is not one. To the contrary, this is one that would harm our ability in the future to successfully pursue sensitive investigations. Now, there have been a series of unprecedented and, frankly, unfounded attacks on the justice department.
This request, this effort to use contempt as a message of obtaining sensitive law enforcement files is just the most recent. The effort to threaten to defund our investigations and the way in which there are contributions to an atmosphere that puts our agents and our prosecutors at risk… these are wrong.
The only thing I can do is to continue to do the right thing. I will protect this building and its people.
Og det kan Garland roligt gøre, det er politik, og får ingen konsekvenser, skriver Jonathan Turley i The Hill
From impeachment to oversight to the 25th Amendment (allowing the removal of a president for incapacities), there are ample reasons for Congress to demand information and evidence from the government on these questions. Congress is also interested in looking at repeated omissions for “inaudible” statements. Under this sweeping theory that Biden can legitimately withhold these recordings under executive privilege, any president could withhold any evidence of incapacity or criminality.
The House is poised to find Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt for refusing to release the audiotapes. It is a cynical calculation. Garland knows that his own department will never prosecute him for contempt of Congress. Obama Attorney General Eric Holder was clearly in contempt of Congress and abused executive privilege arguments to shield embarrassing details tied to Operation Fast and Furious. His department refused to even submit the matter to a grand jury.
Garland also knows that it will take months to get any ruling on the matter once Congress can file with a court. That will push any decision and release until after the election. While the administration and liberal legal analysts insisted that courts should expedite any and all trials of Donald Trump before the election, they are not eager for the public to know this information about whether Biden seemed feeble or confused under questioning.
A court may be a tad confused as to why a president’s answers are not privileged, but the actual audio recording of those answers can be privileged.
Det er den bærende opfattelse af magt, den sidder ikke hos de folkevalgte, men de udpegede og de overlejrede. Det er, hvad der ligger bag anklagen mod Trump, for, som udøvende magt, at have taget dokumenter hjem, som statsansatte, mener er deres. Forskellen mellem Trump og Biden er, at Biden er en af dem. Trump er en af folket, han har ingen ret til at stikke sin næse i statens affærer. Og pressen er selvfølgelig på magtens side, som de spørger
With this, combined with the efforts to defund Jack Smith and other attacks on Biden administration officials say about the broader efforts to discredit you and to discredit the justice department and also – how do you manage that? How are you resisting that? And what can you do as Attorney General?
(…)
The odds now seems vanishing small that the two Jack Smith federal cases are gonna begin trial, let alone finish trial this year. What does that say about the pace of the justice system and confidence in the justice department.
En hurtig retssag er, hvad den anklagede har krav på, ikke offentligheden. Men pressen ser hellere end gerne den obsternasig orange populist, der forstyrrer den fjerde statsmagts ansættelse i embedsapparatet, dømt. Tilliden til retsstaten svækkes, hvis ikke oppositionen retsforfølges og fængsles.
MONOKULTUR 
Skriv en kommentar