Notes and Comment Blog


Preposterous

Jun 14th, 2019 3:52 pm | By

The Justice Department agrees with Trump that he doesn’t have to show anyone his tax returns if he doesn’t want to, so there.

The Justice Department released Friday its legal opinion supporting the Treasury secretary’s refusal to hand over President Donald Trump’s tax returns.

Last month, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal issued a subpoena to Treasury and the IRS after the agencies rebuffed the Democrat’s request for six years of the President’s personal and business tax returns. Neal is invoking a little-known provision of the tax code which states the Treasury Secretary “shall furnish” the committee with the return information.

Legal experts are not impressed.



Flag rape

Jun 14th, 2019 11:50 am | By



In breach of our own risk assessments

Jun 14th, 2019 11:42 am | By

The Guardian two days ago:

The NSPCC has offered the trans activist Munroe Bergdorf a “full, frank and unreserved apology” for abruptly cutting ties with her in the face of social media criticism of her appointment.

The child protection charity announced last week it would have “no ongoing relationship” with Bergdorf, 48 hours after she told her Twitter followers how proud she was to have become the first LGBT+ campaigner for its counselling service Childline.

Bergdorf, a model, said she had not been contacted by the charity before it issued its statement abruptly ending their relationship with her and, in a letter seen by the Guardian, nearly 150 NSPCC employees spoke of their “embarrassment and shame” at their employer’s decision.

The story does eventually get to why the NSPCC dropped Bergdorf, but it’s way down the page.

[Peter] Wanless [the CEO] said the decision to cut ties with Bergdorf – which was made by the charity’s board of trustees – was nothing to do with the fact that she was transgender.

He explained: “The board decided an ongoing relationship with Munroe was inappropriate because of her statements on the public record, which we felt would mean that she was in breach of our own risk assessments and undermine what we are here to do.”

Bergdorf had been been criticised for inviting children to get in touch with her directly on social media. The NSPCC had also faced criticism on social media that she was an inappropriate “sexualised” role model for children, and accusations that she was a “porn model”.

Does Bergdorf seem ideal as an ambassador for a child protection charity? Not to me. There are people who groom children for prostitution or personal rape or both, and having a sexualized (without scare quotes) trans woman as a child protection ambassador looks a tad grooming-like. (Why a trans woman especially? Because it’s mostly not women who groom children into prostitution.)

So why did the NSPCC invite Bergdorf to be an ambassador in the first place? Apparently it was the idea of the NSPCC’s Celebrity and Talent manager, James Makings.

Meet James Makings:

Earlier this week the news broke on Twitter that James Makings, Celebrity and Talent Manager at the NSPCC, had made rubber-themed pornography at work.

One film linked to the leading children’s charity employee was titled ‘Cub Pisses and Wanks in Rubber at Work’ – a still from the film features a childish cartoon animal placed strategically over what seems to be Makings’ penis.

This was a new act in a larger drama that has seen the NSPCC attacked from all sides. Makings was responsible for recruiting controversial transgender activist and glamour model Munroe Bergdorf as an NSPCC ambassador.  The appointment of Bergdorf, who has no background in child protection, attracted a raft of criticism after it was revealed the model was found to have advised children struggling with their sexuality or identity to ‘drop me a message on insta’.

Ok but surely we’re not going to kink-shame this nice fella, are we?

Many of those who accused the NSPCC of transphobia following the decision to drop Bergdorf have now rallied to support Makings, the Celebrity and Talent Manager and amateur pornographer at the charity. Those who have raised concerns about the employment of a man who makes pornography from the offices of a children’s charity have been smeared as homophobic, as if being gay absolves one from the responsibility of behaving appropriately at work.

Coverage of the issue from Pink News identified a tweet in which Makings was called a ‘perverted narcissist’ as evidence of apparent homophobia.

