|
Our Consoler-in-Chief was actually worse than expected, Biden makes the case, the right continues to glorify violence, what Castro has done, and why Tucker Carlson should be so proud. –Charlie Sykes
|
|
1. Our Consoler-in-Chief
Well, that went about as badly as you might have expected.

He. Just. Couldn't. Help. Himself.
EL PASO — On a day when President Trump vowed to tone down his rhetoric and help the country heal following two mass slayings, he did the opposite — lacing his visits Wednesday to El Paso and Dayton, Ohio, with a flurry of attacks on local leaders and memorializing his trips with grinning thumbs-up photos.
A traditional role for presidents has been to offer comfort and solace to all Americans at times of national tragedy, but the day provided a fresh testament to Trump’s limitations in striking notes of unity and empathy.
When Trump swooped into the grieving border city of El Paso to offer condolences following the massacre of Latinos allegedly by a white supremacist, some of the city’s elected leaders and thousands of its citizens declared the president unwelcome.
In his only public remarks during the trip, Trump lashed out at Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Dayton Mayor Nan Whaley, both Democrats, over their characterization of his visit with hospital patients in Dayton
Exit take: Donald Trump is uniquely incapable of rising to the moment. A president who rose to power by vilifying minorities and stoking fears of Islamic terrorism, simply cannot muster the passion or even the interest to similarly confront domestic white nationalist terrorism.
|
|
2. Okay, It was Even Worse Than We Expected
Dan Scavino has clearly settled into his role as the White House troll. But this tweet was, perhaps, unintentionally revealing about the priorities of this presidency.

The reaction was, well, to be expected.


