Posts Tagged ‘MARK ANTONY’
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ADAM SCHIFF, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP JUNIOR, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GRU (RUSSIAN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE), HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HILLARY CLINTON, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, HUFFINGTON POST, JARED KUSHNER, JULIUS CAESAR, JULIUS CAESAR (PLAY), KELLEYANNE CONWAY, KEVIN MCCARTHY, LINDSEY GRAHAM, MARCUS BRUTUS, MARK ANTONY, MEDIA MATTERS, MIKE CONAWAY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUELLER REPORT, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PAUL MANAFORT, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, RONNA MCDANIEL, RUSSIA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SUBVERSION, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TREASON, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WIKILEAKS, WILLIAM BAR, WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on March 3, 2023 at 5:10 pm
On March 24, 2019, Attorney General William Barr received the long-awaited report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller about Russian efforts to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.
Barr claimed that the report—which no one else in the government had seen—showed no evidence that President Donald Trump had colluded with Russian Intelligence agents.
So House Republicans—acting entirely on that claim—suddenly went on the offensive.
On March 28, all nine Republicans on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence demanded in a letter that Representative Adam Schiff (D-California) resign as its chairman.
Other Republicans quickly joined the chorus:
- House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California): Schiff owed “an apology to the American public” and should step down from his post as head of the Intelligence committee.
- Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel: “They [Schiff and House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-New York] should be removed from their chairmanships. They owe the American people an apology. They owe this President an apology, and they have work to do to heal this democracy because this is our country we are talking about.”
- White House Adviser Kelleyanne Conway: “He’s been on every TV show 50 times a day for practically the last two years, promising Americans that this President would either be impeached or indicted. He has no right, as somebody who has been peddling a lie, day after day after day, unchallenged. Unchallenged and not under oath. Somebody should have put him under oath and said, ‘You have evidence, where is it?’”
On March 28, Schiff—speaking in a firm and controlled voice—addressed his critics in the House and beyond.
It was a speech worthy of that given by Mark Antony at the funeral of Julius Caesar.
Adam Schiff
“My colleagues may think it’s okay that the Russians offered dirt on the Democratic candidate for President as part of what was described as ‘the Russian government’s effort to help the Trump campaign.’ You might think that’s okay.
“My colleagues might think it’s okay that when that was offered to the son of the President, who had a pivotal role in the campaign, that the President’s son did not call the FBI, he did not adamantly refuse that foreign help. No, instead that son said that he would ‘love’ the help of the Russians. You might think it’s okay that he took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that Paul Manafort, the campaign chair, someone with great experience running campaigns, also took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that the President’s son-in-law also took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that they concealed it from the public.
“You might think it’s okay that their only disappointment after that meeting was that the dirt they received on Hillary Clinton wasn’t better. You might think that’s okay.![]()
![]()
![]()
“You might think it’s okay that when it was discovered a year later that they’d lied about that meeting and said it was about adoptions, you might think it’s okay that the President is reported to have helped dictate that lie. You might think that’s okay. I don’t.
![]()
“You might think it’s okay that the Presidential chairman of a campaign would offer information about that campaign to a Russian in exchange for money or debt forgiveness. You might think that’s okay. I don’t.
“You might think it’s okay that campaign chairman offered polling data, campaign polling data to someone linked to Russian intelligence. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think it’s okay that the President himself called on Russia to hack his opponent’s emails, ‘if they were listening.’
“You might think it’s okay that later that day, in fact, the Russians attempted to hack a server affiliated with that campaign. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think that it’s okay that the President’s son-in-law sought to establish a secret back channel of communications with the Russians through a Russian diplomatic facility. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think it’s okay that an associate of the President made direct contact with the GRU [the Russian military Intelligence agency] through Guccifer 2 and Wikileaks, that is considered a hostile Intelligence agency.
“You might think that it’s okay that a senior campaign official was instructed to reach that associate and find out what that hostile Intelligence agency had to say, in terms of dirt on his opponent.
“You might think it’s okay that the National Security Adviser-Designate [Mike Flynn] secretly conferred with the Russian ambassador about undermining U.S. sanctions, and you might think it’s okay he lied about it to the FBI. You might say that’s all okay.
“You might say that’s just what you need to do to win, but I don’t think it’s okay. I think it’s immoral. I think it’s unethical. I think it’s unpatriotic. And yes, I think it’s corrupt and evidence of collusion.”
Not one Republican dared challenge even one accusation Schiff had made.
With the coming retirement of 89-year-old Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) Adam Schiff is now a candidate for United States Senator from California.
Like this:
Like Loading...
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ADAM SCHIFF, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP JUNIOR, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GRU (RUSSIAN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE), HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HILLARY CLINTON, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, HUFFINGTON POST, JARED KUSHNER, JULIUS CAESAR, JULIUS CAESAR (PLAY), KELLEYANNE CONWAY, KEVIN MCCARTHY, LINDSEY GRAHAM, MARCUS BRUTUS, MARK ANTONY, MEDIA MATTERS, MIKE CONAWAY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUELLER REPORT, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PAUL MANAFORT, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, RONNA MCDANIEL, RUSSIA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SUBVERSION, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TREASON, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WIKILEAKS, WILLIAM BAR, WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on March 2, 2023 at 12:10 am
“Friends, Romans, countrymen—lend me your ears!”
It’s the opening line of a speech once widely memorized by schoolboys in English literature classes. It’s from William Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar,” and it’s a far more sophisticated piece of writing than most people realize.
Mark Antony, addressing a crowd of Romans at the funeral of his former patron, Julius Caesar, faces a serious problem.
Caesar has been murdered by a band of conspirators who feared he intended to make himself king. The chief conspirator, Marcus Brutus, is one of the most honored men in ancient Rome. And he has just addressed the same crowd.
As a result, they are now convinced that the assassination was fully justified. They assume that Antony intends to attack the conspirators. And they are ready to attack him—maybe physically—if he does.
