David French has the unenviable job of being the voice of reason over at the National Review, which means that he has to find a “middle ground” between the True Trumpers of the pack and, well, the truth, which frequently means explaining that grunting like a hog and wallowing in one’s own filth isn’t as bad as it looks.
Dave’s genteel/desperate/pathetic hypocrisy is amply on display in a recent post regarding our attorney general’s casual attitude towards the truth, which Dave describes as follows: “The controversy over Robert Mueller’s letter to Bill Barr strikes me as much ado about not much at all.”
Yes, says Dave, Bob had a right to be frustrated with Bill’s less than accurate non-summary of Bob’s report. But, so what? Now we have Bob’s report. We don’t have to rely on what Bill said Bob said, because we know what Bob said. So, so what if the Attorney General of the United States deliberately distorted the truth in order to cover up some of the gamiest doings of the gamiest man to ever sit in the White House?
So what, Dave? So what if Bill Barr sees it as his job to be as corrupt, and devious, and deceitful as his boss? You’re down with that? Seems like Rod Rosenstein isn’t the only “survivor” in town.
Afterwords
Unlike Dave, I found plenty not to like about Bill Barr, who basically auditioned for his current job by sending the president a 44-page get out of jail free card, in the form of a brief arguing that the president has the right to goddamn well run the goddamn government any goddamn way he pleases, so go stick a fork in yourself, you’re done. As for David French, who once wrote “The more we learn about Trump World’s contacts with Russians or Russian operatives, the more astounding it becomes”, well, I’m afraid he’s done too. They say lawyers make the best whores. I guess that’s true. And over at Reason, Eric Boehm notes that Dave won’t lack for company in the swine pit.
