How come being qualified to perform the job isn't even on the list? The man is a TV host. And he is supposed to run one of the most complex organizations in the world? Does anyone think he'd get a second look if he'd been proposed to be the CEO of General Motors, say or AT&T?
So his suitability for this job rests on the degree of revulsion of his private life?
Yes, spokespeople and people who will do what he asks without a second thought to legality, security, or morality. All this to the detriment of the millions of people governed by these organizations. Trump has zero interest in actually governing or helping anyone else in the country except himself.
Chris, love your commentary, but you missed discussing the report's recommendation which is very different than the police concluding the claims were false.
The report concludes with a recommendation to forward the case to the Monterey County District Attorney's Office for review. It lists the potential criminal offense as "Rape: victim unconscious of the nature of the act" -- citing California penal code section 261(a) (4). Under state law, rape is classified as a felony punishable by three to eight years in prison.
Maybe let’s not be so quick with the “which is fine” in response to him saying that he was “totally cleared”. Not being charged is entirely different than being “totally cleared”. We know he said he had sex with her, we know she says it wasn’t consensual and he says it was. The police deciding that there wasn’t enough physical evidence to support charges, doesn’t mean that him having sex with an admittedly drunk woman, who believed she was drugged and who remembers saying no “a lot”, is not clearing him. At the minimum it sounds like very ungentlemanly conduct of questionable morality, and at most it sounds like a potential rape that just couldn’t be proved by investigators who may or may not have been vigorous in their search for the truth.
But just letting that “totally cleared” assertion pass unremarked is something journalists need to get out of the habit of doing. He wasn’t.
I heard a prosecutor explain that the reason someone guilty isn't charged could be because they don't believe they can meet the standard of proof "beyond a reasonable doubt." So, no, he wasn't "cleared."
WTF is wrong with this picture? Seriously, where is our country.
Remember running John Edwards and Gary Hart out of the races? Their crap was consensual. And they were GONE, never to be heard from again except in a very tawdry way.
We're not even discussing what management skills does the guy have to run an almost 1 TRILLION dollar operation with 1 million employees. Of course the answer is none.
Have we truly lost our minds that we are even still considering the guy who has a 22 page police report detailing a sexual encounter with a married woman at a hotel where he defiled on her stomach. Is there where we are?
And just like with Al Franken when it is someone from your own party making the allegations it is much more believable…so this isn’t like Kavanaugh this is like Franken but exponentially worse because Franken’s behavior was disgusting but not rape.
This is probably a very obvious thing to say, but it feels like we are accelerating really fast in the opposite direction of taking crimes against women seriously. How is is that again and again, we see these cases with some really awful allegations - and no charges filed. “He blocked the door” Are we supposed to believe the lock was stuck and he was trying to fix it, and she misinterpreted it?!? I mean, seriously? And with four years of Trump, that’s clearly not going to change. It’s frightening how people seem to have moved past the idea of respecting women as “being woke” and going backwards. I just don’t get his unbreakable support.
I guess the American public will now grade a nominee on a scale of 1-100 with 1 being “yes, it was not consensual, she cried, and it was in the back seat” through “she only said ‘no’ once and seemed to enjoy it” to “Oh, my gosh, we had such fun but she seemed to sleep through it” to “No charges were filed and she cashed the check.” U-tube video made available free to consenting adults.
This nomination - most of them actually - has nothing to do with competence. Hegseth's job will be to remain loyal and "de-woke" the Department of Defense. Given the appropriate authority, he can probably accomplish that.
A sad and disgusting commentary but very well done. It's a far-from-funny topic, but your composition made me chuckle. "And if I laugh at any mortal thing, 'tis not I may not weep." — William Shakespeare
Re: Your Nomination for Secretary of Defense — A Blatant Spectacle of Opportunism, Recklessness, and the Sinister Nexus of White Nationalism and Sex Crimes
Also, in 2017 when this incident occurred Hegseth was a married father of three who in that same year had a child outside his marriage with another woman, an executive producer at Fox News and while that was happening had sex with a married woman he met at a conference. I must hang out with the wrong crowd but I don’t know any men who act like that. That lack of moral character pales beside his complete lack of experience to take on a job of this magnitude but sheesh…
Hey Chris - loyal reader here, but can you cool it with the breathless political betting market reporting? The implication of including them is that those that bet have some insight into the likely outcome or, at a minimum, that they represent the unquantifiable "vibe" around a likely outcome. Neither have been proven to be the case and given the analyses that was done pre-November 5 about the very small amount of bettors driving the betting lines by placing large sums of money, it's entirely possible that unscrupulous people are using these markets to a) drive the vibe and thus influence the outcome or more likely, b) take advantage of small fish ignorance. Including them regularly in your reporting is aiding and abetting, IMO and you'd be much better off without it.
My problem with Hegseth is that years ago he was a younger better looking Liz Cheney…I actually support Trump’s foreign policy and I don’t want Trump to make the same mistakes he made in his first term! John Bolton served Trump!?! WTF????
My only fear is that the sex scandal blocks a discussion of the fact that he’s phenomenally unqualified for the job.
Just like his boss.
How come being qualified to perform the job isn't even on the list? The man is a TV host. And he is supposed to run one of the most complex organizations in the world? Does anyone think he'd get a second look if he'd been proposed to be the CEO of General Motors, say or AT&T?
So his suitability for this job rests on the degree of revulsion of his private life?