But Antony is too smart to do that—at least initially.
Instead, he assures the crowd: “I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.”
And he praises the chief conspirator: “The noble Brutus hath told you Caesar was ambitious. If so, it was a grievous fault—and grievously hath Caesar answered it.”
Then he introduces a line he will repeat with great effectiveness throughout the rest of his speech: “For Brutus is an honorable man—so are they all, all honorable men.”
The “Death of Julius Caesar,” as depicted by Vincenzo Camuccini.
For Antony, the line is ironic. But it serves his purpose to appease the crowd. Later, he will wield it like a sword against the same conspirators.
“He was my friend, faithful and just to me.” And then: “But Brutus says he was ambitious, and Brutus is an honorable man.”
Antony then goes on to extol Caesar as the foremost Roman of his time:
- As a military victor: “You all do know this mantle. I remember the first time ever Caesar put it on. ‘Twas on…that day he overcame the Nervii.”
- As a humanitarian: “When that the poor hath cried, Caesar hath wept.”
And then, as if against his better judgment, he says: “But here’s a parchment with the seal of Caesar. I found it in his closet—’tis his will. Let but the commons hear this testament—which, pardon me, I do not mean to read—and they would go and kiss dead Caesar’s wounds.”
This inflames the crowd’s curiosity and greed: What has Caesar left them? And Antony’s refusing to read the alleged will only makes them determined to hear it.
Now the crowd is entirely at Antony’s disposal. They hurl abuse at the conspirators: “They were traitors!” “They were villains, murderers!”
So Antony, claiming to read Caesar’s will, pronounces: “To every Roman citizen he gives…seventy-five drachmas.”
Marlon Brando as Mark Antony in the 1953 film, “Julius Caesar”
Is this truly Caesar’s will? And, if so, does it really make this bequest? No one knows.
In addition, claims Antony, Caesar has left his fellow citizens “his private arbours and new-planted orchards on this side Tiber. He hath left them you, and to your heirs forever, common pleasures, to walk abroad, and recreate yourselves.”
By now the crowd is fired up—against the conspirators.
“Here was a Caesar!” cries Antony. “When comes such another?”
A citizen shouts: “We’ll burn [Caesar’s] body in the holy place. And with the brands fire the traitors’ houses.”
The crowd disperses—to pay fiery homage to Caesar and burn the houses of Brutus and the other conspirators.
Caesar’s assassins flee Rome for their lives. In time, they will face the legions of Antony and Octavian, the young nephew of Caesar—and choose suicide over capture and execution.
Apparently Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) is familiar with Shakespeare’s play.
Because, on March 28, 2019, he used the same repetitive technique in addressing his “Republican colleagues” on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Days earlier, Attorney General William Barr had claimed to summarize the long-awaited report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller about Russian efforts to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.
According to Barr, the report—which no one else in the government had seen—showed no evidence that President Donald Trump had colluded with Russian Intelligence agents.
And now House Republicans—acting entirely on that claim—were going on the offensive.
On March 28, Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) and all other eight Republicans on the Committee demanded in a letter that Schiff resign as its chairman.
“Mr. Chairman,” the letter read, “since prior to the inauguration of President Trump in January 2017, you’ve been at the center of a well-orchestrated media campaign claiming, among other things, that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government.
“On March 24, 2019, the special counsel delivered his findings to the Department of Justice….The special counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 election….
“Despite these findings, you continue to proclaim to the media that there is ‘significant evidence of collusion.’
“The findings of the Special Counsel conclusively refute your past and present conclusions and have exposed you as having abused your position to knowingly promote false information, having damaged the integrity of this Committee, and undermined faith in U.S. Government institutions.”
Like this:
Like Loading...
ABC NEWS, ABORTION, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, ADOLF HITLER, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BIRTH CONTROL, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, CIVIL WAR, CLARENCE THOMAS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DEMOCRATS, DRED SCOTT, FACEBOOK, FASCISM, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HUFFINGTON POST, INFLATION, JULIUS CAESAR, KENJI YOSHINO, MARK ANTONY, MEDIA MATTERS, MEDICARE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NIGHT OF THE LONG KNIVES, NINTH AMENDMENT, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, PRIVACY, RAPE, RAW STORY, RELIGIOUS RIGHT, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, ROE V. WADE, ROGER B. TANEY, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOCIAL SECURITY, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, UPI, USA TODAY, WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Medical, Politics, Social commentary on June 29, 2022 at 12:12 am
“If anyone reproaches me and asks why I did not resort to the regular courts of justice, then all I can say is this: In this hour I was responsible for the fate of the German people, and thereby I became the Supreme Judge of the German people!”
That was how Chancellor—not yet Fuhrer-–Adolf Hitler justified his June 30, 1934 purge of his private army, the brown-shirted S.A. It has gone down in history as “The Night of the Long Knives.”
Adolf Hitler
It took five “Supreme Judges” of the American people to purge the right to abortion for millions of American women—including victims of rape and incest.
Hitler’s “blood purge” carried Germany yet another step closer to Nazi dictatorship. Similarly, the Supreme Court has carried the United States yet another step closer to a Republican dictatorship.
In the past, the Supreme Court has made decisions that have blackened its reputation in the eyes of historians.
One of these occurred in 1857, in what has become known as the “Dred Scott decision.” The Court decided 7–2 that neither Scott nor any other person of African ancestry could claim citizenship in the United States.
The case centered on slaves Dred and Harriet Scott and their children, Eliza and Lizzie. The Scotts claimed that they should be granted their freedom because Dred had lived in Illinois and the Wisconsin Territory for four years. Slavery was illegal in those jurisdictions, and their laws said that slaveholders gave up their rights to slaves if they stayed for an extended period.
Dred Scott
Chief Justice Roger B. Taney ruled that freeing Scott and his family would “improperly deprive Scott’s owner of his legal property.”
