Bernie’s Q&A: Herman Cain, WH Press Secretary, Republicans on the Debt, and more! (8/7) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s note: If you enjoy these sessions (along with the weekly columns and audio commentaries), please use the Facebook and Twitter buttons to share this page with your friends and family. Thank you! 

Now, let’s get to your questions (and my answers):


Kneeling [for the national anthem] sends all the wrong messages, not least because it is well on its way to replacing the only way probably 90% 0f Americans ever hear the National Anthem and sometimes ponder what it means. Spreading Kneeling is a masterful tactic that can be applied to many other cultural, government and business events. For decades it has been a tradition in this country to start all sports events with the National Anthem. With a few wobbles here and there, and some short term protests, the players stood at attention along with their loyal fans.

Standing for the National Anthem was a way to acknowledge all that this country of ours has made possible for players and fans alike. For a brief span of time ,it brought together people from many different backgrounds sitting in booths for the wealthy or connected to the grunts in the nose bleed tiers. NOW, entire teams are taking a knee and they have no clue about the ultimate aims of Black Lives Matter, despite the fact some of its founders proudly boast of being Neo-Marxists. So how long will the players (many with incomes in the millions of dollars) continue to flout and honor their ignorance? Except for the outrageous incomes, how long will many fans continue, in their own ignorance, kneeling or tolerating their teams kneeling? — John D. P.

You make some good points, John. I’m not a fan of kneeling either but I’m not sure it’s going to be a problem for most sports fans. Ratings have been good for live sports so far. But your question is a good one: How long with fans tolerate the kneeling of athletes? At this point, nobody knows.

Bernie, did you see this nonsense out of the PAC-12? What are the odds that this is also going on in the corporate and political fields as well? All you need to do is buy ads and the paper will give you great coverage. — Joe M.

This is from the Oregonian: “According to emails and other documents, the conference struck a deal in 2018 with the Los Angeles Times that aimed to steer $100,000 in advertising to the newspaper in exchange for an expansion in conference coverage.”

This is beyond pathetic. The PAC -12 might be excused … but not the LA Times. Are they so desperate for cash that they’d sell their journalistic soul? I guess the answer is yes. And you’re concern is justified. This could spread.

Bernie: I have loved your work over the years and read these Q & A’s every Friday without fail. I also appreciate your voice as the sole conservative on Real Sports in addition to your thoughtful commentaries on media bias. I also think you’re an imbecile who hates puppies and children and curses your wife. This “mostly peaceful” commentary was brought to you by the mainstream media, whose manipulation of modern language is chilling and Orwellian. Of course, that’s just my “lived experience”. — Steve R.

How did you know I hate puppies and children (except my own)? Who told you? My wife? Curses!!! As for me being an imbecile … Duh.

What is the role of our federal and state and local governments? Is there a better question to ask Americans to think about as they prepare to make momentous decisions in November? How would Trump, Biden, and for good measure Obama, answer this question? Are Americans even capable of understanding why this question is important? Now more than ever, questions related to the role of our government should be discussed in our schools. Alas, civics and citizenship are no longer among the values or priorities of our public schools or universities — Michael F.

Nothing to add, Michael.

In your Monday column, you show a horrifying vision of what would happen if the leftist progs take over, and you give several examples of dunderhead liberal Democrat mayors ALLOWING these hooligans to continue with their violent nonsense while ordering law enforcement to allow it. This type of baloney is EXACTLY what conservatives have feared for decades. What I would like to know is—- are these elected DEMOCRAT officials just F—-ING stupid!? Or are they simply so damn spiteful in their hatred of Trump, that they think the destruction of their own cities is somehow worth it if Trump can be blamed with help from the lamestream media? And why don’t the Democrat pols realize that the mob hates them as well, since they’ve made it pretty obvious ? Worse yet, in your opinion, are the liberals who continue to vote for these clownish dunderheads EQUALLY spiteful and/or stupid!? Or do ya think the liberals who keep voting for them are part of the infamous NIMBY crowd that are just fine with it as long as they are not directly affected? — “Not In My Back Yard” Regards From The Emperor

Excellent points, Emperor. I think the progressives so hate Donald Trump that they’ll put up with just about anything they believe will hurt his chances of being reelected. I also think Democrats don’t quite understand that after the mob is finished with Trump, Republicans and conservatives in general, they’ll go after liberal Dems next. They want to fundamentally change America, not tweak around the edges. As for liberals who vote for “these clown dunderheads” … some are just like the people they’re voting for — far left progressives. Others would rather have any Democrat than a Republican. I keep wondering if a silent majority is out there just waiting… for November 3.

When did Democratic ideals become so unaccepting and unwilling to debate issues, to listen to others points of view, and most concerning to totally shut down or reject any beliefs or positions they don’t accept and then berate you if you do not see things their way? Can’t quite put my finger on when this really flipped, can you? — ScottyG

These are liberals who forgot how to be liberal. They’ve become authoritarians. The change has been coming for a while now. And I think it’s been accelerating since W was elected. Liberals really hated him — maybe even more than they hated Reagan. They called Reagan a dunce but they called Bush a Nazi. And their ally, the mainstream media, also moved left and gave the authoritarians on the left cover. Here’s the bad news, Scotty: It’s not going to get better anytime soon.

I watched a bit of former AG Sally Yates being questioned by the Senate today wherein she admitted that if she knew then what she knows now, she would not have signed the Carter Page FISA application, and that in her opinion, Comey was a rogue FBI Director. My question: do you think Comey will ever be held accountable? Part II. Is WH Press Secty not one of the toughest jobs one could have? You have to be a master spin doctor, go out and sell what your boss is selling knowing it “may” not be totally truthful. I include all Press Secty’s in this. If I were asked to take the job, I would run far away, fast. — John M.

Let’s take your second question first: I’m completely with you regarding the job of press secretary. It takes a special kind of person to want that job. And that’s not a compliment. I wouldn’t take that job for anything. Regarding Comey: Let’s see what the Durham report finds. But he would have had to commit a very serious crime for the  Department of Justice to put him on trial. Even if he deserves it.

