Jimmy Carter spoke on a panel at the Carter Center Conference on Human Rights, and he made a few interesting comments. Very interesting, indeed.
At @CarterCenter conference on human rights moderated by historian Jon Meacham, former president Jimmy Carter says “every day we send a terrible signal” with border policy, “a disgrace to the United States, and I hope it will soon be ended. Maybe not until the 2020 election.”
— Susan Page (@SusanPage) June 28, 2019
Walter Mondale also was present.
Former Vice President Walter Mondale on President Trump: “He’s got something deep in him that is detestable.” Cites “his rhetoric, his harshness, his divisiveness,” then adds: “Doctors tell me they think they recognize symptoms of psychological problems.” At @CarterCenter panel
— Susan Page (@SusanPage) June 28, 2019
Jimmy Carter is a good man and a great humanitarian. His Habitats for Humanity project has been thriving for years and he still shows up to work on it even in his 90’s. It seems that Carter is finally becoming truly appreciated for who and what he is in his later years.
This is truth, and gutwrenching. And people are sliming Speaker Pelosi, instead of concentrating on the actual problems we have. It is so upsetting. I really can’t stand some of the b@llshit I keep hearing, over and over.
Exactly. We’ve got a crime family in power, put there via Russian interference, and people are fragmented off, dissing Pelosi. But I expect that. The weakness of the Democrats has always been our purity and our infighting. If we don’t come together and do something sane this year, we could hand the reins to Trump for another four years — and I don’t even want to think about the damage he could do.
Boy I so agree with you and it’s scary
The election is ours to screw up.
I don’t feel any need to get on democratic leadership, not now. No, they won’t be 100% on point every time. We need to stand with them and show support, like reasonable adults. Not point fingers at the wrong people. It drives me crazy. We are already assured of election interference, and people are bashing leadership. Way to go!
That’s twice today you scooped me, but I think I’m first at DKos….
I posted this at 8:55 a.m. Your time stamp on the DK piece is 10:11, Alduous posted the same story at 10:02. But you raise a good point. The reason I’m not over there any more is because I scooped too many people, once too often. And I didn’t do it on purpose — I just love this. This is what I do and who I am. And I was way too naive to realize that I was stepping on peoples’ toes and p*ssing people off. (This is the scuttlebutt that I have gotten privately and you and I can have a private conversation about it, too.) Live and learn.
Ursula,
Maybe you could explain the issue of “scooping” someone and what is offensive about it …to us, the unenlightened. Your posts are wonderful and I have no complaints about your style.
Hi Anniss! “Scoop” is an old newspaper term. It means getting the story out first. So, Durrati saying I “scooped” him twice in one day means that i got my story posted before he could post a story on the same topic. Durrati was going to write on this story, and also on the one about Trump laughingly telling Putin “don’t meddle in the election.” I did the election story Thursday night. I just happened to find it late at night. This story I found early Friday morning.
I know Durrati’s taste in choosing material, so sometimes if I see a story that i think he’ll want to write on, I’ll send him an email that I’m already on it, so we don’t bang into each other posting on the same topic. This Jimmy Carter story is all over the internet. It got developed overnight Thursday and early Friday morning. I couldn’t get anything more on it when I found this on Thursday night, so I said, heck with it, this is the ball I run with.
There’s nothing offensive about scooping somebody. It’s just the way of the world. Competing newspapers started doing it back in the day and then of course TV networks, everybody got into the act. And now bloggers try to be the first with the story.
In truth, a lot of it is luck. I remember one time a story broke about Steve Bannon threatening to quit Trump’s administration if he lost his position on the National Security Council. I literally happened to be on The Hill’s website when the story broke and I grabbed it right up and posted it. I was in the right place at the right time.
Never forget that despair helps the enemy. Dressing it up as “realism” and using it as a defense against a letdown will never help in the event of such a letdown. So…I say harden your heart against it and keep going. The only alternative is to hide in the corner and THAT’S WHAT THEY WANT.
Still. Pelosi and Shumer caved. Just like the Supreme Court. The only good news is that it won’t matter that much because in the long run there is only a short run left – and within decades cannabilism will be not only practiced, but encouraged.
You know, even a few short years ago I would have considered this highly cynical, good black humor. Now, I think it’s a legitimate possibility, and perhaps even a probable one.
Ursula, I rarely take exception with your stories, but, um, exactly where and when did Carter say what you claim in this piece’s title? You offer two quoted tweets (or whatever) from Susan Page but neither say “Trump didn’t actually win the election” as YOU attribute to Carter in the title. (At least, as of the time I’m reading and responding.)