As despicable as the Dred Scott decision was, it nevertheless lay grounded in the existing laws of that time. The Court did not reverse an earlier ruling. Millions who were already enslaved were kept enslaved. But it did not extend slavery throughout the country.
The Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade set a huge and dangerous legal precedent.
On January 22, 1973, the Court had struck down virtually every anti-abortion law in the country. On June 24, 2022, it overturned that decision.
It went, in effect, from having expanded freedom of choice to suddenly abolishing it. And the Justices did so in the single most intimate aspect of a woman’s life.
Once people have tasted a benefit, they expect it to continue. When President Barack Obama fought to secure passage of the Affordable Care Amendment (ACA) Republicans repeatedly and savagely tried to prevent its becoming law.
And once it became law, Republicans continued to try to overturn it. They knew that if millions of poor and middle-class Americans finally won the right to obtain medical care, they would support it as wholeheartedly as they did Medicare, Social Security and the Civil Rights Act.
For 49 years, Republicans made ending the right to abortion their key issue for gaining and holding elective office. It won them cheers, votes and monies from the Religious Right and powerful Right-wing forces such as Fox News.
Now, suddenly, they have attained their objective. Millions of women will no longer be able to obtain an abortion in cases of rape or incest—let alone because of a failed condom or birth control pill.
Nor is that the only right the Justices intend to revoke.
In his concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas said that the Roe decision should prompt the Court to reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents. And he named the three landmark decisions that established those rights.
Clarence Thomas
According to Kenji Yoshino, Professor of Constitutional Law at the New York University School of Law:
“The Ninth Amendment says that there are unenumerated [implied] rights in the Constitution. And those include things that we take for granted every day, like the right to vote, the right to marry, the right to travel.
“These are all rights that are nowhere enumerated explicitly in the constitution but that we nonetheless take for granted as Americans.
“One of the most shocking things about [the Court’s] opinion was that these unenumerated rights will only be respected if they are deeply rooted in this nation’s history and traditions. And so it essentially said that if the framers of the 14th Amendment in 1868 didn’t recognize the right and question that the right didn’t have constitutional existence.
“And so that’s what leads Justice Thomas and that concurrence, to see an opening to say, ‘Well, maybe we’ll get rid of not just the right to abortion, but also the right to same-sex marriage, the right to sexual intimacy and the privacy of your home, and even the right to contraception.'”
Thomas, says Yoshino, is inviting lower courts to reach that conclusion. He is also inviting Right-wing litigants to bring cases which can eventually reach the Supreme Court.
Thomas is in effect saying that once this happens, the right to same-sex marriage, contraception and privacy can be struck down by the Court—just as it has struck down the right to abortion.
Mark Antony, speaking in William Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar,” had it right: “The evil that men do lives after them.”
Like this:
Like Loading...
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ADAM SCHIFF, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP JUNIOR, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GRU (RUSSIAN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE), HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HILLARY CLINTON, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, HUFFINGTON POST, JARED KUSHNER, JULIUS CAESAR, JULIUS CAESAR (PLAY), KELLEYANNE CONWAY, KEVIN MCCARTHY, LINDSEY GRAHAM, MARCUS BRUTUS, MARK ANTONY, MEDIA MATTERS, MIKE CONAWAY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUELLER REPORT, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PAUL MANAFORT, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, RONNA MCDANIEL, RUSSIA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SUBVERSION, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TREASON, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WIKILEAKS, WILLIAM BAR, WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on April 6, 2022 at 12:10 am
On March 24, 2019, Attorney General William Barr received the long-awaited report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller about Russian efforts to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.
According to Barr, the report—which no one else in the government had seen—showed no evidence that President Donald Trump had colluded with Russian Intelligence agents.
And now House Republicans—acting entirely on that claim—suddenly went on the offensive.
On March 28, all nine Republicans on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence demanded in a letter that Representative Adam Schiff (D-California) resign as its chairman.
On the same day, President Donald Trump tweeted: “Congressman Adam Schiff, who spent two years knowingly and unlawfully lying and leaking, should be forced to resign from Congress!”
Other Republicans quickly joined the chorus:
- House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California): Schiff owed “an apology to the American public” and should step down from his post as head of the Intelligence committee.
- Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel: “They [Schiff and House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-New York] should be removed from their chairmanships. They owe the American people an apology. They owe this President an apology, and they have work to do to heal this democracy because this is our country we are talking about.”
- South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham: “He’s getting into conspiracy land and he’s acting like an Oliver Stone type figure. That to me is not helpful to him but I’m not going to ask him to resign from Congress.”
- White House Adviser Kelleyanne Conway: “He’s been on every TV show 50 times a day for practically the last two years, promising Americans that this President would either be impeached or indicted. He has no right, as somebody who has been peddling a lie, day after day after day, unchallenged. Unchallenged and not under oath. Somebody should have put him under oath and said, ‘You have evidence, where is it?’”
On March 28, Schiff—speaking in a firm and controlled voice—addressed his critics in the House and beyond.
It was a speech worthy of that given by Mark Antony at the funeral of Julius Caesar.
Adam Schiff
“My colleagues may think it’s okay that the Russians offered dirt on the Democratic candidate for President as part of what was described as ‘the Russian government’s effort to help the Trump campaign.’ You might think that’s okay.
“My colleagues might think it’s okay that when that was offered to the son of the President, who had a pivotal role in the campaign, that the President’s son did not call the FBI, he did not adamantly refuse that foreign help. No, instead that son said that he would ‘love’ the help of the Russians. You might think it’s okay that he took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that Paul Manafort, the campaign chair, someone with great experience running campaigns, also took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that the President’s son-in-law also took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that they concealed it from the public.
