Please consider becoming a voluntary paying subscriber to support the independent journalism of Wide World of News today.
You can subscribe at fixed monthly or annual rates here – or become a vaunted Founding Member at the rate of your choice above the annual rate.
If you would like to contribute to the cause without becoming a formal subscriber, please consider one of these options:
* Buy me a cocktail (at Chevy Chase prices….), tax and server tip included, by clicking here.
* Buy me a cup of coffee (or a week’s worth) by clicking here.
Or use one of these methods:
* Check. send a simple email to markhalperintalk@gmail.com and ask where you can send a piece of paper.
• PayPal. markhalperinnyc@gmail.com
• Venmo. Mark-Halperin-4 (telephone number ends in x3226)
• Zelle. markhalperinnyc@gmail.com
There are no ads, sponsors, investors, staff, or corporate backers here.
It is just me doing this, seven days a week.
Your support is much appreciated.
Mark
****
In a matter of just a few months, we will know if Joe Biden or/and Donald Trump will get their parallel wishes to be the presidential nominees of their respective parties in 2024 and go on to another White House term.
The Dominant Media, which almost always gets its way, has an asymmetrical view of the prospects of the two Men Who Would Be President (Again).
The members of the elite press don’t want Trump to be the nominee or president; think he might be the former but probably not the latter; and believe they are doing everything they can possibly can to put him in prison or whatever it takes to remove him from the field of play.
In performance of these functions, the Dominant Media remains largely out of touch with why Trump has any prospect whatsoever of returning to his old job, ironically often aiding and abetting that very prospect.
These same journalists have a much more complicated and ambivalent relationship towards Biden ’24, skeptical, as most Americans are, that the incumbent will end up running again but not fully opposed to it, especially if it appears that the Democrats’ renominating Biden is the best (or: only?) way to stop four more years of Trump.
At the same time, this covey of journalists doesn’t think Vice President Harris is up to the tasks (of winning the nomination, winning the general election, or being an effective president), and/but also doesn’t see The Next Big New Thing candidate anywhere on the horizon, unless one counts Hillary Clinton, who might be next and is definitely politically big – but is, by no definition, “new.”
But with Biden abroad, focused externally on arguably the greatest success of his administration – building and holding together the Coalition of the Willing against Putin – the Dominant Media focus is on driving a stake through the heart of Trump ’24 (if not, necessarily, Trump himself).
****
The current press attention is on the January 6 hearings, with the Wednesday night news of a committee subpoena to former White House counsel Pat Cipollone setting Stop Trump hearts aflutter — and imaginations about what might be atwitter.
Everywhere you look – the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Associated Press – there are news stories quoting legal eagles galore suggesting that the Cassidy Hutchinson framework is going to put Trump in prison garb as orange as his hair.
And lest you think that this is a view consigned only to the left, check out John Podhoretz’s column (“Trump is in deep deep deep deep trouble,” that closes with the resonant “And I haven’t even gotten to the possible witness tampering!, which is indeed what might bring the former president down).
Or soak in the words of former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy, who follows his National Review piece along these lines from a few news cycles ago with this clear-eyed take in Murdoch’s New York Post:
[T]he obstruction possibility is…basic: Trump knowingly and willfully exhorted an armed mob to descend on the Capitol for the purpose of corruptly influencing how members of Congress would conduct the constitutionally mandated electoral count. That’s a rudimentary offense. Everyone in America knows it’s lawful to influence Congress with provocative speech and edgy legal claims, but it is never lawful to influence lawmakers by the threat of force.
Aiding and abetting the forcible intimidation of federal officials is a felony. In a case where the threat was real but not terribly serious, the penalty is up to a year’s imprisonment — but where we are talking about intimidation involving dangerous weapons, the potential penalty can run up to 20 years. And similarly, the penalty for obstructing congressional proceedings is up to 20 years of incarceration.
The stronger the evidence becomes that Trump intended to use the intimidating threat of armed violence to his advantage, the higher the likelihood that he will be indicted.
And the public drumbeat remains high (and could well go higher), as per a fresh new Associated Press poll:
About half of Americans believe former President Donald Trump should be charged with a crime for his role in the U.S. Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021, a new poll shows.
The survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds that 48% of U.S. adults say the former president should be charged with a crime for his role, while 31% say he should not be charged. An additional 20% say they don’t know enough to have an opinion. Fifty-eight percent say Trump bears a great deal or quite a bit of responsibility for what happened that day.
The poll was conducted after five public hearings by the House committee,investigating Jan. 6, which has sought to paint Trump’s potential criminal culpability in the events that led to deadly insurrection. But it was taken before Tuesday’s surprise hearing featuring former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson. Her explosive testimony provided the most compelling evidence yet that the former president could be linked to a federal crime, experts say.
Views on Trump’s criminal liability break down predictably along party lines, with 86% of Democrats but only 10% of Republicans saying Trump should be charged with a crime. Among Republicans, 68% say he should not be charged and 21% say they don’t know. Still, the fact that nearly half the country believes he should be prosecuted is a remarkable position for the former president, pointing to the difficulties he could face if he makes another run at the White House in 2024.
And it doesn’t stop there.
Karl Rove uses his Wall Street Journal column to explore the landscape of 2022 Big Liars on the ballot and suggests following Trump in denying Biden won is likely a losing midterm formula, thus making the argument by implication that it would be a mistake for his party to pick Trump as the next national standard bearer:
The baseless claim that the 2020 election was stolen doesn’t appeal to independents, whose votes in key states are often decisive. A December 2021 UMass poll found independents were 49% less likely to vote for a candidate who “refused to say that Joe Biden was legitimately elected president,” compared with 24% who were more likely. Thirty-eight percent of independents said they were less likely to vote for someone who “questioned the legitimacy of the results” of the 2020 election, compared with 23% who were more likely.
Finally, John Harris in Politico essentially writes that both abortion and 1/6 are really bad for Trump’s prospects:
One way to measure Trump’s predicament is to view it through the eyes of someone who supports his ostensible agenda. If you are a sincere opponent of abortion rights, you might be grateful for what Trump did to change the Supreme Court. But would you regard Trump—who for years boasted of his promiscuity, who once asserted “I am very pro-choice” and who is now uneasy about the ramifications of the court’s ruling—as the right person to carry the fight forward into its next, long-term phase? Let’s say you are genuinely concerned that efforts to make voting easier through vote-by-mail could dilute election integrity. Is Trump, with his reckless allegations and obvious self-absorption, really your ideal spokesman?
Two breathtaking developments—one at the Supreme Court, the other across the street at the House select committee—have sent American politics into a whole new realm. By experience and temperament, this is not a realm in which Trump is well-equipped to prosper.
If not Trump, who?
The Dominant Media largely fills that vacuum with DeSantis speculation, of course.
Certainly, an apparent Joe Rogan endorsement of the Sunshine State topper, is not nothing, along with this nugget filled with semiotic meaning for the Gang of 500 only:
Ed Rollins, who once ran the pro-Trump Great America PAC and recently formed the “Ready for Ron” PAC to urge DeSantis to make a 2024 presidential bid, said it’s too early to predict the impact that today’s hearings will have on Trump’s political standing.
But what about Liz Cheney, whose boffo Reagan Library speech Wednesday night was sweet, sweet music to Dominant Media anti-Trump ears?
Yes, yes, maybe.
But, wow wow wow wow, this Washington Post Glenn Youngkin story:
Gov. Glenn Youngkin flew to New York last week to meet privately with GOP megadonors in Manhattan, a move that underscores recent hints that the Republican is considering a run for president in 2024.
The day-long visit, which was not listed on Youngkin’s public calendar and included a trio of national TV interviews, comes as the new governor prepares to headline his first out-of-state political event since taking office, with an appearance next week in Nebraska. He also has begun speaking more often about the needs of “Americans,” not just “Virginians,” and has subtly changed how he answers questions about whether he will seek the White House.
Youngkin, a multimillionaire and former private equity executive, used to respond that he is solely focused on his new job in Virginia. More recently, he has begun saying he is “humbled” that so many people “request” that he run.