Exit take: It's all about Trump All the Time. He is the bride at every wedding. the corpse at every funeral. the baby at every christening..... and the rock star at every trauma center.
|
|
3. Biden Makes the Case
My unpopular opinion: Joe Biden gave a very, very good speech yestreday. and I wish it had been given by a Republican. Any Republican.
But who?
Ben Sasse? Who is now running for re-election against "socialism"? Mitt Romney, who has apparently gone into witness protection?
A nation turns it's lonely eyes to....??????
In the meantime, I find myself agreeing with my friend Jonathan Capehart here. "What gave Biden’s address more power was that it wasn’t just a harangue against Trump. It was a reminder of who we are as a nation, 'the soul of America,” as he called it."
Some of what Biden said:
What this president doesn’t understand is that unlike every other nation on earth, we're unable to define what constitutes "American" by religion, by ethnicity, or by tribe; you can't do it.
America is an idea. An idea stronger than any army, bigger than any ocean, more powerful than any dictator or tyrant. It gives hope to the most desperate people on earth….
The most powerful idea in the history of the world I think beats in the hearts of the people of this country. And it beats in all of us. No matter your race, your ethnicity. No matter your gender identity, your sexual orientation. No matter your faith. It beats in the heart of rich and poor alike. It unites America -- whether your ancestors were Native to these shores or they were brought here forcibly and enslaved, whether they were immigrants generations back, like my family from Ireland, or those coming today looking to build a better life for your family.
The American creed – that we are all created equal –was written long-ago. But the genius of every generation of Americans has opened it wider and wider and wider, to include those who have been excluded in a previous generation. That’s why it has never gathered dust in the history books.
|
|
4. The Right Continues to Glorify Violence
I'll have a much longer piece in the Bulwark later today. But it is worth revisiting what Christian Vanderbrouk wrote back in March, when he warned about a darker but related strain of rhetoric on the right. It's time, he wrote then, for conservatives to stop trafficking in violent fantasies about racial civil wars that pit red and blue states against one another.
And he raised a warning flag about the mainstreaming of a certain genre of white nationalist violence porn that was making its way into the mainstream of the new Trumpian conservativism. You should go back and read the whole thing.
In particular, Vanderbrouk highlighted the work of Kurt Schlcihter, a well-known figure on the right despite his fringey extremism. Schlichter peddles white nationalist ‘replacement” theory, calls inner city residents of Chicago “savages,” and has written a series of books featuring “white genocide paranoia and race war fantasy.”
Ideas, conservatives once knew, have consequences...
More TK...
|
|
4. What Castro Has Done
Over at Commentary, Noah Rothman argues that by releasing a list of Trump donors, Joaquin Castro has expanded the rules of engagement. And not in a good way.
Castro’s attack on Trump donors in his district inadvertently makes a strong argument in favor of “dark money”—a practice against which Democrats frequently rail but a practice that’s utilized even more than their Republican opponents in 2018. The landmark 1958 Supreme Court decision in NAACP v. Alabama found that state-issued subpoenas for the group’s records, including its membership and donor lists, represented an assault on civil rights. This foundational ruling has served as the basis on which charitable organizations and social-welfare groups have successfully argued in favor of anonymity ever since.
In the interest of transparency and accountability, these protections do not apply to candidates. Until now, the argument raised by critics of America’s Byzantine labyrinth of financial disclosure rules has been that they anonymize wealthy interests and prevent Americans from having a full understanding of who is influencing the political process. Castro’s maneuver deals a fatal blow to that argument. By shining a spotlight on small-dollar donors and implying strongly that their contributions represent a moral failing that puts minority lives in jeopardy, the congressman redefined the rules of engagement. Republicans will respond in kind, and yet another conventionally private aspect of American life will be nationalized.
If Democrats truly believed that this delicate moment in American political life had the capacity to spiral out of control, they would regard Castro’s irresponsible actions with the same disdain they reserve for Republicans who single out private individuals and businesses. Their silence suggests that they don’t, which raises the question: Is Trump’s rhetoric really beyond the pale, or is he just not agitating for the kind of social instability Democrats like?
|
|
5. So What Would You Do?
Yesterday, I asked a question on Twitter:
It had more than 2.1 million "engagements." And overwhelmingly, people said that if they walked into that store, saw the guy with the gun, they'd leave. I know that I would.
Back when I used to have a radio show, I devoted a show to a story about two guys in Wisconsin who showed up at some sort of public event with the rifles slung over their shoulders. Folks were scared, cops were called, etc.
The vast majority of my callers -- who were mostly strong gun rights advocates -- thought the stunt was stupid and counter-productive.
Exit take: the pubic reaction would seem to be a strong incentive for businesses to ban such displays. if they did, it would be the free market at work, amirite?
|
|
|
Don't miss the Bulwark Podcast, featuring Charlie Sykes, Bill Kristol, and a whole host of people willing to tell you what they really think.
|
|
1. Tucker Carlson Must Be So Proud
A ringing endorsement from former KKK Grand-WTF, David Duke:
|
|
1. What Laws Stop 8Chan?
...virtually none, explains Kim Wehle in today's Bulwark.
It might be time for Congress to revisit Section 230 with the goal of disincentivizing technical service providers from carrying sites like 8chan while at the same time protecting speech based on content, as the mere threat of litigation operates to deter bad conduct. The same goes for laws against negligence, breach of contract, speeding, robbery, and a whole host of other human or corporate behaviors that society wants to temper. The vast majority of people conform their behavior to abide by those laws because, among other reasons, they don’t want to face the legal consequences.
Laws aside, the 22 deaths in El Paso are what motivated 8chan’s website security firm to stop protecting what it called a “cesspool of hate” from cyberattacks. As a result, 8chan went dark, but not for long. Another firm swiftly stepped in, however briefly. The next chapter in the story remains to be seen.
Read the whole thing.
|
|
|
If you have suggestions for tomorrow's quick hits, cheap shots, or deep thoughts, email me at cjaysykes@gmail.com
Charlie Sykes
Founder, Editor-At-Large
Host, Bulwark Podcast
|
|
|
Are you a fan of The Bulwark? Would you like to support our work? Even better. We're not a fan of paywalls, and we're not a fan of ads. But if you'd like to throw a few bucks our way to show your support, that'd make our day.
|
|
|
|