“You might think it’s okay that their only disappointment after that meeting was that the dirt they received on Hillary Clinton wasn’t better. You might think that’s okay.![]()
![]()
![]()
“You might think it’s okay that when it was discovered a year later that they’d lied about that meeting and said it was about adoptions, you might think it’s okay that the President is reported to have helped dictate that lie. You might think that’s okay. I don’t.
![]()
“You might think it’s okay that the Presidential chairman of a campaign would offer information about that campaign to a Russian in exchange for money or debt forgiveness. You might think that’s okay. I don’t.
“You might think it’s okay that campaign chairman offered polling data, campaign polling data to someone linked to Russian intelligence. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think it’s okay that the President himself called on Russia to hack his opponent’s emails, ‘if they were listening.’
“You might think it’s okay that later that day, in fact, the Russians attempted to hack a server affiliated with that campaign. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think that it’s okay that the President’s son-in-law sought to establish a secret back channel of communications with the Russians through a Russian diplomatic facility. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think it’s okay that an associate of the President made direct contact with the GRU [the Russian military Intelligence agency] through Guccifer 2 and Wikileaks, that is considered a hostile Intelligence agency.
“You might think that it’s okay that a senior campaign official was instructed to reach that associate and find out what that hostile Intelligence agency had to say, in terms of dirt on his opponent.
“You might think it’s okay that the National Security Adviser-Designate [Mike Flynn] secretly conferred with the Russian ambassador about undermining U.S. sanctions, and you might think it’s okay he lied about it to the FBI. You might say that’s all okay.
“You might say that’s just what you need to do to win, but I don’t think it’s okay. I think it’s immoral. I think it’s unethical. I think it’s unpatriotic. And yes, I think it’s corrupt and evidence of collusion.”
Not one Republican dared challenge even one accusation Schiff had made.
Like this:
Like Loading...
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ADAM SCHIFF, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, HUFFINGTON POST, JULIUS CAESAR, JULIUS CAESAR (PLAY), MARCUS BRUTUS, MARK ANTONY, MEDIA MATTERS, MIKE CONAWAY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUELLER REPORT, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, RUSSIA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SUBVERSION, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WILLIAM BAR, WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on April 5, 2022 at 12:11 am
“Friends, Romans, countrymen—lend me your ears!”
It’s the opening line of a speech once widely memorized by schoolboys in English literature classes. It’s from William Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar,” and it’s a far more sophisticated piece of writing than most people realize.
Mark Antony, addressing a crowd of Romans at the funeral of his former patron, Julius Caesar, faces a serious problem.
Caesar has been murdered by a band of conspirators who feared he intended to make himself king. The chief conspirator, Marcus Brutus, is one of the most honored men in ancient Rome. And he has just addressed the same crowd.
As a result, they are now convinced that the assassination was fully justified. They assume that Antony intends to attack the conspirators. And they are ready to attack him—maybe physically—if he does.
But Antony is too smart to do that—at least initially.
Instead, he assures the crowd: “I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.”
And he praises the chief conspirator: “The noble Brutus hath told you Caesar was ambitious. If so, it was a grievous fault—and grievously hath Caesar answered it.”
Then he introduces a line he will repeat with great effectiveness throughout the rest of his speech: “For Brutus is an honorable man—so are they all, all honorable men.”
The “Death of Julius Caesar,” as depicted by Vincenzo Camuccini.
For Antony, the line is ironic. But it serves his purpose to appease the crowd. Later, he will wield it like a sword against the same conspirators.
“He was my friend, faithful and just to me.” And then: “But Brutus says he was ambitious, and Brutus is an honorable man.”
Antony then goes on to extol Caesar as the foremost Roman of his time:
- As a military victor: “You all do know this mantle. I remember the first time ever Caesar put it on. ‘Twas on…that day he overcame the Nervii.”
- As a humanitarian: “When that the poor hath cried, Caesar hath wept.”
And then, as if against his better judgment, he says: “But here’s a parchment with the seal of Caesar. I found it in his closet—’tis his will. Let but the commons hear this testament—which, pardon me, I do not mean to read—and they would go and kiss dead Caesar’s wounds.”
This inflames the crowd’s curiosity and greed: What has Caesar left them? And Antony’s refusing to read the alleged will only makes them determined to hear it.
Now the crowd is entirely at Antony’s disposal. They hurl abuse at the conspirators: “They were traitors!” “They were villains, murderers!”
So Antony, claiming to read Caesar’s will, pronounces: “To every Roman citizen he gives…seventy-five drachmas.”
Marlon Brando as Mark Antony in the 1953 film, “Julius Caesar”
Is this truly Caesar’s will? And, if so, does it really make this bequest? No one knows.
In addition, claims Antony, Caesar has left his fellow citizens “his private arbours and new-planted orchards on this side Tiber. He hath left them you, and to your heirs forever, common pleasures, to walk abroad, and recreate yourselves.”
By now the crowd is fired up—against the conspirators.
“Here was a Caesar!” cries Antony. “When comes such another?”
A citizen shouts: “We’ll burn [Caesar’s] body in the holy place. And with the brands fire the traitors’ houses.”
The crowd disperses—to pay fiery homage to Caesar and burn the houses of Brutus and the other conspirators.
Caesar’s assassins flee Rome for their lives. In time, they will face the legions of Antony and Octavian, the young nephew of Caesar—and choose suicide over capture and execution.
Apparently Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California) is familiar with Shakespeare’s play.
Because, on March 28, 2019, he used the same repetitive technique in addressing his “Republican colleagues” on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Days earlier, Attorney General William Barr had claimed to summarize the long-awaited report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller about Russian efforts to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.
According to Barr, the report—which no one else in the government has seen—showed no evidence that President Donald Trump had colluded with Russian Intelligence agents.
And now House Republicans—acting entirely on that claim—were going on the offensive.
On March 28, Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) and all other eight Republicans on the Committee demanded in a letter that Schiff resign as its chairman.
