KD vs. WB

In the comment thread, WB writes:

... in his latest piece he basically writes that he and we know nothing and will not get to know the truth, just as I told you above.

This after pretending in his previous two pieces that he actually knows something.

I don't agree with his second sentence, and I quote from all three pieces:

Kevin Drum Number One:

In other words, nobody has even looked at these emails yet. The FBI has to get a court order first. So: are these emails that have already been turned over? Maybe. Are they routine emails about schedules and so forth? Maybe. Nobody, including the FBI, has the slightest idea.

Kevin Drum Number Two:

We have a bunch of emails from Huma Abedin to other people. The FBI has not read them yet and has no idea what they're about.

Kevin also quotes an LA Times story which attributes to an unidentified official:

Investigators came across the emails while investigating whether Weiner violated federal law when exchanging sexually explicit texts with a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina, one official said....The emails were not to or from Clinton, and contained information that appeared to be more of what agents had already uncovered, the official said, but in an abundance of caution, they felt they needed to further scrutinize them.

KD Number Three:

Have you heard? There are some emails. They are pertinent to something or other. But nobody has actually read them, so, actually, maybe they aren't.

They are from Hillary Clinton to Huma Abedin. No, wait, they aren't. Or maybe they are. No they're not.

They are duplicates of emails we've already seen. No they aren't. But maybe some of them are. Or most of them.

So do these really show that Kevin is a "pompous fool" as at least a couple of my readers seem to believe? I don't think so. Yes, he is partisan and sarcastic, but it looks to me like he is both careful and consistent in identifying both what is known and speculated (see KD's last two sentences.

Now in the pompous fools department, how about that guy proclaiming on TV and rallies everywhere that "this is bigger than Watergate?"

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anti-Libertarian: re-post

The most pointed critique of social security and liberalism in general is the libertarian critique. The problem with libertarians, for a liberal, is that we have too much in common. We both believe in individual rights, tolerance of individual differences, and dislike government prescription of religion. The basic difference, it seems to me, is the different answers we give to Cain's (with thanks to the Captain - my original version had the corpse asking the question!) famous question: "Am I my brother's keeper?" That's not really my basic bitch against the libertarians though. My real complaint is the same as my complaint against most religion - its premise is a fraud. For those who can't stand to wait for the punchline, I believe that trying to implement libertarian principles leads to tyranny or social disintegration. Demonstrating that takes some historical (and pre-historical) context. For all but the last 15,000 or so of the 100,000 years the human spec...
Read more

Uneasy Lies The Head

Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown ........... Shakespeare Henry IV, Part II. So it is with us and our slightly distant primate cousins , so it seems. A 9-year study of wild baboons in Kenya by Princeton University and the Institute of Primate Research may turn conventional assumptions of alphas males upside down. The study found that alpha males have high testosterone levels, which allows them to dominate other baboons, get access to more food, and attract better mates. This is expected. Surprisingly, though, the alpha males also have high levels of stress hormone glucocorticoid, which scientists measured from their feces samples. In fact, the stress of alpha baboons was on par with low-ranking baboons. The convention wisdom is that access to food and females provides life security and thus less stress for dominant males. Conversely, weak males who are constantly threatened by starvation and physical violence from stronger males are thought to be more stressed. The st...
Read more

We Call it Soccer

The US played its best, and maybe only good game of World Cup, but lost thanks to brilliant goalkeeping by the Swedish keeper and the bizarre method soccer uses to settle ties when three US stars could not put the ball on frame from the 12 yard spot.  At the end it came down to a blocked shot that spun in by maybe a couple of centimeters. Well, that's football - too much like life.   Which brings me to a modest proposal.  Replace the thirty minute overtimes with as many 7-player 15 minute periods as needed to settle it.  Scoring should be much easier with fewer players.
Read more