I’m really surprised that the unfortunate death of Herman Cain hasn’t become a bigger political issue. Here you had a remarkable man with a remarkable life, who just about everyone liked, show up at his friend Donald Trump’s totally reckless indoor arena event in Tulsa (seemingly healthy, smiling, and seated around a bunch of people also not wearing masks)… Then, ten days later, he’s hospitalized for COVID-19, and later dies from it. We of course can’t know with 100% certainty that the event is where he became infected, but it sure seems like a likely scenario (the same goes for Kimberly Guilfoyle). Also, Cain had been echoing Trump’s skepticism of masks, prior to becoming infected. Do you think the Tulsa rally and the story of Cain will become a bigger political theme by the Democrats as we get closer to November? — Ben G.

Everyone these days has a short attention span. The media made the point that you made Ben… about him going to Tulsa. Now it’s in the rearview mirror. So, no I don’t think it will become a bigger political theme as we approach November. But the president’s handling of the virus will.

Within the past few weeks, prominent Republicans like Ted Cruz, Mark Meadows, and Nikki Haley have suddenly started talking about the dangers of the national debt again (after 4 years of silence on the issue, and about $7 trillion added since Trump took office). Are you laughing as hard as I am? — Jen R.

Better late than never, Jen. You’re not buying that are you?

Do you think AOC is over-hyped by both sides of the political aisle? She says lots of crazy stuff, but she’s just one person in Congress after all. By how often her name comes up in the media, you’d think she’s on the presidential ballot. — Brian S.

I’ve heard this before, Brian… coincidentally from another guy named Brian. AOC is young, attractive and provocative. She’s a shiny object for TV. And she does have influence. So for good or bad, I’m  not at all sure she’s over-hyped.

 


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.




Bernie’s Q&A: Swan, Barr, Social Media Bans, Maxwell, and more (7/31) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s note: If you enjoy these sessions (along with the weekly columns and audio commentaries), please use the Facebook and Twitter buttons to share this page with your friends and family. Thank you! 

Now, let’s get to your questions (and my answers):


Bernie, did you see Jonathan Swan’s interview clip with Trump about Russian bounties on our military? I think Swan has become a very sharp and prepared interviewer. Was interested in your take on him, and also the fact that Trump has never even brought up the “bounty” issue with Putin in the 8 conversations they’ve had since it became known. — Alex

I also think Swan is a solid journalist. As for bringing up the bounty issue with Putin: What if Trump did? Putin would deny it. What then? But not bringing it up — in eight conversations — gives ammo to Democrats who still think Trump and Putin are collaborating on something or other.

Trump gave an interview with Barstool Sports, and during the interview said, “It used to be in the old days before this, you’d write a letter and you’d say this letter is very big. You put it on your desk and then you go back tomorrow and you say, ‘Oh, I’m glad I didn’t send it,’ right? But we don’t do that with Twitter, right? We put it out instantaneously, we feel great, and then you start getting phone calls — ‘Did you really say this?’ I say, ‘What’s wrong with that?’ and you find out a lot of things.”

He later said it’s his retweets that tend to get him in trouble, not necessarily his own tweets. Regardless, has hell frozen over? I never thought Trump would regret any of his actions, including retweets or tweets.  — Joe M.

I was pleasantly surprised too, Joe. But just because he seemed contrite doesn’t mean he really was and it sure doesn’t mean he won’t do again precisely what he suggested he regrets.

As the MLB season began this past week, and as the NBA and NFL seasons beckon, it appears that kneeling will become a regular part of our professional sports leagues (and no doubt college athletics as well). Here are my suggestions and questions. Instead of kneeling during the national anthem, why not instead have a separate one minute of silence before or after the playing and singing of the national anthem (with players as and fans having the ability to show their support by kneeling or otherwise)? Racial issues could be highlighted without showing disrespect for the flag or America. Would this not be consistent with the claims made by those taking a knee that they are simply trying to draw attention to the need to address systemic racism and are not intending to show disrespect for America or those who serve in the military (and those who have died in service to the country). One final question. Is there a time limit as to how long the kneeling should continue or will this be part of pregame rituals for a very extended period of time? — Michael F.

Here’s my take, Michael: I think people go to sports to escape politics. At some point (soon) fans may grow tired of players taking a knee before a game … and looking at slogans on NBA uniforms … and the rest. If we weren’t so hungry for live sports during this pandemic, fans might tune out — a form of protest too. They still might.

As for a time limit on the kneeling: Shorter is better than longer. And even though I’m not a fan of taking a knee, it is silent and non disruptive … so take a knee, get it over with and play ball.

Dear Mr. Goldberg: Longtime follower, but newly-minted subscriber and former TV journalist who read your “Bias” books, and raised in your neck of the woods, The Magic City of Miami! And may I add, best $4 I ever spent!

You wrote in your July 13 column that “Americans are exhausted with this president” and you mentioned several negative descriptions of his behavior. No argument here. But you also wrote that people are “exhausted with the non-stop controversies and chaos.” I was surprised you didn’t include the liberal media and Democrats who have tormented Mr. Trump from the get-go. Am I cherry picking? Speaking of the liberal media, I just read an entry about it in Wikipedia, and did you know they pay you a high compliment when they label your “Bias” book as “toxic”? Meanwhile, the site describes a competing book from the other side that “challenges the widespread conservative belief in liberal media bias…that the media as a whole, is not biased liberally, but conservatively.” That sounds like word-salad to me but wasn’t that the point of your books? Thanks for all you do! — James F. in Florida

Hey James. Thanks for the kind words. Yes, I did say that people are exhausted with the non stop controversies and chaos. I think the polls back up that belief. And yes, liberal journalists who are out to get this president certainly contribute to that chaos. I’ve written about that many times over the years, if not in that particular column. As for my book being tagged as “toxic” — sticks and stones …

In my last book, A Slobbering Love Affair, I quote two liberal political journalists who acknowledge that there’s a liberal bias. They’re just not troubled by it. But even open minded liberals know that liberal bias is real.

Bernie, Rutgers is this your alma mater, right? RU announced it will change its standards of English instruction in an effort to stand with and respond to the BLM Movement. In response, Leonydus Johnson, a speech pathologist and Libertarian activist said, the change makes the racist assumption that minorities cannot comprehend traditional English. He called the change “insulting, patronizing, and in itself extremely racist.” “The idea that expecting a student to write in grammatically correct sentences is indicative of racial bias is asinine. It has become very clear to me that those who claim to be anti-racist are often the most racist people in this country”……. more dumbing down of America by the Democrats. Once upon a time you couldn’t get into college without strong English schools, not to mention pass the SATs. I know it’s a different world, but how low are we going to go with reducing standards in the country? We already rank low in many educational categories in comparison to the rest of the world. SMH — John M.