“Mr. Chairman,” the letter read, “since prior to the inauguration of President Trump in January 2017, you’ve been at the center of a well-orchestrated media campaign claiming, among other things, that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government.
“On March 24, 2019, the special counsel delivered his findings to the Department of Justice….The special counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 election….
“Despite these findings, you continue to proclaim to the media that there is ‘significant evidence of collusion.’
“The findings of the Special Counsel conclusively refute your past and present conclusions and have exposed you as having abused your position to knowingly promote false information, having damaged the integrity of this Committee, and undermined faith in U.S. Government institutions.”
Like this:
Like Loading...
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ADAM SCHIFF, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP JUNIOR, FACEBOOK, FBI, GRU (RUSSIAN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE), HILLARY CLINTON, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, JARED KUSHNER, JULIUS CAESAR, JULIUS CAESAR (PLAY), KELLEYANNE CONWAY, KEVIN MCCARTHY, LINDSEY GRAHAM, MARCUS BRUTUS, MARK ANTONY, MIKE CONAWAY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUELLER REPORT, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PAUL MANAFORT, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, RONNA MCDANIEL, RUSSIA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SUBVERSION, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TREASON, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WIKILEAKS, WILLIAM BAR, WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE
In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Politics, Social commentary on November 27, 2019 at 12:07 am
On March 24, 2019, Attorney General William Barr received the long-awaited report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller about Russian efforts to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.
According to Barr, the report—which no one else in the government had seen—showed no evidence that President Donald Trump had colluded with Russian Intelligence agents.
And now House Republicans—acting entirely on that claim—suddenly went on the offensive.
On March 28, all nine Republicans on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence demanded in a letter that Representative Adam Schiff (D-California) resign as its chairman.
On the same day, President Donald Trump tweeted: “Congressman Adam Schiff, who spent two years knowingly and unlawfully lying and leaking, should be forced to resign from Congress!”
Other Republicans quickly joined the chorus:
- House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California): Schiff owes “an apology to the American public” and should step down from his post as head of the Intelligence committee.
- Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel: “They [Schiff and House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-New York] should be removed from their chairmanships. They owe the American people an apology. They owe this President an apology, and they have work to do to heal this democracy because this is our country we are talking about.”
- South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham: “He’s getting into conspiracy land and he’s acting like an Oliver Stone type figure. That to me is not helpful to him but I’m not going to ask him to resign from Congress.”
- White House Adviser Kelleyanne Conway: “He’s been on every TV show 50 times a day for practically the last two years, promising Americans that this President would either be impeached or indicted. He has no right, as somebody who has been peddling a lie, day after day after day, unchallenged. Unchallenged and not under oath. Somebody should have put him under oath and said, ‘You have evidence, where is it?’”
On March 28, Schiff—speaking in a firm and controlled voice—addressed his critics in the House and beyond.
It was a speech worthy of the one William Shakespeare put into the mouth of Mark Antony at the funeral of Julius Caesar.
Adam Schiff
“My colleagues may think it’s okay that the Russians offered dirt on the Democratic candidate for President as part of what was described as ‘the Russian government’s effort to help the Trump campaign.’ You might think that’s okay.
“My colleagues might think it’s okay that when that was offered to the son of the President, who had a pivotal role in the campaign, that the President’s son did not call the FBI, he did not adamantly refuse that foreign help. No, instead that son said that he would ‘love’ the help of the Russians. You might think it’s okay that he took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that Paul Manafort, the campaign chair, someone with great experience running campaigns, also took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that the President’s son-in-law also took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that they concealed it from the public.
“You might think it’s okay that their only disappointment after that meeting was that the dirt they received on Hillary Clinton wasn’t better. You might think that’s okay.![]()
![]()
![]()
“You might think it’s okay that when it was discovered a year later that they’d lied about that meeting and said it was about adoptions, you might think it’s okay that the President is reported to have helped dictate that lie. You might think that’s okay. I don’t.
![]()
“You might think it’s okay that the Presidential chairman of a campaign would offer information about that campaign to a Russian in exchange for money or debt forgiveness. You might think that’s okay. I don’t.
“You might think it’s okay that campaign chairman offered polling data, campaign polling data to someone linked to Russian intelligence. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think it’s okay that the President himself called on Russia to hack his opponent’s emails, ‘if they were listening.’
“You might think it’s okay that later that day, in fact, the Russians attempted to hack a server affiliated with that campaign. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think that it’s okay that the President’s son-in-law sought to establish a secret back channel of communications with the Russians through a Russian diplomatic facility. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think it’s okay that an associate of the President made direct contact with the GRU [the Russian military Intelligence agency] through Guccifer 2 and Wikileaks, that is considered a hostile Intelligence agency.
“You might think that it’s okay that a senior campaign official was instructed to reach that associate and find out what that hostile Intelligence agency had to say, in terms of dirt on his opponent.
“You might think it’s okay that the National Security Adviser-Designate [Mike Flynn] secretly conferred with the Russian ambassador about undermining U.S. sanctions, and you might think it’s okay he lied about it to the FBI. You might say that’s all okay.
“You might say that’s just what you need to do to win, but I don’t think it’s okay. I think it’s immoral. I think it’s unethical. I think it’s unpatriotic. And yes, I think it’s corrupt and evidence of collusion.”
Not one Republican dared challenge even one accusation Schiff had made.
Like this:
Like Loading...
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ADAM SCHIFF, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, JULIUS CAESAR, JULIUS CAESAR (PLAY), MARCUS BRUTUS, MARK ANTONY, MIKE CONAWAY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUELLER REPORT, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, RUSSIA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SUBVERSION, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WILLIAM BAR, WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE
In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on November 26, 2019 at 12:15 am
“Friends, Romans, countrymen—lend me your ears!”
It’s the opening line of a speech once widely memorized by schoolboys in English literature classes. It’s from William Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar,” and it’s a far more sophisticated piece of writing than most people realize.
