My apologies to those who, like me, prefer their vulgarly sexual terms of abuse unasterisked and unexpurgated, but you never know whose algorithm you’re going to trigger these days. Anyway, to the point: Right-winger Ramesh Ponnuru, whom I last blasted for gratuitously taking sides with Donald Trump against U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts with regard to the functioning of the federal judiciary,1 has now had the temerity to (gently) suggest in the National Review that Attorney General William Barr exercise the authority the president recently granted him (and that he requested) to declassify classified information with discretion. It’s quite possible, Ramesh says, for some declassification to be salubrious. And yet.
But there is the possibility that declassification will be pursued selectively in a way that furthers the administration’s preferred political narratives. If Bill Barr still had the high reputation he had in both parties when he started this job, that suspicion would have been lessened. But he has spun for the president aggressively, which is within the rights of an AG but has reduced his capital. (Not that some of his critics themselves have much of a reputation for sobriety to lose. This morning Rep. Hakeem Jeffries called him “the so-called attorney general” on Meet the Press.)
Yeah, that Jeffries guy has some mouth on him all right, but it’s, uh, “amusing” that Ramesh thinks that the attorney general of the United States has the “right” to aggressively lie (sorry; “spin”) for the president. Still, props to Ramesh for saying out loud (sort of) that, well, since Barr is a big, fat liar (so to speak), people don’t trust him all that much and he should go out of his way to play it on the up and up.
After covering his ass (so he thought), with his takedown of Rep. Jeffries, Ramesh, well, he just went a little wild, to wit:
The order [allowing declassification] also appears in a worse light because the president has suggested over the last week that James Comey, Andrew McCabe, and others had committed “treason” — even after being reminded that treason is punishable by death.
Trump’s campaign against Comey et al also creates a political problem for Republicans. GOP officials keep insisting that it is time to move on from the endless controversy over alleged Russian collusion and obstruction of justice, while also extending that controversy. Barr himself said to Congress that “we have to stop using the criminal-justice system as a political weapon.” Perhaps he should make that case to a president who is, like a lot of his opponents, very free in throwing around the term “treason.”2
Okay, so not only does our attorney general have to conduct himself as an even-handed enforcer of the law, he has to tell the president not to go around accusing all of his “enemies” of treason? You’re on damned thin ice, Ramesh Ponnuru, and, as a result, Tim Graham (who he?) of the Media Research Center (who they?) landed on poor Ramesh with both feet, calling him—wait for it—a goddamn “David Brooks” (okay, my adjective, though not my epithet), which, these days, is the right-wing equivalent of “Benedict Arnold”.
Naturally, that hurt, a lot, and Ramesh defended himself, aggressively, quoting from a column he wrote after Barr released his infamous letter “summarizing” the Mueller report:
There’s no way for President Donald Trump’s opponents to spin it away: He just won a big victory and the Russia-collusion story is over.
Which would have been totally true had not the attorney general’s letter been total spin, and total bullshit. It tells you a lot about the state of affairs on the right that someone as well established as Ramesh Ponnuru has to defend himself against a two-bit right-wing thug like Tim Graham. Hard times, eh Ramesh? Imagine if you told the truth all the time!
Afterwords
Also at the National Review, Michael Brendan Dougherty has a long and not very interesting piece defending David French against charges of incipient David Brookness (they’re both bald, among other things) leveled by Mike’s “friend” (his word) Sohrab Ahmari, who, like Tim Graham, I never heard of and will try never to know.
1. Ramesh pretended to believe that Donald Trump, in criticizing a decision by a judge appointed by President Obama, was merely pointing to the fact that Democratic presidents tend to appoint liberal judges and conservative presidents tend to appoint conservative ones. But what Trump was saying (loudly) was that decisions by liberal judges are “not law” (his words). The point that Chief Justice Roberts was trying to make—and that Mr. Ponnuru, in his haste to suck up to the cult o’ Trump, deliberately pretended he did not understand—was that every court decision, unless overturned by a higher court, is “the law” and may not be denigrated or rejected on the grounds of partisan motivation. In his statement, the Chief Justice deliberately echoed the words of Donald Trump’s most recent Supreme Court appointee, Neil Gorsuch, at his confirmation hearings, a trick that was clearly waaaay over Mr. Ponnuru’s head.
2. Ramesh seems particularly offended by the fact that Trump continued to make the “treason” charnge even after being “reminded” that treason carries the death penalty. Perhaps Ramesh should be reminded that “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort”, rather than lack of fealty to Donald Trump, who of course was not even president when these “treasonous“ acts occurred. On the other hand, Donald Trump, Jr.'s willingness—nay, eagerness—to receive Russian intelligence to use against Hillary Clinton could easily be consrued as a conspiracy to commit treason. If Chelsea Clinton had done as Little Donald did, any number of Republicans would be crying for her blood.