Rutgers University, my alma mater, opened its doors in 1776 — 10 years before the United States of America became a reality. Henry Rutgers must be rolling over in his grave over this latest moronic move by Rutgers. When I went there, Rutgers was considered a blue collar Ivy. They told us at orientation to look at the student to the right of us and then look at the student to the left. One of the three of us, we were told, would be there by the end of the year. If you didn’t know proper grammar you wouldn’t have gotten in and if you did you’d be one of the three that didn’t make it after a year. Now, grammar is racist. Another reason I refuse to support Rutgers when they call for money.

I believe that Ghislane Maxwell is entitled to due process under the law, but Donald Trump actually WISHING HER WELL!? WHY!? I’m surprised the biased lamestream media didn’t make more out of this! This is dumb even for him! Also, when Jeffrey Epstein got that slap on the wrist in Florida years ago, I have a theory: Since Epstein’s attorneys were an infamous conservative (Ken Starr) and an infamous liberal (Alan Dershowitz), Starr threatened all the “respectable” and vulnerable left wing perverts out there, and Alan Dershowitz did the same thing with the right wing pervs in order to land that slap on the wrist from the prosecutor. What do you think, Sir Bernie? Is that how you believe it may have gone down? Is Ghislane Maxwell in danger of being suicided” in prison? And WHY oh WHY did Trump wish her well? Damn F—ING DUMB if you ask me! — “Watch your back, Ghislane, and I wish you well” Regards, From The Emperor

Let me address just one of your points, Sir Emperor … the one about Trump wishing her well. I almost fell off the couch and spit up the snack I was munching on when I heard that. How stupid does one have to be to say that? Don’t answer that Emperor. I’m not sure which is dopier, his wishing her well comment or saying that we won two “beautiful” world wars. You can’t make this stuff up, Your Highness.

Biden’s campaign turned down a Chris Wallace interview on Fox News. If “Sleepy Joe’s” handlers cannot handle a TV interview with a fair-minded journalist like Chris Wallace, how do they think Joe will survive a ‘cage match’ with a ‘rototiller’ opponent like Trump in the presidential debates? They should re-think their decision and consider Chris Wallace a ‘spring-training’ exercise, but that would be an intelligent move. — Peter E.

There’s a very good reason Joe Biden turned down the interview, Peter. The reason is Biden would get so confused by the questions that everyone would know that he really has lost a few of his marbles. As for the debates, I think Trump would make a big mistake if he gets nasty. That’ll engender sympathy for Joe. Good rule of thumb: Never make fun of people who might have early onset of dementia. But I don’t know if our president can control his instincts. Best to let Joe sink himself … assuming he gets questions from journalists that go beyond, “What’s your favorite color, Mr. Biden?”

A couple of interesting notes on Facebook. A picture of a Mask in its wrapping had a disclaimer, which I will paraphrase, Wearing a mask does not guarantee you protection from Covid-19. The second is the video of a few days ago where so called physicians were in front of the SCOTUS building talking about Covid-19 which was pulled stating it was fake news. My confusion is what is fake? The picture definitely had the declaimer and the physicians did hold a press conference. If Facebook asked you, what would you recommend as a process to determine what is fake or not. In my opinion, post what you want. As a user I don’t have to read what I don’t want to. — Tim H.

It’s my understanding that Facebook (or was it Twitter?) pulled the video because the doctor declared that hydroxychloroquine is a literal “cure” for COVID-19 — which it isn’t. As for the disclaimer, that comes from lawyers who don’t want to be sued by someone who says, “I thought the mask would protect me — and it didn’t.” As a general rule, I don’t want social media companies to determine what’s true and what isn’t. As I say, as a general rule. But if someone says eating grapes is a cure for cancer, some idiot might believe it. That might be an exception to my general rule. Same with declaring that a drug is a cure for COVID-19.

I saw this re-tweet from Brit Hume after the Barr hearings yesterday:

By @AndrewCMcCarthy:“What happened on Capitol Hill Tuesday was a debacle to despair over because Democrats do not act this way because they are preternaturally rude. They act this way because their voters expect and demand that they act this way.”

So, Do anywhere near a majority of Democratic voters expect this type of behavior From the elected officials? Are civil minded Democratic leaders “afraid to speak out” as well per your Weds “Off the Cuff”? Isn’t there a strong possibility that a good number of Dem voters might sit this one out in November as well? — ScottyG

We won’t know until Election Day if Democrat voters approve of the appalling behavior of Jerry Nadler and his nasty gang of authoritarian progressives. You ask, if Democratic leaders are afraid to speak out. They’re in on it — that’s why they’re not speaking out! Anything to discredit Barr and in the process discredit the Durham report that will show how Democrats knew Donald Trump wasn’t colluding with the Russians and proceeded to investigate him for more than two years anyway. If Biden somehow manages to lose, those hearings will be a big reason.

I am going to quit watching the evening national news. Today there was an article in the local Minneapolis Star Tribune about a guy they call “Umbrella Man.” Early on, the national press was pushing the narrative that it was White Supremacy that was causing the riots in Minneapolis. This was disproved by a local network TV news organization. Tonight, on ABC evening news they focused on Umbrella Man who they have identified as a White Supremacist. Maybe he his, who knows. But ABC pointed out that no riots occurred prior to him walking down the street breaking windows and to paraphrase, “he caused the night of destruction”. So according to ABC evening news, the good people of Minneapolis who would never break the law came out and chose to break the law with hammers, Molotov cocktails, and other devices because a single white individual white man? Am I in the twilight light zone? — Tim

No Tim, you’re not in the twilight zone. But a lot of journalists are.

Bernie, I have a somewhat complex disagreement with your suggestion that there will be even more looting and rioting if Biden becomes president. It’s true that this stuff has been happening in cities governed by impotent Democrats, and it’s also true that neither Trump nor his sending of federal officers are to blame for the violence (as some Dems have stupidly said). BUT, I do think that a lot of this stuff (which started with George Floyd before morphing into its present form) is being done to spite Trump. I think these anarchists love doing this in what they view as Trump’s America, and they wrongly feel justified in taking on the president this way, because he has been such a divisive and combative figure. Again… I don’t blame Trump. But I suspect if Biden were to win, they’d actually lose some of their will to fight. And if Trump were to win, the violence would more likely continue and even intensify. Not that anyone should base their vote on that (they shouldn’t!). Does that make any sense? — Ben G.