In a statement the NSPCC said: ‘We have been made aware of the images. The NSPCC has guidance for social media and if there was a problem, we would take action.’ One might ask why making pornography at work is not seen as a ‘problem’ and why the NSPCC are standing by someone who has such disregard for sexual boundaries.

See, it’s at work. At work at the NSPCC. In a multi-cubicle toilet. With film posted online.

High profile figures, including Guardian journalists Owen Jones and Dawn Foster, stepped in to support the NSPPC in standing by their employee- as if filming oneself masturbating in office lavatories while wrapped in PVC was an intrinsic part of being gay. To my mindset, the old trope that gay men are fetishist perverts is in itself homophobic.

Arguably, what is most fascinating about this case is how acceptable it has become to perform fetishes in public, and how male sexual behaviour that clearly over-steps the bounds of acceptability, is ignored for fear of accusations of ‘phobia.’ That not one outlet has to date covered what is in affect a national safeguarding scandal at the heart of the UK’s biggest children’s charity is a testament to the power men hold when they protect one another’s interests.

Boundaries? What boundaries? Away with all boundaries!



Honest as the day is long

Jun 14th, 2019 10:12 am | By

The birthday boy.



Wise guy

Jun 14th, 2019 9:41 am | By

Interesting.

He did say that. Stephanopoulos asked why McGahn would lie under oath to Robert Mueller, Trump said “To make himself look like a better lawyer.” He also told Stephanopoulos “You’re being a little wise guy.”



Definitely no misogyny here

Jun 14th, 2019 8:43 am | By

Another day another campaign to destroy a feminist woman…not by Trump or the pope or a local fundamentalist church but by…The Woke.

I saw a loathsome tweet abusing her yesterday (and immediately followed her) but didn’t realize it was part of a campaign.

What a campaign.

That’s it – that’s the one I saw yesterday. The “stank white pussy ass bitch” one.

The Woke sent a letter demanding she be fired.

The Woke held a demo to heap more abuse on this one feminist woman.

Campus officials appear to be rushing to comply.



Such a lack of fundamental understanding

Jun 13th, 2019 6:02 pm | By

Like a toddler with a flamethrower.

Nearly two years ago, FBI Director Chris Wray set up an office tasked solely with stopping the type of Russian interference efforts that infected the 2016 campaign.

On Wednesday night, President Donald Trump undercut the whole operation in a matter of seconds.

Which, if you think about it, makes total sense – the Russians want Trump, so naturally he wants them to interfere. He doesn’t want the FBI to stop them; he wants the FBI to open the door for them and ask if they’d like a sandwich.

In an ABC News interview, the president first proclaimed he would have no problem accepting dirt on his opponents from a foreign power, then said Wray was “wrong” to suggest the FBI needs to know about such offers.

The comments, according to interviews with nearly a dozen law enforcement veterans, have undone months of work, essentially inviting foreign spies to meddle with 2020 presidential campaigns and demoralizing the agents trying to stop them. And it has backed Wray into a corner, they added, putting him in a position where he might have to either publicly chastise the president and risk getting fired, or resign in protest.

Just three months after Wray assumed the top FBI post in August 2017, he told Congress that he had set up a “foreign influence” task force to stymie future election meddling efforts.

The team brings together counterintelligence, cyber and counterterrorism officials — nearly 40 in total, according to a New York Times story — and coordinates with all 56 FBI field offices. It also works with the Homeland Security Department, state and local governments, as well as the major social media companies that Russian agents used to spread disinformation and stage fake rallies meant to incite voter anger.

The breadth of the effort has to match the scale of the problem, Wray said at a White House briefing last August. “Make no mistake — the scope of this foreign influence threat is both broad and deep,” he said.

“It has to be demoralizing to some extent and confusing and, let’s face it, unprecedented, to have a commander in chief who has such a lack of fundamental understanding about the work the Justice Department and intelligence community do in this area,” added Greg Brower, the former top FBI liaison to Congress who served under Wray during his first months as director.

