Don Surber asks a shrewd question this morning. Surber notes that it was the NYT that outed Adam Schiff for being shifty with the truth regarding coordination between Congressional Dems and the CIA before the Ukraine Hoax was unleashed in public. He then suggests:
But I share this possibly true account [a jibe at the NYT] to show that Democrats may be bailing on Schiff and his plan to impeach President Trump because he blew the whistle on Joe Biden's blatant corruption under the pay-to-pay [sic; "play"?] Obama administration.
This may be a sign that the case is falling apart like cardboard in the rain.
In other words, damaging leaks re Schiff to the NYT may indicate that the party is turning against Schiff. Powerful Democrats may have come to the realization that Schiff's dishonest antics are a clear and present danger to their party that must be reigned in. "At a minimum", as Jerry Nadler might say.
Then there's this: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-kurt-volker-dems-schiff-forbid-foreign-affairs-committee-republicans-questions-equal-representation
ReplyDeleteThere are no "Rules" in the pursuit of Power.
Tom S.
True. This is being exposed now, as McCarthy wrote in Impeachments Past.
DeleteI think Surber is probably wrong- I think this the NYTimes trying to turn it into old news to protect Schiff. I think with the Schiff tweets from August, there was no way to hide the fact that the rumorblower went to Schiff directly and first.
ReplyDeleteI can see that theory, but it does make Schiff, the Harvard lawyer and schemer, into a total bozo. Why would he give the game away with the tweets throughout August? There musta been something else going on that we don't know about. The tweets just seem to make it all much too obvious.
DeleteThe Occam explanation to me sure seems to be Yancey's. This was going to get out regardless and so better to do it quickly and with the best possible spin.
ReplyDeleteAnd FWIW, I humbly submit that I don't see right now any Dems turning on any other Dem in any significant way. I'd love to be wrong here, and of course maybe I am, but this Ukraine thing is all they've got. And failure to them is simply not an option. They're going to try and immediately dismiss/ignore/bury anything that comes from Barr/Durham/Guiliani as nothing but more "dirty play" to "interfere" with the 2020 election - just like with the State Dept. drop yesterday. I am NOT saying it will work; I'm just saying that's the plan and, not only are they sticking to it, they're also sticking together in the process. That said, as long as this transcript remains all they've got, enough voters should eventually grow tired of the drama and force the issue to smoulder. At least I think so.
See my response to Yancey. As for Dems fighting each other, there's definitely unhappiness between the left and way-left wings, the Biden wing and the rest. Unhappy enough to take steps as Surber describes? It's at least possible.
DeleteYes, I hadn't seen your response and you make a real strong point (not for the first time, I might add!). Seems those tweets were part of a plan that almost certainly hasn't gone to plan. I still don't see how the NYT piece isn't just Schiff-approved damage control, since for him to continue denying any previous contact was clearly untenable. But the much bigger question, in line with what you say, is just what was the plan that had him giving away his early knowledge of everything with those tweets? I can see where he might have wanted to signal to friendlies everywhere to keep fighting hard and that something big was coming down the pike, but if he hadn't done those tweets, he could much more easily deny having orchestrated anything. Like you, I don't see where they made sense except in a plan we really don't know yet.
Delete"I am NOT saying it will work; I'm just saying that's the plan and, not only are they sticking to it, they're also sticking together in the process."
DeleteThey'll stick together until the incoming and when shrapnel flies, it's every man for himself.
PS: Since Horowitz is seen as more or less nonpartisan, I think it's now more important than ever not only that he hopefully didn't pull too many punches but that Barr not allow Wray, et al to bury too much of the good stuff through classification. A strong Horowitz report gets the focus back where it should be and greases the skids for what’s to follow from Durham, etc.
ReplyDeletePPS: I wonder how much have we already gotten from foreign governments. Whatever we haven’t gotten yet, Dems are certainly trying to convince those governments “Trump won’t be in power after this term, and you can be damn sure we’re taking note of how much you give him what he wants. We Democrats are way better than the Republicans at punishing those who cross us - remember that.” Don’t know how much this will achieve, but I can’t imagine it’s not in play.
Contrary to what some are saying, that Horowitz will make all clear, I say it's just the start. But Barr and Durham have been working hard and I'll be disappointed if we don't start seeing some of their results this year.
DeleteHorowitz and his wife are Liberal Dems.
Delete