I’m with you Ben in that if Trump somehow, some way, manages to win, the mayhem will intensify. But if Biden wins, the anarchists won’t be satisfied. It’s not unusual that in revolutions — and we’re in the midst of a cultural revolution right now — the leaders often turn on their own. They won’t be happy until they fundamentally change America. They may even go after Bernie Sanders before this is over. Given the nightly chaos, if Donald Trump weren’t so unlikable, he’d win in a landslide.

 


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.




Bernie’s Q&A: Wallace, Obama, Real Sports, and… Witches? (7/24) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s note: If you enjoy these sessions (along with the weekly columns and audio commentaries), please use the Facebook and Twitter buttons to share this page with your friends and family. Thank you! 

Now, let’s get to your questions (and my answers):


Please excuse the rhetorical nature of this post but I wanted to make a point for your response. I have heard for years from liberal friends that there is no truth or morality because everything is relative. This includes of course whether the concepts of good and evil have any meaning. It is quite easy to destroy the position taken, but almost always my examples are merely the “exceptions” (the easy examples are slavery and nazis). Fast forward to today when the moral relativists now find evil and a lack of morality in those with whom they disagree (and of course hate). My question is simple: is any one race or ethnic group morally superior to another, and is not the very nature of any such suggestion smacking of racism, ethnic or racial superiority etc? — Michael F.

There’s a lot of racial tension in America these days … and a New York Times op-ed by Charles Blow about how America’s biggest racial problems stem from “White Supremacy” … but, no one race or ethnic group is morally superior to another. I think we all know that. There are people of good will, and dopes, in all ethnic and racial groups. And the suggestion that white people are superior to black people or the other way around, yes, that smacks of a lot of wrong things, Michael.

Mr. G., I assume you watched the Chris Wallace interview with President Trump. Why do you think he didn’t ask The President one single question on why The GOP leadership has been so reluctant to aggressively counteract the Democrats who have been supporting the violent and health hazard “protests”? — ScottG.

Not sure. Would have been a good question. But by and large, Wallace did a good job.

After reading [last week’s Q&A], I am curious about something. Do you think Donald Trump would lose to my dog Dexter if Dexter was the Democratic nominee? What I am really getting at is do you think the polls reflect the voters’ total rejection of Trump or their love for Biden? If it is their dissatisfaction with Trump, then do you think the Left might have buyer’s remorse about sticking with Biden if they realize anyone, including my dog or a far left radical, could have beaten Trump? — Joe M.

I think there’s a good chance Donald Trump would lose to Dexter — mainly because Dexter doesn’t create non-stop chaos that’s exhausting the American electorate.

I think the polls reflect a rejection of Mr. Trump a lot more than an embrace of Mr. Biden. As for buyer’s remorse: Even if Democrats aren’t happy with a Biden presidency, they’d still rather have him (or Dexter) than Donald Trump.

Bernie, I agree with your response [in last week’s Q&A] regarding blacks or latinos being vaccinated first, but I feel that one thing overlooked in the question and answer was the fact that many are not all that convinced that vaccines in general are all that safe, based on suspicions surrounding the inability to sue vaccine makers for damages and their history of unintended consequences (dare I mention the autism controversy?). Blacks and latinos may actually feel that, by being put “first”, they are actually being used as guinea pigs or a test population. Just another reason to make sure that the vaccine’s efficacy and safety is really, really nailed down before introducing it. And another reason that I doubt that it is showing up anytime soon. I talked to a local restaurant owner about how he’s weathering the storm after our governor again locked everything down and he said that he didn’t think that things would really open up before a vaccine. If that is true, the economic devastation will become even more mind-blowing as that ain’t happening anytime soon. And, if democratic governors and mayors are factoring in politics in the expectation that keeping things locked down longer will result in a more depressed economy and will make a Biden victory more likely……this line of thinking either makes me profoundly cynical or realistic or both. Rough time to be an American….hard to know what the average person can even do, if anything. — John F.

First, I don’t want to give anyone reading this the impression that I said black people or Latinos should be first in line for the vaccine.  Here’s what I said last week:

“Everything these days is about race. To be fair, some would argue that people of color are not coming down with the virus in disproportionate numbers because they’re not ‘virus diligent’ but rather because they suffer from underlying medical conditions that make them more vulnerable. But it would be a bad idea to put people in the front of the line because of their skin color. It would just add to the already existing tensions surrounding race in this country.”

As for the suggestion that politics might be involved in the lockdowns: It might be. I don’t put anything past partisans.

Bernie, there probably is no easy answer to this, but why do those of the Jewish faith, like those within the Black community vote Democrat in the numbers they do? Is it just, after doing so for so long just a reflex? I have noted that Representative Ilhan Omar who has made several anti semite remarks in her short time in Washington, and was not censored by her Party for having done so [they passed a broad brush resolution but did not call her out by name] has just been endorsed by Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi in her bid for re election in her District. Bit of a head shaker for me. — John M.

I’ve answered this question before. A majority of Jewish voters are Democrats for several reasons — high among them because their parents were Democrats. That’s the atmosphere in which they grew up. I did. But I evolved. Another reason is that, as we know, Jews have a long history of being on the wrong end of oppression. So they reflexively vote for the party they view as more emphatic, more concerned about the downtrodden. I think their allegiance is misplaced — but I’m a minority within a minority so there’s not much I can do to change their minds.

My wife and I have just made a bet, and I’d love your opinion on who’s likely to win. I believe that if Biden is elected President, his first Supreme Court pick will be Barack Obama, which would make Obama the second former President to serve on the SCOTUS (after William Howard Taft). I think Obama would jump at what is both the best job in law and the ability to shape public policy in a much more permanent way than he could as President. My wife thinks Barack and Michelle are thoroughly done with Washington and enjoy being able to freely live their lives too much to ever come back. A steak dinner is riding on our bet. In your opinion, who’s more likely to collect? — Joel E.