“To flat out say the FBI director is wrong on this or any other issue is, in and of itself, stunning” Brower added. “It’s tougher for the leadership, the appointees of the president, who know the president is wrong, who have to wonder about his fundamental lack of understanding about what those agencies are doing.”

There’s nothing to wonder about. He’s a criminal, and he has the mindset of a criminal. He does what’s good for him, and is wholly indifferent to everyone else. It’s not complicated.



So many different levels

Jun 13th, 2019 5:32 pm | By

No no no, cry the Republicans, we must not have laws requiring candidates to alert the FBI if a foreign government – say, Saudi Arabia? North Korea? Turkey? – offered help. That would be…erm…umm…inconvenient! That’s it! It would be too much trouble, so no.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) blocked an effort by Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) to pass a bill via unanimous consent requiring campaigns to report any offers of foreign assistance to the FBI.

“We are all for free and fair and honest elections. … These reporting requirements are overbroad. Presidential campaigns would have to worry about disclosure at a variety of levels. So many different levels. Consider this: vendors that work for a campaign, people that are supplying some kind of voter service to a campaign. … It would apply to door knockers, it would apply to phone bankers, down to any person who shares their views with a candidate.”

Warner then countered that Blackburn’s reading of the legislation is “not accurate .., The only thing that would have to be reported is if the agent of a foreign government or national offered that something that was already prohibited.”

Still too much trouble. Also, we want the information. Next item?



No lie untold

Jun 13th, 2019 1:52 pm | By

Sarah Sanders is leaving. Someone even worse will replace her, but at least we won’t have to look at that furious scowl any more.

Two and a half year, not three and a half, but whatever – she goes out as she came in.



“I guess there’s an investigation”

Jun 13th, 2019 12:44 pm | By

Hey George, I know more about prosecutors than you’ll ever know.



Did you read Vanity of the Bonfires?

Jun 13th, 2019 12:18 pm | By

A conversation from 30-some years ago:

Via Paste Magazine for greater ease of reading:

Pat Buchanan: Who are your favorite authors?

Donald Trump: Well, I have a number of favorite authors. I think Tom Wolfe is excellent.

Pat Buchanan: Did you read Vanity of the the Bonfires?

Donald Trump: I did not.

Pat Buchanan: Bonfire of the Vanities, excuse me.

Tom Braden: What book are you reading now? [Crosstalk]

Donald Trump: I reading my own book again because I think it’s so fantastic Tom.

Pat Buchanan: What’s the best book you’ve read beside Art of the Deal?

Donald Trump: I really like Tom Wolfe last book. And I think he’s a great author. He’s done a beautiful job —

Pat Buchanan: Which book?

Donald Trump: His current book.

Pat Buchanan: Bonfire of the Vanities.

Donald Trump: Yes. And the man has done a very, very good job. And I really can’t hear with this earphone, by the way.

It’s interesting to note that his method of bullshitting his way through a lie was the same then as it is now – to cover total ignorance with empty generalities like “I think he’s a great author. He’s done a beautiful job, the man has done a very, very good job.”

Do we wonder why he chose that book to pretend he’d read? Nah, it’s obvious – he didn’t even choose the book, he chose Tom Wolfe, and he chose Tom Wolfe because it was a newsy name and easy to remember. Two syllables: Tom Wolf. Easy, and manly. He’d probably sat next to Tom Wolfe on a few talk show couches. He’d probably run into him while groping a few crotches at Elaine’s.

Image result for bookshelf



White House replies “Nah”

Jun 13th, 2019 11:02 am | By

Oh good, another official ruling for Trump to flout and mock and disparage:

Talking Points Memo summarizes:

report attached to the statement labels Conway a “repeat offender,” and says that her violations, “if left unpunished, would send a message to all federal employees that they need not abide by the Hatch Act’s restrictions.”

The Hatch Act bans federal employees from engaging in partisan political activity. The Office of Special Counsel is a federal watchdog agency that monitors federal employees.

