Tag Archives: ethics

Pompeo’s Correct Path

Posted on by
Reply

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had this to say in a Sunday interview about team play at State and in the other Cabinets of the Federal government.  Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace asked Pompeo about The New York Times‘ manufactured story about Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein wearing a wire and moving to invoke the 25th Amendment:

I’m not going to comment on that in any way, other than to say this: I’ve been pretty clear since my beginning of service here in this administration, if you can’t be on the team, if you’re not supporting this mission, then maybe you ought to find something else to do.
I’ve told that to my senior colleagues, I’ve told it to junior folks at the CIA, and the State Department; we need everyone who’s engaged in helping achieve President Trump’s mission. And I hope that everyone in every agency: DOJ, FBI, State Department is on that mission.

It’s not the subordinate’s role to do as he wishes, or to countermand the boss’ instructions, or to run a shadow government, or to follow his bliss in his civil service—or Senate-confirmed—position.  The subordinate’s role is to give his best advice, and after the boss has made his decision, to carry it out to the best of his ability.  If the subordinate thinks—or feelz—he cannot, his only option is to resign.

Yewbetcha.

Another Witness Demurs

Posted on by
Reply

In an email to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Saturday, Leland Ingham Keyser, a former classmate of Ford’s at the Holton-Arms all-girls school in Maryland, said she doesn’t know Kavanaugh or remember being at the party with him.
“Simply put, Ms Keyser does not know Mr [sic] Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr Ford,” lawyer Howard J Walsh III of Bethesda, MD, conveyed in an email to the committee that was obtained by Fox News [and by Politico].

Another witness identified by Dr Christine Blasey Ford, Patrick J Smyth, also has denied being at the alleged party, saying

…earlier this week that he has “no knowledge” of the party. He told the committee that he understands that “I have been identified by Dr Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as “PJ” who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post.

White House spokeswoman Kerri Kupec summed things up as they currently stand, as reported in a pool report:

One week ago, Dr Christine Ford claimed she was assaulted at a house party attended by four others. Since then, all four of these individuals have provided statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee denying any knowledge of the incident or even having attended such a party.

It’s clear to me that something traumatic happened to Ford all those decades ago, but it’s clear that Kavanaugh had nothing to do with it, whatever it was.

No wonder Ford’s lawyers are continuing to stall regarding her appearance before the Committee—even those lawyers’ “agreement” that Ford would appear this week is a sham; they’re still manufacturing disagreement over “details” of the appearance’s terms and conditions.

Bots and Comments

Posted on by
Reply

As a result of a bit of censorship in which The Wall Street Journal engaged on a comment of mine over the weekend, I had the following exchange with them.

On Sunday, in responding to their piece on trade and tariffs, I tried to post the comment below to the WSJ‘s Comments section, but they blocked it: there were, they claimed, one or more offending words in it [the non-italicized sentences are cut/paste quotes from the article].

[T]he decision’s timing risks deepening the already bitter trade fight by starting another tit-for-tat round of tariffs.
And
The tariffs are bound to complicate—if not derail—talks with top Chinese officials, which are currently scheduled in Washington for Sept. 27 and Sept. 28, say people familiar with the plans.
Another interpretation, carefully ignored by the authors, is that in any conflict, it’s necessary to keep pressure on the opposing side while negotiations occur.  The battlefield shapes the talks, and the talks shape the battlefield–the battlefield encompasses both the talks and the conflict.

I emailed the WSJ‘s comment facility, per their blocking message, asking what the offending word or words were and why they were not identified in the blocking message.

I got a same-day response to my email; kudos to the WSJ.

“Thank you for contacting us. Our filter blocked your comment for the word ‘tit’; we have approved your post and apologize for any inconvenience.”

I asked the obvious question: why is “tit” allowed in the article itself if it’s not allowed in the comments?  Their answer:

Our filter is automatically set up to block certain words that may be used in a less than pleasant manner in the comments sections. We will review this word, however.

This is an example of the failure, here including outright hypocrisy, of using AI bots in place of actual judgment.  I won’t comment on the snowflakiness of “less than pleasant manner;” that speaks well enough for itself.

Responsibility

Posted on by
Reply

The government of Puerto Rico is insisting on some in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria.

The Puerto Rican government is taking a hard line on rebuilding properties decimated by last year’s Hurricane Maria, offering homeowners federal financial assistance only if they move out of flood-prone areas.

It’s about time some politicians stood tall and required some personal responsibility instead of subsidizing its lack with taxpayers’ money.

Trial? We Don’t Need No Stinking Trial

Posted on by
Reply

Progressive-Democratic Party candidate for Texas Senator Beto O’Rourke wants a cop fired.  At a rally last Friday, O’Rourke was asked whether Officer Amber Guyger should be fired.  You remember the case: the officer seems to have entered the wrong apartment, mistaking if for her own, saw a man in the still darkened apartment, the man did not respond to Guyger’s commands, and she wound up shooting him.  O’Rourke’s response to the rally-goer’s question:

I don’t understand given the actions how anyone can come to any other conclusion.

Really?  The evidence the NLMSM has chosen to publish—a subset of the evidence the police are able to release in the middle of an ongoing investigation—certainly appears damning.  But where is the public record of all of the evidence?  When was Guyger’s trial and conviction?  When did it become the American way to begin punishing a person even before an investigation is completed, much less a trial held?

O’Rourke wasn’t finished.  He also

questioned why when everyone is seeking facts, the warrant was released which detailed that marijuana was found in that apartment.

Apparently, only some facts need be sought out, especially early on when it’s unclear—except to the special few—which facts matter.

Of course, it’s of a piece with the Dear Colleague Letter sent out by the Obama Education Department that made it permissible for a school to “convict” a male student on the basis of a female student’s accusation while denying the male student’s right to legal representation or even the opportunity to cross-exam the accuser or accuser’s witnesses.  It’s of a piece with the Progressive-Democrats’ hue and cry over current DoEd Secretary Betsy DeVos’ unmitigated gall in insisting on actual due process for the accused in educational facilities.

And it’s of a piece with a Progressive-Democrat President’s insistence—immediately after he’d admitted he knew none of the facts—that a cop had acted stupidly.

This is due process as the Progressive-Democrats would have it.  This is Beto O’Rourke’s view of due process for those accused of wrong-doing.  Remember this, this fall.