Ask your wife if she’ll let you out of the bet NOW — in exchange for a hamburger. Because if you stay with the bet, you’re going to lose. There’s no way Barack Obama would be one of 9 justices. He’s too big for that. But I’m not sure the Obamas are done with Washington. In any case, Mrs. Joel E is going to win.

For weeks and weeks, Trump has been bragging about “acing” the “very hard” cognitive test he took, and he keeps saying that the test-givers couldn’t believe how amazing he did on it. As we know now, that test was a Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test, and it’s only supposed to be “hard” if you’re literally suffering from dementia (that’s the whole point of the test). It’s a 10-minute, 9-exercise exam that assesses the most basic of reasoning, like being able to look at a bike and train and identify what they have in common. 

As the other Goldberg (Jonah) wrote in a column: “Crowing that you ‘aced’ the MoCA is like bragging that you passed a sobriety test while sober.”

How do Trump and his team think stuff like this helps him get re-elected? Also, if Trump really thought that test was “very hard,” isn’t he in worse mental shape that even a lot of his critics think? — Jen R.

I think you’re being too hard on Mr. Trump. He is a “stable genius” after all. And everyone knows what a bike and a train have in common: They’re both red.

Bernie, I’m just curious. Are you registered with a political party these days, or are you an independent? — Ben G.

I’m registered with a political party.

Will you be doing any remote stories for Real Sports (aka interviewing people from your home)? I’m guessing you won’t be doing any work travel for a while, because of covid. Thanks. — Alex M.

Working on two stories at the moment. One about a “ball hawk” who has caught (and collected from MLB players) more baseballs than anyone else in human history. And the other on a controversial issue in the world of sports, but I’d rather not give it away right now. Stay tuned.

Apparently there is a group of Christian conservatives at the University of Texas who do not agree with the left-wing agenda, and they have said so. This of course triggered a bunch of leftists on the campus. As a result, a group of self-proclaimed satanic witches, who also despise these Christian conservative students, offered to ally themselves with the left-wing snowflakes. The Result: the allies claim to be actively trying to put the whammy on the leader of the Christian group (invoking demons to bring harm to them). Regardless of one believes in Satan, the loony left basically admitted that they would actively seek help from demons to put a stop to Christianity and conservatism.

What are your thoughts on this, and how can anyone on the left believe it’s a good idea to ally themselves with people who actively admit that they are glorifying evil and working with demonic forces to hex conservatives? I mean, even the liberal professors see how wicked and stupid this is? Your thoughts are always appreciated. –“Satan is a leftist” Regards, From the Emperor

Sometimes I think you wake up in the morning, Emperor, and ask yourself: “How can I drive Bernie nuts this week?”

All I can say is that whatever your politics, an alliance between Satan and liberals is an unholy alliance.

Hope you’re happy, Emperor … you Devil you.

 


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.




Bernie’s Q&A: Weiss, West, Wojnarowski, Trump TV, and more! (7/17) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s note: If you enjoy these sessions (along with the weekly columns and audio commentaries), please use the Facebook and Twitter buttons to share this page with your friends and family. Thank you! 

Now, let’s get to your questions (and my answers):


What’s your take on Kanye West? He obviously has no chance of winning the election (for one thing, too many filing dates have passed), but if he got on the ballot in a few key battleground states, could he peel JUST enough votes away from Biden to give Trump the win? — Joel E.

I refuse to take Kanye West seriously, Joel. He’s not running for president no matter how many times he says it. He won’t get on any ballots. A Kanye endorsement might help one candidate or another — but that would require his fans to actually go out and vote. Something else I wouldn’t bet on.

Bernie, Senator Hawley (R-MO) sent out a press release today last Friday asking NBA Commissioner Adam Silver if he would allow players to wear slogans on their jerseys that said, “Free Hong Kong, God Bless America, Back the Blue, or Support Our Troops.” When Hawley’s staff e-mailed the release, members of the media were copied on the e-mail, one of whom was ESPN’s “Senior NBA Insider” Adrian Wojnarowski, who responded to Hawley’s e-mail with “#uck You”. His e-mail did not include the #.

How in the world is that acceptable from anyone, let alone a journalist? How in the world can ESPN still retain a journalist who responds in that manner? Should we just give up on our media and assume it is nothing more than a mouth piece for the radical left? At every level, the media is a total clown show. — Joe M.

Two points, Joe. First: Wojnarowski apologized just hours later with this public statement: “I was disrespectful and I made a regrettable mistake. I’m sorry for the way I handled myself and I am reaching out immediately to Senator Hawley to apologize directly. I also need to apologize to my ESPN colleagues because I know my actions were unacceptable and should not reflect on any of them.”

ESPN suspended him without pay.

Second, his firsts reaction tells me all I need to know. The apology is BS as far as I’m concerned. It’s not just CNN, MSNBC, and big newspapers that have become mouthpieces for the hard left. Sports “journalism” is guilty too.

So I see where the Governor of Minnesota requested funds from the Federal Government to assist in rebuilding the “war-torn” city of Minneapolis. Apparently he was turned down, as he should have been IMO. I have a suggestion, why doesn’t he reach out to the Hollywood types who had no problem donating a lot of money to a fund to be used to bail out those responsible for the burning and the looting? Maybe they’ll fire up a gofundme account. While he’s at it, reach out to the Biden campaign, it too donated money to a bail fund. The chutzpah of this guy. — John M.

John, I’m not adding a word to what you’ve written.  I totally agree!

This excerpt is from the July 9th NYT Coronavirus Briefing, regarding a ranking system for the hopefully soon potential release of a vaccine:

“But the most contentious debate has been over whether to put Black and Latino people — who have disproportionately fallen victim to Covid-19 — ahead of others in the population [to be first in line to receive the vaccine]. The idea was supported by many of the health experts, who viewed it as medically sound and an act of racial justice. But others worried it could create a negative impression of the vaccine for some Americans.”

So are we at the point now where The CDC & the media believes that the virus unfairly attacks minorities because of their skin color and not by their inability to remain virus diligent? — ScottyG

Everything these days is about race. To be fair, some would argue that people of color are not coming down with the virus in disproportionate numbers because they’re not “virus diligent” but rather because they suffer from underlying medical conditions that make them more vulnerable. But it would be a bad idea to put people in the front of the line because of their skin color. It would just add to the already existing tensions surrounding race in this country.