This is the text at the top of the first tweet:
Former president Jimmy Carter says a full investigation “would show that Trump didn’t actually win the election in 2016….He was put into office because the Russians interfered.” Does that mean he’s an illegitimate president? “Based on what I said, which I can’t retract.”
Video:
Also here, with C-SPAN video:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/6/28/1868026/-President-Carter-tells-crowd-Trump-is-only-president-because-Russians-interfered-on-his-behalf
Sorry, Ursula, but this is what *I* see in the “first tweet”:
At @CarterCenter conference on human rights moderated by historian Jon Meacham, former president Jimmy Carter says “every day we send a terrible signal” with border policy, “a disgrace to the United States, and I hope it will soon be ended. Maybe not until the 2020 election.”
Now–would you please show me WHERE IN THAT QUOTED TWEET (which is the FIRST ONE that appears in YOUR article) does it say ANYTHING about Trump’s not winning the election?
I do NOT see or read anything about that not winning above that tweet. The ONLY sentence that *I* read above that (beyond your headline) is the following:
“Jimmy Carter spoke on a panel at the Carter Center Conference on Human Rights, and he made a few interesting comments. Very interesting, indeed.”
Between that introductory statement (which does NOT say a single thing about Trump’s not winning) and the Susan Page tweet (which I copied-and-pasted from your article), there is NOT A DAMN WORD about not winning.
If the text is found on Susan’s Twitter page, why couldn’t you have included that text in the article instead of just the tweet that you did post? It’s like taking a 5-second sound bite from a video but posting a 2-hour long video WITHOUT an advisory that “sound bite starts around the 1 hour 47-minute mark.” I certainly expect better from you, Ursula. Your articles are usually much better than this one and, instead of offering a mea culpa and accepting you kind of fumbled on this, you turn it around on me, as though it was *MY* fault for not doing work that YOU should’ve done in the first place.
And, to those who decided to add videos to back up Ursula, that still does NOT address the issue HERE. Ursula posted an article that carries a very provocative headline and did NOT INCLUDE THE ACTUAL EVIDENCE IN HER ARTICLE! And now, she’s telling me that *I* should have clicked a hyperlink to a Twitter account if I wanted to read the quote. Folks, that is NOT how “reporting” works. It’s one thing to pull that kind of thing in the comments; it’s different when you’re writing an actual article.
Joseph, look at the TOP of the tweet. After my intro, “very interesting indeed.” The tweet appears. Look at the word “NEW” in all caps. The text you’re looking for follows.
NEW: Former president Jimmy Carter says a full investigation “would show that Trump didn’t actually win the election in 2016….He was put into office because the Russians interfered.” Does that mean he’s an illegitimate president? “Based on what I said, which I can’t retract.”
Frequently the top of a tweet will reference the tweet before. It’s an economical way of posting two tweets in one space. I’m sorry you were confused.
I always liked Jimmy Carter, he’s a good man .
He’s so many lightyears beyond Trump that it’s not even real.
Greg Palast has reported extensively on just this subject. If the votes had only been counted, Trump would have lost. Republican secretaries of state managed to frustrate the vote count. It didn’t help that Hillary Clinton had been tricked into an inappropriately generous need to conceed, either.
Would you have a link, or know where this guy’s work was published? I never heard this before now. If this is true, then we may have already lost democracy. I want to read what you’re talking about before I decide anything.
Just look up Greg Palast on the web. He has an official website where almost all he writes gets printed. For this particular topic he’s even published a book, which has references on his website. Or, you can just look up Greg Palast on Amazon. Palast has been around a long time, and has written a number of books and countless articles. He’s a respected journalist who’s worked for a number of news organizations, including the BBC during a time when the US government was making it hard for him to work here. He has a degree in economics and studied in the same classes with several extremely well-known economists. He even has an entertaining writing style that you’ll probably enjoy.
He also has a reputation for getting it wrong.
I will check that out as well. Thanks for the heads up.
I will check it out.
“Wrong” is a bit too aggressive. Palast does have a tendency to report in ways that are prejudiced in favor of his opinions, but i’ve never had a fact-check of his data indicate that he was making anything up. Like nearly all journalists, his reporting needs to be read critically. However, i think in Palast’s case that’s pretty obvious when it needs to be and awfully benign, exactly because it’s not “wrong” so much as “partisan,” with the party he favors being whatever serves the many even if it costs the few. It’s worth noting that he has offered a lot of criticism of Democrats along with condemnation for all the expectable Republican dysfunction. i’ve read a great deal of the material Palast has published. i think he’s quite earnest, honest, and doing his best to help. That we get to see that he’s also human is, i think, a welcome feature rather than a failure.
Ii just love this man. He was the first president I had a chance to vote for in 1976… To bad we ended up with that RepubliCON horses ass Reagan afterwards!