The OSC report states that “If Ms. Conway were any other federal employee, her multiple violations of the law would almost certainly result in removal from her federal position by the Merit Systems Protection Board.”

“Her actions erode the principal foundation of our democratic system – the rule of law,” a letter prefacing the report reads.

So many actions of Trump and his administration do that. It should have been his campaign slogan – “WILL MASSACRE THE RULE OF LAW.”

Investigators cite a May 29, 2019 media appearance in which Conway appeared to downplay the law’s significance. “If you’re trying to silence me through the Hatch Act, it’s not going to work,” Conway said. “Let me know when the jail sentence starts.”

“If you’re trying to silence me” – as if she were Solzhenitsyn or Politkovskaya rather than the publicity chief for a mob boss. She’s a hack doing a hack job for a corrupt head of state, not an embattled independent journalist trying to get the truth out.

A Trump nominee — Henry Kerner — is in charge of the OSC. “OSC respectfully requests that Ms. Conway be held to the same standards as all other federal employees, and, as such, you find removal from federal service to be appropriate disciplinary action,” Kerner wrote in the Thursday letter to Trump.

Kerner’s decision to call for Conway’s revealed a behind-the-scenes battle between the OSC and White House that appears to have been playing out over the past few weeks. White House Counsel Pat Cipollone said in a June 11 letter to Kerner that a draft of the report was “based on multiple fundamental legal and factual errors, makes unfair and unsupported claims against a close adviser to the President, is the product of a blatantly unfair process that ignored statutory notice requirements, and has been influenced by various inappropriate considerations.”

In other words, how dare you try to hold Trump accountable, much less try to make him obey the rules.

How dare a reporter ask Kellyanne Conway a question? These peasants know no limits, do they.

The recommendation comes more than one year after a March 2018 finding by the same office that Conway violated the Hatch Act by advocating for Roy Moore during the 2017 Alabama special Senate election.

The March 2018 report concluded that Conway repeatedly violated the Hatch Act during multiple television appearances. That report cites her as saying that Trump “doesn’t want a liberal Democrat in the Senate. He wants a reliable vote for taxes, for life.” The OSC then states that after two 2017 television appearances, Conway “received Hatch Act guidance” from the White House Counsel.

But Conway continued to ignore that guidance, according to the report out Thursday.

They are our new mob monarchy. The rules don’t apply to them.

Much of Conway’s conduct cited in the report is related to the 2020 presidential election. While “promoting the President’s agenda” is consistent with her official duties, the OSC said, weighing in on the 2020 nominees is not.

The OSC castigates Conway for making comments “directed at persuading voters not to support the Democratic Party candidates in the 2020 presidential election and garnering support for the President’s candidacy.”

The report goes on to cite dozens of media appearances Conway made from February 2019 until the present. In one April 30 appearance, for example, a reporter told Conway: “You brought up Joe Biden several times unprompted. Do you guys see him–?” Conway cut the reporter off, saying “How was it unprompted? He’s the frontrunner!”

After another question, Conway called Democratic voters “sexist” and “racist” due to Biden’s popularity and that of Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT). The White House adviser went on to say that “two old white straight men career politicians” were ahead in polling because voters have “a problem with the rest of the field.”

The OSC also cites Conway’s use of Twitter, accusing her of “engag[ing] in a pattern of partisan attacks on several Democratic Party candidates shortly after they announced” their campaigns. Those attacked include Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX), and former Vice President Joe Biden.

Conway accused Warren of “lying” about her ethnicity in one interview, for example, and referred to the Democratic presidential field as “woodchips.”

The report also cites Conway’s tweets calling Biden “Creepy Uncle Joe.”

But none of that applies, because [see above].

Towards the end of the report, the OSC describes why “Conway’s conduct warrants her removal.”

Calling the Hatch Act violations “persistent, notorious, and deliberate,” the OSC says that her conduct has “created an unprecedented challenge to this office’s ability to enforce the Act.”

“She has willfully and openly disregarded the law in full public view,” the report reads.