I disagree with your conclusion [in Monday’s column] that Donald Trump is in trouble. To quote the Bard “What’s past is prologue”. Since 1900, with only two exceptions, every incumbent running in a two person race has been re-elected. The exceptions were of course Herbert Hoover in 1932 to FDR and Jimmy Carter in 1980 to Ronald Reagan. In both cases, economic forces were the deciding factor in their loss. Even given the current plague, the one thing Donald Trump is good at is managing the economy. He will have a growing economy and increased jobs by October. He will be re-elected by a large margin. — James V.

You may be right, James … but unlike just about any president who came before him, Donald Trump is widely disliked by just about every demographic group. And even the ones who still support him, like white evangelical Christians, don’t back him to the extent they did in 2016. And his noxious personality might make the difference this time around. In any event, I’m amused by your absolute certainty. No doubts for you, James. But if he loses — again, I say “IF” he loses — his most passionate supporters, the ones who never held him accountable for his dishonesty and his nastiness, will have contributed to his defeat. Donald Trump needs his friends to say, “Enough.”  They never do. So if he loses, it won’t be the “fake news” media that’s to blame. It’ll be Donald J. Trump himself — and his friends who will tolerate just about anything.

Yes, you have said numerous times you won’t write another book. But…you are faced with the biggest “Bias” story of this century on the reporting of COVID-19 (from both sides). How do you submit to this position from your loyal readers? — Tim H.

No more books. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it. But thanks for asking, Tim.

In the wake of the Bari Weiss resignation this week (not to mention the scores of other similar events occurring weekly if not daily), it seems to me that the lines have been drawn as to the stakes presented for this year’s elections . There are millions of people who do not like Trump the man but who fear what will happen if the Democrats get complete power (their signals as to what they would do with such power seems very clear). Your faithful readers like me know exactly where you stand as to the character traits of Trump (or lack thereof). The question that is begged is whether Trump’s character failings are being trumped (pun intended) by the dangers posed by those who despise this country and wish to fundamentally change America forever. Put another way, is sitting on the sidelines come November a viable option this time around? One last thought: buy the beans (Goya) and sell the Times. — Michael F.

I’m with you, Michael, on “buy the beans (Goya) and sell the Times. Nicely put.

As for the rest:  I understand your point. My friends hit me with that every day. I do not want the Democrats to win. I don’t think Joe Biden will be a moderate for long if he wins. I believe he’ll continue to be pulled to the left. So, you’re probably saying, “Hold your nose, Bernie and vote for Trump.” I want Republicans to win. But Donald Trump will have to do it without me.

The University of Texas announced this week that it was renaming its field from that of a large benefactor (Joe Jamail) to two African-American players and Heisman Trophy winners (Earl Campbell and Ricky Williams). I’m a classic capitalist, but I always cringed whenever the rich guys could just come in and buy their way onto buildings and sports fields/arenas. I thought the baseball field in Atlanta should have been named after Hank Aaron rather than stroke the enormous ego of Ted Turner in calling it Turner Field. I also hate these generic corporate names attached to fields of play. This begat the ridiculous display of a few years ago when the NBA Finals rotated between American Airlines Arena (Dallas Mavericks) and American Airlines Center (Miami Heat). If there’s one good thing coming out of these social changes, maybe it’s a return to honoring individuals who are tied to fans and their communities. What are your thoughts? — Steve R.

I haven’t given it much thought, Steve, but you make sense. However … Boone Pickens, the late Texas oilman gave about $500 million to his alma mater, Oklahoma State University. Guess what the name of the football field is. Can you blame the folks at OSU?

We have been hearing about infrastructure spending by our politicians now since 2008 and the great recession. Now both Biden and Trump are beating this same drum. It seems to me that when we talk about infrastructure, the predominant ownership of the assets is either at the state and local level or in private hands in the case of the electrical grid. The federal highway system, the nation’s air control system, and selective dams and bridges being the exception. It seems to me that all of this talk about Federal intervention has just provided an excuse for the responsible parties to postpone necessary improvements waiting for the taxpayers to foot the bill for their crumbling assets. With the ridiculously low-interest rates evident over the past decade this seems malfeasant for those in charge. What is your take on this? — Douglas C.

Any time a local politician can lay off his expenses on the federal government … he or she will do just that. But the reason both parties love infrastructure is because they can claim credit for creating JOBS. The idea that it’s any president’s responsibility for a pothole on my street is ridiculous. But the reality is in an election year Dems and the GOP will talk a good game about infrastructure — even if it’s just talk.

The woke scolds now want to cancel the hit musical “Hamilton” because it glorifies a racist slave owner. The creator of this extravaganza has actually apologized to the woke crowd for not being “woke enough” and he wants to do better. I take great schadenfreude in the fact that during the curtain call, the entire cast and crew of the show felt the need to lecture the Pence family for being politically incorrect (that is, Conservative Christians), and now the creator and star Lin-Manuel Garcia and his cast now find THEMSELVES on the receiving end of the woke scolds. Nonetheless I fear that more people (whether I agree with their political positions or not) will be shut down, and the First Amendment will go by the wayside.

What is your feelings about what is happening to Hamilton? Do ya think the woke scolds would approve of Lin-Manuel Garcia producing an all black cast in a musical inspired by the life of Jeffrey Dahmer? Your thoughts are always appreciated. — “Jeffrey Dahmer—The Musical!” Regards, From The Emperor

I don’t know if you know this, Emperor. But at Jeffrey Dahmer’s trial, there was an unexpected commotion involving some of the people watching the trial from the gallery. The judge banged his gavel and shouted, “Order.” Dahmer stood up and said, “I’ll have juror number 7.”

As for Hamilton:  This is what happens in revolutions.  The purists take over — and then nobody’s safe, not even liberal icons like Mr. Garcia.

I live in a relatively small town where the local newspaper is now nearly all just local news. Because of that I want to subscribe to a newspaper online that will give me relatively unbiased information. After reading your article about Bari Weiss today I read her resignation letter. And I canceled my New York Times online subscription. I knew they were biased but felt I could still get a fair amount of factual news from them. Now I don’t like what they did , I don’t trust them and don’t want to support them financially. Can you recommend another online news source? — Beth R.

First, good for you Beth. It’s the Times’ loss, not yours. I checked around and my good friend John Daly tells me he is very happy with The Dispatch (a subscription website, owned in part by Stephen Hayes and Jonah Goldberg). “Their daily reporting (sent to members every morning via email) is very strong, thorough, and fair. Great commentary too,” he says. Good luck!

