RUTHFULLY YOURS

Liz Cheney was removed from her leadership position by the Republican Party on Wednesday mainly because she has spent too much time attacking former President Trump for questioning the results of the 2020 election, and not enough time trying to stop Joe Biden’s agenda. She has said, “there is clearly an attempt to unravel the democracy,…by focusing on challenging the legitimacy of the election.” And that we have “particular obligation to make sure people know the election wasn’t stolen, that we shouldn’t perpetuate ‘the big lie,’.”

Donald Trump is not lying when he questions the results of the election. He is making an unsubstantiated claim. And that is an important distinction. Most proven claims of wrongdoing start out as an unsubstantiated claim that with a thorough investigation, and fact finding, is then proven either true or false. Liz Cheney does not know the election was honest with any more certainty than Trump knows it was stolen. Her claims of election integrity are as evidence-free as Trump’s claims of election fraud. And therein lies the problem. Neither side knows the truth.

26 million more votes were cast in 2020 than in any previous Presidential election, so it’s fair to ask whether all 26 million of those new votes were cast legally and legitimately. Election integrity is paramount to a functioning country, and simply stating the election was fair, like Liz Cheney, does not make it fair. That is something dictators do; they make blanket claims of integrity without any evidence to back them up. So, questions about the integrity of an election should not be ignored, or shot down as threats to democracy, they should be fully investigated. Yet we have never had a complete forensic investigation or audit of the 2020 election. So, Liz Cheney’s claim that the election was fair is as unproven as Trump’s claim that it was stolen. 

Not only were 26 million more votes cast, but we also had unprecedented, unconstitutional, and rushed-thru changes to our election laws in many states, primarily the battleground states, so it only makes sense to conduct a thorough investigation of our elections to determine if these changes hold up to the highest standards of integrity.

www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2021/05/ny-times-slow-joe-getting-slower.php?

The New York Times has a remarkable story out this weekend that offers its typical “behind the scenes” construction of how the White House operates—in this case, under President Biden. While the story tries to soften the blows with lots of fluff and filler, it paints a devastating picture of Biden for the careful reader. It explains he has a quick temper, takes a long time to make decisions, and needs to be heavily propped up by staff to function. It reminds us that Biden is indeed a creature of the Senate, where he mostly attended hearings, made speeches, fiddled with legislation, and seldom made any decisions that suggested executive skill (Quick—can anyone name a major piece of Biden legislation? The crime bill of 1994? Likely written mostly by the Clinton Justice Department. The bankruptcy reform bill of 2007? Likely written largely by Delaware-based banks. You get the picture.)

Here’s one early paragraph:

On policy issues, Mr. Biden, 78, takes days or weeks to make up his mind as he examines and second-guesses himself and others. It is a method of governing that can feel at odds with the urgency of a country still reeling from a pandemic and an economy struggling to recover.

One passage details weeks and weeks of meetings, briefings, and deliberations about how to confront Putin, culminating with this astonishing paragraph:

In the end, Mr. Biden called Mr. Putin directly and then delivered a public statement on Russia sanctions that lasted only five minutes and 49 seconds. For as much as Mr. Biden projects an aura of ease — with his frequent backslapping, references to Irish poetry and liberal use of the phrase “c’mon, man” — his aides say it takes a lot of behind-the-scenes work to prepare him to project an assured demeanor.