Well it’s no fun if you do it in secret.



Beware the tracking number

Jun 13th, 2019 7:42 am | By

Business Insider reports that Saudi Arabia uses a tracking number on the packaging of phones to track down women who leave the country.

Women who flee Saudi Arabia expect to be chased.

They expect their friends to be interviewed, their social media to be scoured, their passports to be frozen.

They mostly do not expect Saudi government agents to hunt down the old box for their iPhone.

But why do they expect to be chased, though? I realize Saudi Arabia doesn’t allow women to travel without a male “guardian” but I don’t see why it feels the need to continue that beyond its own borders.

The fact that such techniques are being employed shows how seriously Saudi Arabia takes the mass escape of as many as 1,000 women each year, people it has said are as much of a national security threat as terrorists.

Because…?

They’re just women after all. Nobody is going to listen to them or look askance at Saudi Arabia for treating them like objects. I’m not seeing the security threat.

A third Saudi woman, who was captured by Saudi agents after fleeing, was also told her IMEI number played a part. INSIDER was told her story by Taleb al-Abdulmohsen, an activist based in Germany, who passed her messages on.

“Captured” after “fleeing” – what is this shit? Nations don’t get to “capture” people who leave it, and people who leave their home countries aren’t “fleeing” – nations aren’t supposed to be prisons, and people who emigrate aren’t considered fugitives. What business does Saudi Arabia have “capturing” women who travel to other countries? That’s not capture, it’s kidnapping.

The woman, apprehended in the ex-Soviet nation of Georgia in 2018, was informed by her Georgian state-funded attorney that Saudi intelligence found her IMEI number. Working with the Georgian police, the attorney said, Saudi officials used it to find her.

“Apprehended” – no, kidnapped.

“The Georgian police tracked you upon request from the Saudi government, using an IMEI that they obtained from the packaging box of your cellphone,” she said, paraphrasing what the lawyer told her.

The woman was taken back to Saudi Arabia, where she has remained since.

Where she has remained a prisoner, kidnapped by the Saudis with help from the Georgian police.

At any rate: if you’re a Saudi woman making plans to leave, be sure to destroy the packaging your phone came in.



“Everything!”

Jun 13th, 2019 7:02 am | By

What is he, six?

“You leave stuff on the floor too! You leave the chairs on the floor, and the table, and the rug – you should get all your stuff off the floor too! Waaaaaaaah!”

Yes, Don, we know you talk to foreign governments. (By the way the royals are not that. You can talk to all the Romanovs you like.) The issue wasn’t talking tout court, and we’re not so stupid that we’re going to believe you think it was. The issue was “oppo research” – your words, buddy – from foreign governments. You know this, we know this, everyone knows this. You make yourself look even stupider with this shit. You also make yourself look conscious of guilt, telling such absurd whoppers.

Updating to add a requested screen grab.



“It’s called oppo research”

Jun 12th, 2019 4:28 pm | By

Trump still doesn’t get it.

In an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, the president admitted that he would accept information on a political opponent from a foreign government.

“It’s not an interference, they have information – I think I’d take it,” President Trump said. “If I thought there was something wrong, I’d go maybe to the FBI – if I thought there was something wrong. But when somebody comes up with oppo research, right, they come up with oppo research, ‘oh let’s call the FBI.’ The FBI doesn’t have enough agents to take care of it. When you go and talk, honestly, to congressman, they all do it, they always have, and that’s the way it is. It’s called oppo research.”

Knowing the nickname for it doesn’t make it legal.

Stephanopoulos asked about Donald Trump Jr. and the regretable role he played in the Trump Tower meeting in June 2016. He asked if Trump’s son should have brought the Russians’ offer for “dirt” on Hillary Clinton to the FBI.

“Somebody comes up and says, ‘hey, I have information on your opponent,’ do you call the FBI?” Trump responded.