There were times in 2015 and 2016 when I was convinced that Trump was trying to sabotage his own campaign to assure that, after generating the publicity he definitely wanted from running and staying in the race so long, he wouldn’t actually become president and have to do the job. I’m believing that again now, with the latest evidence being his commutation of the thoroughly corrupt and fairly convicted (even A.G. Barr said so) Roger Stone. What do you think the probability is that I’m right? — Ben G.

I’ve thought the same thing, Ben. I even thought about writing a column that begins: Sometimes I think Donald Trump wants to lose in November.

If that’s not it, he’s just the dumbest guy to ever set foot in the Oval Office. No one has ever put his foot in his mouth, has stepped on his own good news, more than this man.

Bernie, I have a different take on the upcoming election. President Trump, is doing (and has done) a lot of strange things if we assume he is trying to get reelected. I don’t really think he cares. It’s not fun anymore, with “Tell All” books, scores of former White House associates’ candidly dumping on him, on and on. He loves his base. Loves ’em. Binden is elected. Trump starts up cable “Trump TV”, and slashes and burns to the sea, every day, 24/7. Doesn’t get better than that, for ‘Disinfectant Donny”. I kinda agree with him. His highest, best, and fun use of his talents … many, people have said; many many people — Aloha, Mike S.

Hey Mike … I think “Trump TV” is what he had in mind from the jump. He’d run for president, lose, then start a network featuring the narcissist himself. And if he loses in November, there’s an excellent chance that he’ll do just that.  Here’s the question that lingers: What will become of Fox? Will he bring the bootlickers over to Trump TV? If he does, Fox is in big trouble. It might be smart for Fox to offer him almost anything he wants. Just when you think it can’t get any crazier, it gets crazier.  Aloha, Mike.

 


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.




Bernie’s Q&A: Lemon, Crews, Vindman, Downs, and more! (7/10) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s note: If you enjoy these sessions (along with the weekly columns and audio commentaries), please use the Facebook and Twitter buttons to share this page with your friends and family. Thank you! 

Now, let’s get to your questions (and my answers):


I know you worked at different networks, but I was wondering if you had any thoughts on Hugh Downs, who recently passed away. Did you know him at all? What did you think of his work as a journalist? Thanks. — Ben G.

I worked only at CBS… later as a contributor at Fox. Did not know Hugh Downs. But he certainly came across as a likable guy. Not sure I’d call him a journalist, not in any old school sense anyway. He was a TV personality who did his job well.

I recently re-watched the Spielberg film, Munich. The themes of the film…the endless revenge cycle, both sides claiming injustices, both sides fighting and killing… I couldn’t help but think about how we are today in this moment. With Trump or without him, we would despise one another. Even a worldwide pandemic can’t get us to be kind to each other, to listen to one another. I can’t think of anything that would bring us together. I believe Trump shouldn’t get a second term…but how would a President Biden be able to fix this? Fix a broken Congress? Fix a divided people? Heal all this anger? Care to give me some positive news for our future? Anything? — Joe B.

I’d love to give you some positive news for our future, Joe, but I can’t. I think we’re so divided, so broken, that I can’t think of what would fix it. I used to think an attack on the United States would bring us together. 9/11 did. For 10 minutes. I’ve been warning for a while now that the most serious problem facing this country is our polarization. I’m more convinced than ever that I was… and remain… right.

Mr G., Is the pathetically weak response from the GOP House & Senate to the unrest of the past few weeks crushing their chances at keeping the Senate & winning The House back? Or were they DOA before the Floyd murder? — ScottyG

The president has spoken out against the unrest and it hasn’t helped him in the polls. That shows you how far we’ve gone — voters hate Trump more than they hate the rioters and looters. Not sure it’s the GOP’s silence that might bring down their control of the Senate so much as a blue wave of discontent with how things are going generally. Donald Trump is at the helm. It’s happening on his watch. He may not be the only one to suffer the consequences.

Bernie……I spoiled my ballot in ’16 (voted MAD, for A E Neuman) because of Trump’s public –indeed, disgraceful– disregard for McCain even while being sympathetic to much of the Rep’s vision and agenda. Now, even with Covid19, I’m inclined to vote Rep but given Trump’s recent rubbishing of Jeff Sessions (a decent man over his head at DOJ who wanted to preside when the job called for an active manager) I may well, again, spoil my ballot at the top of the ticket. What, me worry? — Best regards, Andy M.

I think your vote for Alfred E Neuman was a good one — given the alternatives — Hilary and Donald.

To write about today’s street revolutionaries, without looking into the big money behind them that is funding them, what hope do we as average Americans have in stopping them (aka ultimately and successfully prosecuting the violent criminals who have destroyed many minority businesses and killed and assaulted our men in blue)?

Where is the progress in the prosecution of Hunter Biden and his co-conspirator-father Joe Biden?
Donations to BLM seem to be routed to the DNC but I don’t see the facts about that on the public table! — Gary H.

Not sure where you get your information, Gary, but if donations to BLM is routed to the DNC that’s news to me. Average Americans don’t have the authority to go out and arrest the criminals who are tearing down statues. That’s up to the authorities — local or federal, depending on where the statues stand. Democrats haven’t spoken out forcefully (if at all) against the chaos. But neither have a lot of Republicans, though as a group they’re better than the other side. I’m still wondering if a silent majority exists and will rise up on Election Day. As for Joe and Hunter Biden — not all sleazy business dealings are crimes. Let’s see if anything comes of it.

Bernie, what would it take for Trump to ignore these idiots and be the adult in the room? It appears that he has a terrible habit of wanting to fight everyone and not let controversies die a natural death. For instance today (7/6), he idiotically attacked NASCAR and Bubba Wallace even though the sport, and its fans, have mostly moved on from the incident in Talladega. His focus on Kapernick and those who kneel during the anthem keeps these people in the headlines. Why can Trump not let things go and focus on what unites us? He says he wants a united and patriotic country but why does he think he will achieve this with lowbrow tweets that seem more like school yard taunts and not honest attempts and showing all of the good that this nation has achieved in the past 244 years? I cannot imagine Reagan, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Kennedy, Washington, Grant, or Jefferson ever engaging in such childish antics. He needs to step up or else he will be stepping out. — Joe M.

Here’s your problem, Joe: You’re thinking rationally about an irrational man. Don’t waste your time. He’s incorrigible.

In many ways Trump has been his own worst enemy but I wonder, how would Obama have fared if 95% [or more] of the print and visual media had been on his case from day one? Flat out lied about much it reported about him? Not like he wasn’t thin skinned. — John M.

No question, John, that much of the media is out to get the president. The most recent evidence is how big news outlets covered the president’s speech at Mt. Rushmore. But this president is needlessly combative and chronically dishonest — and that would be true whether the media liked him or not. As for Obama:  He probably would have been a lot more prickly than he was if he had journalists on his rear end from Day One. So given the treatment he gets from the media, to some extent Mr. Trump’s behavior is understandable. But only to some extent.

I’m not sure how Trump is supposed to be taken seriously as a warrior against the “cancel culture” when he has called for the firing of a ton of media commentators, athletes, and CEOs (in most cases, just for criticizing him). It seems to me he’s contributed more to the cancel culture than most people. — Jen R.

Once again, Jen, you show us all how perceptive you are. I have nothing to add. You nailed it.

Regarding the coverage of Trump’s July 4th speech at Mt Rushmore, have we gone from media bias, to media advocacy (“A Slobbering Love Affair”), to the media telling blatant lies about a speech and a president? If so, has the mainstream media become Pravda, telling lies as a version of truth? — Steve R.

The coverage of the president’s speech at Mt. Rushmore was a new low for journalism. Some journalists did in fact, as you say, tell blatant lies about that speech. Whether it’s Pravda or not, I, personally, have not seen it this bad in my long journalistic career.

I saw that “interview” Don Lemon had with Terry Crews. It was stunning that Lemon CONSTANTLY INTERRUPTED Crews. Lemon essentially admitted that BLM really only cares about blacks being murdered when the death is from white cops or white civilians, as opposed to blacks dying at the hands of other black people. He then used the hypothetical argument of a group called “Cancer Matters,” and having people complain about that, and asking “what about HIV?”

Then Lemon doesn’t really allow Crews to respond by interrupting Crews and refusing to listen to him. I would have pointed out the flaws of Lemon’s fatuous point by saying that if HIV were causing a much larger amount of deaths in a certain community (such as black on black crime is) as opposed to cancer causing deaths (such as blacks dying at the hands of white cops), then YES, I think the larger problem should be dealt with as well instead of ignoring it and STILL blaming cancer for the deaths instead of HIV. A better comparison would be if a group that wanted to fight leprosy decided on totally ignoring HIV or cancer.

Why do you think Don Lemon thought he would not look silly and ridiculous to the viewing audience by making an argument and then cutting off any possible response from Terry Crews? Your thoughts and comments are appreciated. — “Leprosy Matters” Regards From The Emperor

Do you watch Don Lemon to get angry or to have a few chuckles? Just wondering. No anchor thinks he or she will look silly no matter how silly they behave. Don Lemon and many others on both sides of the aisle have very high opinions of themselves. As for Leprosy Matters: I interviewed patients at the last leprosy hospital on the U.S. mainland — in Carville , Louisiana — just before they shut the place down. And if you’re wondering … Carville, Louisiana is named after James Carville’s family.

Bernie, I’m an Independent – socially liberal, fiscally conservative. Non-violent, constructive, protests – good. Burners and looters – bad. I try to keep political comments to myself. The speech that President Trump gave July 4th, however, in my humble opinion, truly had to be one of the most irresponsible, reckless, and dangerous, speeches of all time, because it contained this quote – “Now we have tested almost 40 million people. By so doing, we show cases – 99% of which are totally harmless … ” –> “Totally harmless.” “99%.” “Totally.” “Harmless.” President Trump, millions of folks absolutely believe what you tell them. You speak. They believe. How many people will you, Donald J. Trump, kill by this savage disregard for the truth. Maybe me? My wife? My son? Maybe even you, who is reading this post now …Truly unbelievable. Bernie, your feelings about this? — Aloha, Mike

When Donald Trump’s lips are moving there’s a very good chance he’s saying something that isn’t true. That’s bad enough. But the toadies who cover for him… they are truly pathetic. Yes, I know they’re on his team… that they’re soldiers… not generals. But it takes a certain kind of person to be on his team — and it’s obvious, Mike that neither your nor I are that kind of person.

Bernie, do you believe that there exists a cabal of elitist oligarchs that are thrilled that the focus of the people of America is centered on both the coronavirus and the supposed pillars of injustice; African Americans, the LBGT community and all other theoretically socially oppressed groups? While most folks are desperately trying to survive the financial implications of the virus and fathom the hysterical protesting (rioting) and looting, this group of self-serving corporate executives and their political lackeys from both the right and the left are systematically expanding their wealth and power, taking advantage of the Federal Reserves accommodating monetary policies and the hastily conceived fiscal policies enacted by Congress. — Douglas C.

I’m not into conspiracies, Douglas. So, no, I don’t believe they’re “thrilled” that we’re focused on chaos and not on how they’re getting even more rich.  I believe they’re really with BLM.  I also believe there are no profiles in courage among our corporate executives, because if there were they’d question the group’s motives and wouldn’t accept as a given that systemic racism exists in America.  I don’t think this answers your question the way you intended, but it’s the best I’ve got.  Thanks.

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman (who testified in Trump’s impeachment hearings, and who Trump repeatedly attacked the character of) just retired from the U.S. Army. This came after the White House delayed (multiple times over several weeks) a promotion Vindman was due. The delays included the White House calling for an investigation into Vindman, in which the Pentagon found no suggestion of misconduct on his part.

Vindman’s lawyer responded with this statement: “Through a campaign of bullying, intimidation, and retaliation, the President of the United States attempted to force LTC Vindman to choose: Between adhering to the law or pleasing a President. Between honoring his oath or protecting his career. Between protecting his promotion or the promotion of his fellow soldiers.”

What are you thoughts on this, and what do you think it means for the future of public servants coming forward when they believe higher-ups have abused their power? Thank you. — Jeremy T.

Let me refer you, Jeremy, to Jen’s observation above. Beyond that, the president had the right to do what he did. But that didn’t make it right. Our president is not a gracious man. And that’s putting it mildly.

 


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.