Mark Antony, addressing a crowd of Romans at the funeral of his former patron, Julius Caesar, faces a serious problem.
Caesar has been murdered by a band of conspirators who feared he intended to make himself king. The chief conspirator, Marcus Brutus, is one of the most honored men in ancient Rome. And he has just addressed the same crowd.
As a result, they are now convinced that the assassination was fully justified. They assume that Antony intends to attack the conspirators. And they are ready to attack him—maybe physically—if he does.
But Antony is too smart to do that—at least initially.
Instead, he assures the crowd: “I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.”
And he praises the chief conspirator: “The noble Brutus hath told you Caesar was ambitious. If so, it was a grievous fault—and grievously hath Caesar answered it.”
Then he introduces a line he will repeat with great effectiveness throughout the rest of his speech: “For Brutus is an honorable man—so are they all, all honorable men.”
The “Death of Julius Caesar,” as depicted by Vincenzo Camuccini.
For Antony, the line is ironic. But it serves his purpose to appease the crowd. Later, he will wield it like a sword against the same conspirators.
“He was my friend, faithful and just to me.” And then: “But Brutus says he was ambitious, and Brutus is an honorable man.”
Antony then goes on to extol Caesar as the foremost Roman of his time:
- As a military victor: “You all do know this mantle. I remember the first time ever Caesar put it on. ‘Twas on…that day he overcame the Nervii.”
- As a humanitarian: “When that the poor hath cried, Caesar hath wept.”
And then, as if against his better judgment, he says: “But here’s a parchment with the seal of Caesar. I found it in his closet—’tis his will. Let but the commons hear this testament—which, pardon me, I do not mean to read—and they would go and kiss dead Caesar’s wounds.”
This inflames the crowd’s curiosity and greed: What has Caesar left them? And Antony’s refusing to read the alleged will only makes them determined to hear it.
Now the crowd is entirely at Antony’s disposal. They hurl abuse at the conspirators: “They were traitors!” “They were villains, murderers!”
So Antony, claiming to read Caesar’s will, pronounces: “To every Roman citizen he gives…seventy-five drachmas.”
Marlon Brando as Mark Antony in the 1953 film, “Julius Caesar”
Is this truly Caesar’s will? And, if so, does it really make this bequest? No one knows.
In addition, claims Antony, Caesar has left his fellow citizens “his private arbours and new-planted orchards on this side Tiber. He hath left them you, and to your heirs forever, common pleasures, to walk abroad, and recreate yourselves.”
By now the crowd is fired up—against the conspirators.
“Here was a Caesar!” cries Antony. “When comes such another?”
A citizen shouts: “We’ll burn [Caesar’s] body in the holy place. And with the brands fire the traitors’ houses.”
The crowd disperses—to pay fiery homage to Caesar and burn the houses of Brutus and the other conspirators.
Caesar’s assassins flee Rome for their lives. In time, they will face the legions of Antony and Octavian, the young nephew of Caesar—and choose suicide over capture and execution.
Apparently Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California) is familiar with Shakespeare’s play.
Because, on March 28, 2019, he used the same repetitive technique in addressing his “Republican colleagues” on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Days earlier, Attorney General William Barr had claimed to summarize the long-awaited report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller about Russian efforts to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.
According to Barr, the report—which no one else in the government had seen—showed no evidence that President Donald Trump had colluded with Russian Intelligence agents.
And now House Republicans—acting entirely on that claim—were going on the offensive.
On March 28, Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) and all other eight Republicans on the Committee demanded in a letter that Schiff resign as its chairman.
“Mr. Chairman,” the letter read, “since prior to the inauguration of President Trump in January 2017, you’ve been at the center of a well-orchestrated media campaign claiming, among other things, that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government.
“On March 24, 2019, the special counsel delivered his findings to the Department of Justice….The special counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 election….
“Despite these findings, you continue to proclaim to the media that there is ‘significant evidence of collusion.’
“The findings of the Special Counsel conclusively refute your past and present conclusions and have exposed you as having abused your position to knowingly promote false information, having damaged the integrity of this Committee, and undermined faith in U.S. Government institutions.”
Like this:
Like Loading...
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ADAM SCHIFF, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP JUNIOR, FACEBOOK, FBI, GRU (RUSSIAN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE), HILLARY CLINTON, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, JARED KUSHNER, JULIUS CAESAR, JULIUS CAESAR (PLAY), KELLEYANNE CONWAY, KEVIN MCCARTHY, LINDSEY GRAHAM, MARCUS BRUTUS, MARK ANTONY, MIKE CONAWAY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUELLER REPORT, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PAUL MANAFORT, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, RONNA MCDANIEL, RUSSIA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SUBVERSION, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TREASON, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WIKILEAKS, WILLIAM BAR, WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE
In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on April 2, 2019 at 12:10 am
On March 24, 2019, Attorney General William Barr received the long-awaited report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller about Russian efforts to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.
According to Barr, the report—which no one else in the government has seen—showed no evidence that President Donald Trump had colluded with Russian Intelligence agents.
And now House Republicans—acting entirely on that claim—suddenly went on the offensive.
On March 28, all nine Republicans on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence demanded in a letter that Representative Adam Schiff (D-California) resign as its chairman.
On the same day, President Donald Trump tweeted: “Congressman Adam Schiff, who spent two years knowingly and unlawfully lying and leaking, should be forced to resign from Congress!”
Other Republicans quickly joined the chorus:
- House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California): Schiff owes “an apology to the American public” and should step down from his post as head of the Intelligence committee.
- Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel: “They [Schiff and House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-New York] should be removed from their chairmanships. They owe the American people an apology. They owe this President an apology, and they have work to do to heal this democracy because this is our country we are talking about.”
- South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham: “He’s getting into conspiracy land and he’s acting like an Oliver Stone type figure. That to me is not helpful to him but I’m not going to ask him to resign from Congress.”