As someone pointed out, what Trump is looking for are spokespeople, not administrators.
Yes, spokespeople and people who will do what he asks without a second thought to legality, security, or morality. All this to the detriment of the millions of people governed by these organizations. Trump has zero interest in actually governing or helping anyone else in the country except himself.
Chris, love your commentary, but you missed discussing the report's recommendation which is very different than the police concluding the claims were false.
The report concludes with a recommendation to forward the case to the Monterey County District Attorney's Office for review. It lists the potential criminal offense as "Rape: victim unconscious of the nature of the act" -- citing California penal code section 261(a) (4). Under state law, rape is classified as a felony punishable by three to eight years in prison.
Maybe let’s not be so quick with the “which is fine” in response to him saying that he was “totally cleared”. Not being charged is entirely different than being “totally cleared”. We know he said he had sex with her, we know she says it wasn’t consensual and he says it was. The police deciding that there wasn’t enough physical evidence to support charges, doesn’t mean that him having sex with an admittedly drunk woman, who believed she was drugged and who remembers saying no “a lot”, is not clearing him. At the minimum it sounds like very ungentlemanly conduct of questionable morality, and at most it sounds like a potential rape that just couldn’t be proved by investigators who may or may not have been vigorous in their search for the truth.
But just letting that “totally cleared” assertion pass unremarked is something journalists need to get out of the habit of doing. He wasn’t.
I heard a prosecutor explain that the reason someone guilty isn't charged could be because they don't believe they can meet the standard of proof "beyond a reasonable doubt." So, no, he wasn't "cleared."
WTF is wrong with this picture? Seriously, where is our country.
Remember running John Edwards and Gary Hart out of the races? Their crap was consensual. And they were GONE, never to be heard from again except in a very tawdry way.
We're not even discussing what management skills does the guy have to run an almost 1 TRILLION dollar operation with 1 million employees. Of course the answer is none.
Have we truly lost our minds that we are even still considering the guy who has a 22 page police report detailing a sexual encounter with a married woman at a hotel where he defiled on her stomach. Is there where we are?
You know the rest of the world is laughing at us.
And just like with Al Franken when it is someone from your own party making the allegations it is much more believable…so this isn’t like Kavanaugh this is like Franken but exponentially worse because Franken’s behavior was disgusting but not rape.
This is probably a very obvious thing to say, but it feels like we are accelerating really fast in the opposite direction of taking crimes against women seriously. How is is that again and again, we see these cases with some really awful allegations - and no charges filed. “He blocked the door” Are we supposed to believe the lock was stuck and he was trying to fix it, and she misinterpreted it?!? I mean, seriously? And with four years of Trump, that’s clearly not going to change. It’s frightening how people seem to have moved past the idea of respecting women as “being woke” and going backwards. I just don’t get his unbreakable support.
Trump looks weak. There still are guardrails. It’s going to be a slog for the Trump Administration. while the constitution and the law remain intact.
The Trump of 2024 is certainly diminished compared to 2016. “Childcare is childcare.” Sure!
😂
I guess the American public will now grade a nominee on a scale of 1-100 with 1 being “yes, it was not consensual, she cried, and it was in the back seat” through “she only said ‘no’ once and seemed to enjoy it” to “Oh, my gosh, we had such fun but she seemed to sleep through it” to “No charges were filed and she cashed the check.” U-tube video made available free to consenting adults.
This nomination - most of them actually - has nothing to do with competence. Hegseth's job will be to remain loyal and "de-woke" the Department of Defense. Given the appropriate authority, he can probably accomplish that.
A sad and disgusting commentary but very well done. It's a far-from-funny topic, but your composition made me chuckle. "And if I laugh at any mortal thing, 'tis not I may not weep." — William Shakespeare
AN OPEN LETTER TO PETE HEGSETH
Re: Your Nomination for Secretary of Defense — A Blatant Spectacle of Opportunism, Recklessness, and the Sinister Nexus of White Nationalism and Sex Crimes
https://open.substack.com/pub/patricemersault/p/an-open-letter-to-pete-hegseth?r=4d7sow&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Also, in 2017 when this incident occurred Hegseth was a married father of three who in that same year had a child outside his marriage with another woman, an executive producer at Fox News and while that was happening had sex with a married woman he met at a conference. I must hang out with the wrong crowd but I don’t know any men who act like that. That lack of moral character pales beside his complete lack of experience to take on a job of this magnitude but sheesh…
Hey Chris - loyal reader here, but can you cool it with the breathless political betting market reporting? The implication of including them is that those that bet have some insight into the likely outcome or, at a minimum, that they represent the unquantifiable "vibe" around a likely outcome. Neither have been proven to be the case and given the analyses that was done pre-November 5 about the very small amount of bettors driving the betting lines by placing large sums of money, it's entirely possible that unscrupulous people are using these markets to a) drive the vibe and thus influence the outcome or more likely, b) take advantage of small fish ignorance. Including them regularly in your reporting is aiding and abetting, IMO and you'd be much better off without it.
This is what happens when unvetted, unqualified people are nominated for very high profile positions.
Elon Musk might buy MSNBC?!?
Wouldn’t that be amazing!
😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂
My problem with Hegseth is that years ago he was a younger better looking Liz Cheney…I actually support Trump’s foreign policy and I don’t want Trump to make the same mistakes he made in his first term! John Bolton served Trump!?! WTF????