‘Resistance’ spin doctors
President Joe Biden’s press conference last week was an unmitigated disaster, as evidenced by the astounding number of “clarifications” and walk backs issued later by the White House.
In a rambling, meandering, and often nonsensical presser that went on for roughly two hours, the president was anything but commanding and articulate. He all but consented to a soft Russian takeover of Ukraine. He cast doubt on the legitimacy of all future elections that Democrats lose. He said he doesn’t trust polls that show his approval numbers are in the toilet. He followed this by citing polls that show the public favors Democratic-led legislation. He got snippy with reporters who asked him legitimate but uncomfortable questions. He also denied he said recently that anyone who opposes “voting rights” legislation is a modern-day Bull Connor and Jefferson Davis (he absolutely said this).
Yet from the way certain members of the press tell it, Biden hit a home run. The way particular anti-Donald Trump “resistance” journalists tell it, you didn’t see what you definitely saw.
“Biden, in the longest news conference in presidential history, made news, pushed back on critics, called out lies, took responsibility for mistakes he believes he made, expressed surprise at GOP, talked foreign policy, and didn’t lash out on reporters,” PBS’s Yamiche Alcindor said. “Quite the change.”
How, exactly, was this a change?
Casting doubt on the legitimacy of elections, complaining about polling numbers, attacking journalists, and denying he said things he undoubtedly said all sounds an awful lot like Biden’s predecessor.
“There is so much to say about Pres Biden’s presser,” Alcindor tweeted. “The thing that sticks w/ me is that he took responsibility for mistakes he believes he made, expressed genuine frustration w/ COVID & his agenda being stalled by GOP and Democrats & took hard questions without insulting folks.”
Yes, he “took hard questions without insulting folks,” except for when he did.
At CNN, White House correspondent John Harwood attempted to clean up Biden’s remarks casting doubt on the legitimacy of future elections.
“The difference on election legitimacy: Trump falsely claimed fraud in 2020 election, tried to overturn it legally, then incited mob violence,” Harwood tweeted. “Based on his lies, GOP legislators seek to limit voting procedures and change election administration in search of better outcomes.”
“Biden seeks legislation to secure national baseline maximizing participation by legal voters,” added Harwood, whom the Republican National Committee once allowed moderate a GOP primary debate. “Senate GOP blocks it. [The] entire premise of Democratic push is that GOP legislators want to erode democracy, thwarting popular will, by making voting harder for political opponents.”
Harwood concluded: “If you accept that premise — as Biden does — it logically follows that success of GOP effort undercuts the legitimacy of the election. That’s different from Trump questioning the tabulation of votes actually cast. It’s more like what Stacey Abrams did after losing [Georgia’s 2018 gubernatorial race].”
Just get a job with the White House already. Drop the charade.
At MSNBC, supposed political insider John Heilemann, who has been adrift ever since his reporting partner Mark Halperin was accused in 2017 of sexually abusing several women, likewise claimed Biden hit all the marks in his press conference.
“To go for an hour and 50 minutes, hour and 45 minutes, and not screw up really demonstrably — not screw up really at all,” Heilemann said. “I thought it was the best demonstration of the fact that the president’s mind is perfectly fine.”
That this obsequious, cloying praise for what was by all standards a disastrous press conference comes from supposedly straight news people is maddening enough. That it comes from people who played pretend during the Trump years as tireless and uncompromising defenders of truth and fact makes it even more galling.
Total Totenberg collapse
There was a he said, she said last week between the Supreme Court and NPR.
In one corner: Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Neil Gorsuch. In the other corner: NPR’s anonymous source.
Who are you going to believe?
Longtime NPR Supreme Court reporter Nina Totenberg scored viral gold when she reported Gorsuch refused to wear a mask at in-person oral arguments, even despite the fact that Sotomayor is immunocompromised and even despite a direct request from the chief justice.
Totenberg reported:
Sotomayor has diabetes, a condition that puts her at high risk for serious illness, or even death, from COVID-19. She has been the only justice to wear a mask on the bench since last fall when, amid a marked decline in COVID-19 cases, the justices resumed in-person arguments for the first time since the onset of the pandemic.
Now, though, the situation had changed with the omicron surge, and according to court sources, Sotomayor did not feel safe in close proximity to people who were unmasked. Chief Justice John Roberts, understanding that, in some form asked the other justices to mask up.
They all did. Except Gorsuch, who, as it happens, sits next to Sotomayor on the bench. His continued refusal since then has also meant that Sotomayor has not attended the justices’ weekly conference in person, joining instead by telephone.
Gorsuch was raked over the coals following the publication of Totenberg’s supposed scoop, criticized widely for supposedly disregarding his colleague’s health, even after a direct request from the chief justice.
However, in the days following the story’s publication, both Gorsuch and Sotomayor took the unusual step of releasing a joint statement rejecting Totenberg’s anonymously sourced reporting.
“Reporting that Justice Sotomayor asked Justice Gorsuch to wear a mask surprised us,” the statement said. “It is false. While we may sometimes disagree about the law, we are warm colleagues and friends.”
Amazingly, rather than back away slowly from the story, NPR staffers, including Totenberg herself, dug in their heels, sticking to the say-so of her anonymous source.
“I surprised at how many Supreme Court correspondents I admire are passing along a statement from two justices that is at best false without any context whatsoever,” NPR correspondent David Gura said.
Then came the killing blow. Roberts himself put out a statement last week saying he never requested anything of the sort from Gorsuch.
“I did not request Justice Gorsuch or any other Justice to wear a mask on the bench,” Roberts’s statement said.
So, to recap: Everyone involved in the NPR story, from Gorsuch to Sotomayor to even Roberts, claimed the reporting is false. Yet, despite all that, NPR and Totenberg stand by her coverage.
“NPR stands by my reporting,” Totenberg proudly tweeted last week.
“What is incontrovertible is that all the justices have at once started wearing masks — except Gorsuch. Meanwhile, Sotomayor has stayed out of the courtroom. Instead, she has participated remotely in the court’s arguments and the justices’ weekly conference, where they discuss the cases and vote on them,” she argued in a follow-up report.
Yes, but this is not the problem. The problem is: Totenberg claimed Gorsuch had flagrantly disregarded Sotomayor’s health, even despite a directive from the chief justice himself. But all three relevant members of the Supreme Court have gone on the record to say this is not true. So, what, exactly, is NPR standing by? That Gorsuch didn’t wear a mask? Tell us something we didn’t already know.
Where does this leave us? It leaves us in the position of having to choose between three on-the-record Supreme Court justices and Totenberg’s assurances her anonymous source got it right.
Geez, that’s a really tough choice.