- White House Adviser Kelleyanne Conway: “He’s been on every TV show 50 times a day for practically the last two years, promising Americans that this President would either be impeached or indicted. He has no right, as somebody who has been peddling a lie, day after day after day, unchallenged. Unchallenged and not under oath. Somebody should have put him under oath and said, ‘You have evidence, where is it?’”
On March 28, Schiff—speaking in a firm and controlled voice—addressed his critics in the House and beyond.
It was a speech worthy of that given by Mark Antony at the funeral of Julius Caesar.
Adam Schiff
“My colleagues may think it’s okay that the Russians offered dirt on the Democratic candidate for President as part of what was described as ‘the Russian government’s effort to help the Trump campaign.’ You might think that’s okay.
“My colleagues might think it’s okay that when that was offered to the son of the President, who had a pivotal role in the campaign, that the President’s son did not call the FBI, he did not adamantly refuse that foreign help. No, instead that son said that he would ‘love’ the help of the Russians. You might think it’s okay that he took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that Paul Manafort, the campaign chair, someone with great experience running campaigns, also took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that the President’s son-in-law also took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that they concealed it from the public.
“You might think it’s okay that their only disappointment after that meeting was that the dirt they received on Hillary Clinton wasn’t better. You might think that’s okay.![]()
![]()
![]()
“You might think it’s okay that when it was discovered a year later that they’d lied about that meeting and said it was about adoptions, you might think it’s okay that the President is reported to have helped dictate that lie. You might think that’s okay. I don’t.
![]()
“You might think it’s okay that the Presidential chairman of a campaign would offer information about that campaign to a Russian in exchange for money or debt forgiveness. You might think that’s okay. I don’t.
“You might think it’s okay that campaign chairman offered polling data, campaign polling data to someone linked to Russian intelligence. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think it’s okay that the President himself called on Russia to hack his opponent’s emails, ‘if they were listening.’
“You might think it’s okay that later that day, in fact, the Russians attempted to hack a server affiliated with that campaign. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think that it’s okay that the President’s son-in-law sought to establish a secret back channel of communications with the Russians through a Russian diplomatic facility. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think it’s okay that an associate of the President made direct contact with the GRU [the Russian military Intelligence agency] through Guccifer 2 and Wikileaks, that is considered a hostile Intelligence agency.
“You might think that it’s okay that a senior campaign official was instructed to reach that associate and find out what that hostile Intelligence agency had to say, in terms of dirt on his opponent.
“You might think it’s okay that the National Security Adviser-Designate [Mike Flynn] secretly conferred with the Russian ambassador about undermining U.S. sanctions, and you might think it’s okay he lied about it to the FBI. You might say that’s all okay.
“You might say that’s just what you need to do to win, but I don’t think it’s okay. I think it’s immoral. I think it’s unethical. I think it’s unpatriotic. And yes, I think it’s corrupt and evidence of collusion.”
Not one Republican dared challenge even one accusation Schiff had made.
Like this:
Like Loading...
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ADAM SCHIFF, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, JULIUS CAESAR, JULIUS CAESAR (PLAY), MARCUS BRUTUS, MARK ANTONY, MIKE CONAWAY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUELLER REPORT, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, RUSSIA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SUBVERSION, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WILLIAM BAR, WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE
In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on April 1, 2019 at 12:07 am
“Friends, Romans, countrymen—lend me your ears!”
It’s the opening line of a speech once widely memorized by schoolboys in English literature classes. It’s from William Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar,” and it’s a far more sophisticated piece of writing than most people realize.
Mark Antony, addressing a crowd of Romans at the funeral of his former patron, Julius Caesar, faces a serious problem.
Caesar has been murdered by a band of conspirators who feared he intended to make himself king. The chief conspirator, Marcus Brutus, is one of the most honored men in ancient Rome. And he has just addressed the same crowd.
As a result, they are now convinced that the assassination was fully justified. They assume that Antony intends to attack the conspirators. And they are ready to attack him—maybe physically—if he does.
But Antony is too smart to do that—at least initially.
Instead, he assures the crowd: “I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.”
And he praises the chief conspirator: “The noble Brutus hath told you Caesar was ambitious. If so, it was a grievous fault—and grievously hath Caesar answered it.”
Then he introduces a line he will repeat with great effectiveness throughout the rest of his speech: “For Brutus is an honorable man—so are they all, all honorable men.”
The “Death of Julius Caesar,” as depicted by Vincenzo Camuccini.
For Antony, the line is ironic. But it serves his purpose to appease the crowd. Later, he will wield it like a sword against the same conspirators.
“He was my friend, faithful and just to me.” And then: “But Brutus says he was ambitious, and Brutus is an honorable man.”
Antony then goes on to extol Caesar as the foremost Roman of his time:
- As a military victor: “You all do know this mantle. I remember the first time ever Caesar put it on. ‘Twas on…that day he overcame the Nervii.”
- As a humanitarian: “When that the poor hath cried, Caesar hath wept.”
And then, as if against his better judgment, he says: “But here’s a parchment with the seal of Caesar. I found it in his closet—’tis his will. Let but the commons hear this testament—which, pardon me, I do not mean to read—and they would go and kiss dead Caesar’s wounds.”
This inflames the crowd’s curiosity and greed: What has Caesar left them? And Antony’s refusing to read the alleged will only makes them determined to hear it.
Now the crowd is entirely at Antony’s disposal. They hurl abuse at the conspirators: “They were traitors!” “They were villains, murderers!”
So Antony, claiming to read Caesar’s will, pronounces: “To every Roman citizen he gives…seventy-five drachmas.”
Marlon Brando as Mark Antony in the 1953 film, “Julius Caesar”
Is this truly Caesar’s will? And, if so, does it really make this bequest? No one knows.
In addition, claims Antony, Caesar has left his fellow citizens “his private arbours and new-planted orchards on this side Tiber. He hath left them you, and to your heirs forever, common pleasures, to walk abroad, and recreate yourselves.”