“I am always humbled by this request, but we have a lot of work to do today in Virginia,” Youngkin told Brian Kilmeade last week, as the “Fox & Friends” co-host queried him about a run during an interview in Richmond. But when Kilmeade pressed him on whether he’d made a decision, Youngkin seemed to acknowledge that he was actively considering a bid, saying, “I have not made a decision yet.”
Youngkin appeared to encourage the speculation in a separate Fox interview that aired Monday, when Kilmeade noted that there’s “a buzz about you running for president.”
“We’ll see what comes next,” Youngkin replied.
Only time will tell.
****
As for Joe Biden, there are so many reasons for the Dominant Media to think he will not be the Democratic nominee in 2024, there is not room to list them all here.
Let’s start with this New York Times downer:
Americans are becoming more pessimistic about the economy, more worried about inflation — and now, more anxious about the job market, as well.
Fifty-two percent of American adults say they are worse off financially than they were a year ago, according to a survey conducted for The New York Times this month by the online research platform Momentive. That was up from 41 percent in April, and was by far the highest share in the survey’s five years. Only 14 percent of Americans said they were better off than a year ago, the worst in the survey’s history.
The dour mood is also reflected in other surveys. The University of Michigan’s index of consumer sentiment this month hit its lowest level in its 70-year history. Another measure of consumer confidence, from the Conference Board, has also fallen, though less drastically.
Then let’s go to the confusing (but, really not confusing, per the White House counsel’s office, but, really what’s important here is that the Dominant Media has chosen to treat this as confusing) walk back by The Veep about whether her boss is running with her again in a couple of years:
Vice President Kamala Harris created new uncertainty Wednesday about President Biden's intentions to run for reelection in 2024, pulling back from a definitive statement she had made earlier in the week.
But a pair of New York Post stories about Hunter Biden might tell the tale that the Dominant Media just doesn’t want to discuss quite yet
What happened with the big China deals and what is happening with an ongoing federal criminal probe of the president’s son are really important questions.
In the end, as hard as it is for the Dominant Media to digest, the determination of the identities of the major party nominees for president in 2024 might hinge less on the January 6 committee’s investigation than on these two paragraphs from Jonathan Turley:
I previously wrote a column on the one year anniversary of the Hunter Biden laptop story that marveled at the success of the Biden family in making the scandal vanish before that 2020 election. It was analogized to Houdini making his 10,000-pound elephant Jennie disappear in his act. The Biden trick however occurred live before an audience of millions.
None of these new facts can force the media to see the elephant. The key to the trick was involving the media in the original illusion, investing reporters in the narrative. It is like calling audience members to the stage to assist in the performance. Reporters have to insist that there was nothing to see or they have to admit to being part of the original deception. The media cannot see the elephant without the public seeing something about the media in its past efforts to conceal it.
Did I mention that only time will tell?
****
ESSENTIAL READING
* OMG these three paragraphs from the New York Times:
The dispute [over what happened in the presidential car on 1/6] also highlights Mr. Trump’s relationship with his Secret Service detail, which was unlike that of most previous presidents. Agents were seen as more overtly supportive and admiring of Mr. Trump than they had been under any other modern president, according to people who have spent time in the White House during multiple administrations, and Mr. Trump worked to build loyalty among them.
While other presidents came to favor the head of their detail and sometimes ensured they were promoted within the service, even at times appointing them as director of the agency, Mr. Trump sought to make his lead agent part of his personal political team. In naming Mr. Ornato deputy White House chief of staff, Mr. Trump raised eyebrows among traditionalists who saw that as inappropriate.
For generations, agents generally tried to maintain studious neutrality under Republican and Democratic presidents, determined to be seen as protectors of the office regardless of who occupied it. Agents were known to like certain presidents more than others — George H.W. Bush was often described as a favorite, while many were reportedly not fond of Bill Clinton and especially Hillary Clinton — but they always insisted they were not part of the political team.
* Snapshot in time from just one state that Trump has made snakebit for his party, but, I’m telling you this is meaningful:
If Warnock can be that far ahead and above 50% and Abrams can be tied against an incumbent, in a state where Joe Biden’s numbers are weak, you can’t go around predicting with great confidence that a Red wave is about to tsunami the Democrats out of power.
Let’s all sing out loud: ONLY TIME WILL TELL!!