“I’ll tell you what, I’ve seen a lot of things over my life. I don’t think in my whole life I’ve ever called the FBI. In my whole life. You don’t call the FBI. You throw somebody out of your office, you do whatever you do,” Trump continued. “Oh, give me a break – life doesn’t work that way.”

“The FBI director said that is what should happen,” Stephanopoulos replied. (During congressional testimony last month, FBI director Christopher Wray told lawmakers “the FBI would want to know about” any foreign election meddling).

“The FBI director is wrong, because frankly it doesn’t happen like that in life,” Trump said. “Now maybe it will start happening, maybe today you’d think differently.”

The fact that Trump thinks life doesn’t work that way doesn’t make it legal to accept campaign help from a foreign government.

This is the president, and he appears to have no understanding of the law, even though it’s been discussed endlessly for the past three years, even though it applies to him, even though he swore an oath to uphold the constitution.

Does he really think he can violate a law with impunity simply by saying what he thinks the law should be?

Watch Stupid being stupid.



Don’t make promises you can’t keep

Jun 12th, 2019 3:35 pm | By

Hmm.

He can’t “promise” that. It’s an absurd thing to say. He could promise to increase funding to cancer research, but he can’t promise that if he’s elected we’ll “cure” cancer. Cancer isn’t One Thing, so “it” can’t be cured, boom, game over. Survival rates can be improved but I don’t think anyone who knows anything about it talks about curing cancer full stop.

The doofus act was ok for a sidekick. It’s not ok for this. Promising to cure cancer is worthy of Trump, not a serious alternative to Trump.

Go home, Joe Biden.



Guest post: Anti-boundaries activism

Jun 12th, 2019 2:43 pm | By

Guest post by Josh Slocum

Guaranteed method to attract abusers:

1. Lower your boundaries—and make a big deal out of talking about lowering your boundaries.

2. Characterize lowering your boundaries as “being inclusive.” This signals to predators that you are already brainwashed. They now know that you believe discernment and boundaries are bad things, things that oppress other people.

They can see that you derive your sense of being a good person from your self sacrifice. They like this, because it means that you will work hard to give up things that rightly belong to you, and that you won’t reserve any space for yourself.

They realize they can make you work faster and harder at giving up your own boundaries because you “get off”, you get self-esteem, the more you abase yourself.

3. Make a social show of castigating other people for having boundaries. This shows predators that you can be conscripted by them to help them infiltrate other people’s space.

This is what “liberal feminism” is. It’s what “social justice” has become on the left.

This is not progressive, or justice oriented. It’s a perversion of those classic ideals.



Waves of criticism and accusations

Jun 12th, 2019 11:42 am | By

What was that we were saying yesterday about the ever-escalating demands to obey the ever-inflating rules, and how impossible it is to obey them all when they’re constantly in motion, and how that trap is indeed a trap and no we can never escape the new demands? The trap caught Chelsea Cain:

Mockingbird writer Chelsea Cain has deleted her Twitter account after facing mounting backlash and accusations of transphobia due to a creative choice present in the latest issue of her comic book series Man-Eaters.

Cain’s self-described “feminist” series Man-Eaters, published by Image Comics with art by Elise McCall, follows the exploits of a twelve-year old girl named Maude as she navigates a world wherein a mutation causes women’s menstrual cycles to change a woman into a ‘were-cat’ creature and the ensuing harsh, fear and paranoia motivated response from the government.

Cain has repeatedly faced waves of criticism and accusations of holding Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist (or TERF) beliefs due to the alleged trans-exclusionary nature of the series’ concept, as some believed associating the monstrous change in women with a biological menstrual cycle excluded persons who were not biologically female but identified as such.

There.

Seriously?

A woman writing a comic based on menstrual cycles is bad and politically criminal because doing so excludes men who “identify as” biological women?

If that’s the standard then women just can’t write or talk about anything related to women, because it will always be found to exclude men who “identify as” biological women. Is it now obvious enough that the woke are absolutely determined to push women all the way out of the public sphere with this shit?

In the latest issue of Man-Eaters, Cain took a swing at her critics by including two tweets critical of her work as propaganda posters in a “pantherism recovery clinic,” a re-education camp-like facility meant to keep women from transforming into the were-cats.

The Tweet featured in the first panel reads, “I appreciate any comic on menstruation and the literal violent eating of men-I super duper do-but #ManEaters further cements the toxicity of a gender binary in a heavy handed, sad way.” The second, “I want to like @ImageComics #ManEaters so bad, but it is SO HEAVILY founded in bio essentialism and TERFness that it’s impossible to not feel like it perpetuates the same misogyny/systemic violence that it’s attempting to tackle.” While Cain did not include the respective handles of the users who posted these Tweets, they remain easily found through a quick search of the tweets’ body text.

And? Tweets are public (unless the account is locked); everybody knows that; so what if the handles are easy to find? If you attack someone on Twitter, you’re making it possible for other people to see your tweets attacking someone; that’s how Twitter works.

But she got pounced on anyway, and she ended up deleting her account. Score?



Joe Biden 3

Jun 12th, 2019 9:52 am | By

Yes, that’s a good look, Joe Biden sticking his finger in a woman’s face and telling her what’s what.

If you play it you can see that he’s wagging his finger up and down, right in her face, while leaning over her. This is what I keep talking about – when men do that shit it’s intimidating, and they need to stop doing it.

Go away, Joe.



GOP lawmakers would see the error of their ways

Jun 12th, 2019 9:23 am | By

Biden’s red-hot New Idea is to run as The Guy Who Can Work With Republicans. People who know anything about Republicans think he’s doolally.

Joe Biden insists that congressional Republicans will work with him once he’s elected president but no one, let alone [especially] those who worked with Biden in the last administration, actually believes him.

The former vice president’s latest promise of a forthcoming wave of bipartisan cooperation came on Monday night, when he told a crowd of fundraisers in Washington D.C. that he believed that when Donald Trump left office, GOP lawmakers would see the error of their ways.  “[T]hese folks know better,” he explained. “They know this isn’t what they’re supposed to be doing.”

Uh huh, and Donald Trump is really a nice guy at heart.

The line echoed comments that Biden reflects a strategy he’s adopted to appeal to voters as a throwback to a less divisive era and is based on the belief that the rest of the political establishment will join him there.

But veterans of the Obama administration say that Biden is either being naive or is willfully selling voters on a political fairytale.

“Fuck no,” one senior Obama aide said when asked if Republicans would be willing to work with a hypothetical President Biden.

Yep, I’m with “Fuck no” here. Republicans may know this isn’t “what they’re supposed to be doing”, but they sure as hell don’t care. They don’t take any kind of ethical view of the matter; they take a “give us all the power forever” view of it.

“Right on,” Ben Labolt, Obama’s 2012 campaign press secretary, said sarcastically of Biden’s call to renew bipartisan cooperation. “Mitch McConnell and [Rep.] Mark Meadows will rush to form the Woke Caucus. And Nelson Rockefeller will be revived from his grave.”

The legislative collaborations that Biden is best known for are not particularly popular among Democratic activists. And the deals he hashed out with McConnell—first to extend the Bush era tax cuts in exchange for stimulative tax measures, the second to extend many of those tax cuts even further while paving the way for large spending cuts—are often regarded as progressive low points of the Obama era; so much so that, to this day, Senate Republicans revel in them.

“Vote for me,” says Joe, “I can work with the Republicans, so that they get to slash taxes on the rich and I get to…say I can work with them.”

“It’s either delusional or dishonest,” said Adam Jentleson, who served as Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid’s deputy chief of staff during the last two years of the Obama administration. “Republicans reaped enormous gains from their obstruction, like securing the balance of the Supreme Court for a generation or more. They know obstruction works and they will eat Biden’s lunch while he reminisces about the good old days.”

Well, but at least little girls will learn that they’re fuck toys and nothing else.