By now the crowd is fired up—against the conspirators.
“Here was a Caesar!” cries Antony. “When comes such another?”
A citizen shouts: “We’ll burn [Caesar’s] body in the holy place. And with the brands fire the traitors’ houses.”
The crowd disperses—to pay fiery homage to Caesar and burn the houses of Brutus and the other conspirators.
Caesar’s assassins flee Rome for their lives. In time, they will face the legions of Antony and Octavian, the young nephew of Caesar—and choose suicide over capture and execution.
Apparently Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California) is familiar with Shakespeare’s play.
Because, on March 28, he used the same repetitive technique in addressing his “Republican colleagues” on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Days earlier, Attorney General William Barr had claimed to summarize the long-awaited report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller about Russian efforts to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.
According to Barr, the report—which no one else in the government has seen—showed no evidence that President Donald Trump had colluded with Russian Intelligence agents.
And now House Republicans—acting entirely on that claim—were going on the offensive.
On March 28, Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) and all other eight Republicans on the Committee demanded in a letter that Schiff resign as its chairman.
“Mr. Chairman,” the letter read, “since prior to the inauguration of President Trump in January 2017, you’ve been at the center of a well-orchestrated media campaign claiming, among other things, that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government.
“On March 24, 2019, the special counsel delivered his findings to the Department of Justice….The special counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 election….
“Despite these findings, you continue to proclaim to the media that there is ‘significant evidence of collusion.’
“The findings of the Special Counsel conclusively refute your past and present conclusions and have exposed you as having abused your position to knowingly promote false information, having damaged the integrity of this Committee, and undermined faith in U.S. Government institutions.”
Like this:
Like Loading...
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ADAM SCHIFF, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP JUNIOR, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GRU (RUSSIAN MILITARY INTELLIGENCE), HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HILLARY CLINTON, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, HUFFINGTON POST, JARED KUSHNER, JULIUS CAESAR, JULIUS CAESAR (PLAY), KELLEYANNE CONWAY, KEVIN MCCARTHY, LINDSEY GRAHAM, MARCUS BRUTUS, MARK ANTONY, MEDIA MATTERS, MIKE CONAWAY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUELLER REPORT, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PAUL MANAFORT, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, ROBERT MUELLER, RONNA MCDANIEL, RUSSIA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SUBVERSION, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TREASON, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WIKILEAKS, WILLIAM BAR, WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, WONKETTE
ADAM SCHIFF: STANDING UP TO TYRANTS AND THEIR ACCOMPLICES: PART TWO (END)
In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on March 3, 2023 at 5:10 pmOn March 24, 2019, Attorney General William Barr received the long-awaited report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller about Russian efforts to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.
Barr claimed that the report—which no one else in the government had seen—showed no evidence that President Donald Trump had colluded with Russian Intelligence agents.
So House Republicans—acting entirely on that claim—suddenly went on the offensive.
On March 28, all nine Republicans on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence demanded in a letter that Representative Adam Schiff (D-California) resign as its chairman.
Other Republicans quickly joined the chorus:
On March 28, Schiff—speaking in a firm and controlled voice—addressed his critics in the House and beyond.
It was a speech worthy of that given by Mark Antony at the funeral of Julius Caesar.
Adam Schiff
“My colleagues may think it’s okay that the Russians offered dirt on the Democratic candidate for President as part of what was described as ‘the Russian government’s effort to help the Trump campaign.’ You might think that’s okay.
“My colleagues might think it’s okay that when that was offered to the son of the President, who had a pivotal role in the campaign, that the President’s son did not call the FBI, he did not adamantly refuse that foreign help. No, instead that son said that he would ‘love’ the help of the Russians. You might think it’s okay that he took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that Paul Manafort, the campaign chair, someone with great experience running campaigns, also took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that the President’s son-in-law also took that meeting.
“You might think it’s okay that they concealed it from the public.
“You might think it’s okay that their only disappointment after that meeting was that the dirt they received on Hillary Clinton wasn’t better. You might think that’s okay.![]()
![]()
![]()
“You might think it’s okay that when it was discovered a year later that they’d lied about that meeting and said it was about adoptions, you might think it’s okay that the President is reported to have helped dictate that lie. You might think that’s okay. I don’t.
“You might think it’s okay that the Presidential chairman of a campaign would offer information about that campaign to a Russian in exchange for money or debt forgiveness. You might think that’s okay. I don’t.
“You might think it’s okay that campaign chairman offered polling data, campaign polling data to someone linked to Russian intelligence. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think it’s okay that the President himself called on Russia to hack his opponent’s emails, ‘if they were listening.’
“You might think it’s okay that later that day, in fact, the Russians attempted to hack a server affiliated with that campaign. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think that it’s okay that the President’s son-in-law sought to establish a secret back channel of communications with the Russians through a Russian diplomatic facility. I don’t think that’s okay.
“You might think it’s okay that an associate of the President made direct contact with the GRU [the Russian military Intelligence agency] through Guccifer 2 and Wikileaks, that is considered a hostile Intelligence agency.
“You might think that it’s okay that a senior campaign official was instructed to reach that associate and find out what that hostile Intelligence agency had to say, in terms of dirt on his opponent.
“You might think it’s okay that the National Security Adviser-Designate [Mike Flynn] secretly conferred with the Russian ambassador about undermining U.S. sanctions, and you might think it’s okay he lied about it to the FBI. You might say that’s all okay.
“You might say that’s just what you need to do to win, but I don’t think it’s okay. I think it’s immoral. I think it’s unethical. I think it’s unpatriotic. And yes, I think it’s corrupt and evidence of collusion.”
Not one Republican dared challenge even one accusation Schiff had made.
With the coming retirement of 89-year-old Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) Adam Schiff is now a candidate for United States Senator from California.
Share this:
Like this: