CSotD: While You Were Out
Skip to comments
We’re still in the between-times, and the selection of fresh material is limited. I’m sympathetic to Herbert’s idea that the period is a needed break in otherwise unbearable times, mostly because she suggests that, once the New Year’s celebrations are over, we’ll be back to harsh reality.
Certainly, I’m sympathetic to the idea of taking a break to recharge your batteries, but to have everyone take the same break only works if “everyone” includes not just the hounds but the foxes as well, and with so many people keeping backyard chickens these days, I shouldn’t have to explain the metaphor.
And the foxes do not appear to be taking this week as a vacation.
A fresh batch of Epstein documents have surfaced and Milbrath manages a sort of horrified shrug, but DOJ isn’t releasing the ones they already had, so what difference does a million more make?
I don’t know that very many people object to deleting the names of victims, but obviously the pages and pages of blacked-out material have covered up far more than that.
There is a move in the House to hold Pam Bondi in what is known as “inherent contempt,” which Joyce Vance explains here. It’s a move that requires less coordination and cooperation with the Senate or the executive, but while it’s a stronger weapon than a vote of censure, I’m not sure it has enough teeth to change things.
Meanwhile, we’ve had far too many editorial cartoons featuring blacked-out pages, but while it becomes monotonous for those of us who immerse ourselves in the medium, it’s important to realize that most people do not, and there’s value in confronting the average voter with the fact that those in possession of the papers are not letting us see what’s in them.
If your local editor declines to feature these commentaries, there’s at least a chance that sharing them on social media will help break into the silos in which so many people hide from the issue.
And, yes, it is at least ironic if not darkly humorous that the MAGA crowd has adopted “pedo” as a universal insult for politicians they dislike but, presented with documentation of an actual example, are dismissing it as a “hoax.” I’m not sure they really comprehend either word, but both decency and patriotism demand we keep hammering in hopes of breaking through.
As Bagley suggests, the fact that DOJ has only released blacked-out paper does make it hard to convince people who are dead-set on not seeing it in the first place.
It might be paranoid to suggest that the meetings of Trump, Zelensky and (remotely) Putin were timed for a week in which nobody was paying attention, but Adams asks the right question, because we’ve been treated to indistinct speeches and vague reports and not a whole lot of actual productivity.
It’s been an opportunity for Trump to burnish his credentials as the Peace President, though he’s also pursuing a reputation as a tough guy who can bomb other countries without consulting Congress.
However, Jennings suggests that Dear Leader is so infatuated with and loyal to Vladimir Putin that for him to present himself as a neutral negotiator is farcical. It’s a good thing Zelensky has a background as a comedian, because he is being forced to go along with the joke in order to have any chance of ending the war.
Anderson depicts Putin as the puppet master controlling things, though I think it’s more just to suggest that he is controlling the results than to say he is controlling Zelensky. It’s not that he makes Zelensky do his bidding — as he does with Trump — but that he controls the outcome of these meetings or at least is able to make sure there is no outcome. (UPDATE: It’s Vance. See comments. And it makes far more sense that way.)
This being the man, after all, who flew to Alaska for a meeting with Dear Leader, but then snubbed him by skipping the meal and heading home early. The old KGB veteran knows how to pull strings, and launching attacks on Kyiv in the course of the Trump/Zelensky conference was as good as being in the room.
Not to worry, Danziger says. The two leaders — the leader who leads and the leader who follows — will come up with a solution that will please both sides, though it may not please anyone else.
Kikkert isn’t as polite as Danziger, making the important point that you can’t really enjoy a New Year’s celebration unless you have a date whom you know will kiss you at midnight, and perhaps after midnight as well.
It’s quite a system: They get to have the party and everyone else gets to have the hangover.
Meanwhile, there is another major power in the world, though you’d hardly know it if it weren’t for Dear Leader’s periodic announcements about how well he’s doing in persuading Xi to purchase high-tech chips and agree to favorable trade agreements.
But in response to a few feints suggesting that the US still backs Taiwan’s independence, the Chinese are making counter-moves to remind everyone that they still consider it their island and have a limited tolerance for contradiction on the point.
If you’re looking for a proposition wager with a magnificent payoff, put some money down on the launch date for Trump’s first battleship, because every other player on the planet — certainly the ones who know how boats work — is betting it will never happen.
But the foolish proposal is furnishing plenty of laughs for political cartoonists, and Mariani manages to salt his cartoon with a selection of humorous marginalia in addition to making the major point that the prospect of these floating war wagons is hardly intimidating Xi.
We started with one Australian cartoonist’s gratitude for a few days off, so we’ll close with another Aussie’s more cold-eyed view of the year’s end.
She’s certainly right: You can’t expect to accomplish both, and we should be grateful for those who choose to keep their eyes on the ball and their pens sharp, because attractive as it might seem to drop out and ignore the surrounding hellscape, it’s more optimistic to assume that resistance is not, in fact, futile.
Comments 5