Plenty of Republicans have been lamenting their party’s nomination of “the one guy who cannot beat the historically unpopular Hillary Clinton,” but Gary Legum thinks they’re assuming facts not in evidence. In a Friday article, Legum indicated that Hillary would have been a prohibitive favorite against anyone the GOP might have chosen. He opined that the Republicans’ so-called deep bench was a mirage and argued, "For the GOP to nominate someone capable of beating Hillary Clinton in 2016, it would have had to have been a completely different GOP since at least 1992. And if that GOP existed, Clinton would not be a weak and unpopular figure, because she would not have spent 25 years being hit with every ridiculous charge under the sun."



At Monday afternoon's White House press briefing, Fox News reporter Kevin Corke asked Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz about the reasons for the White House's reluctance to account for President Obama's whereabouts and activities on the night of the September 2012 Benghazi attacks.

Schultz never genuinely answered Corke's question, so then Corke zinged him with the fact that it took President Barack Obama far longer than the length of time Congress has spent on Benghazi to hem, haw, and finally reject the Keystone Pipeline project.



When citing instances of “the worst in human behavior,” reasonable choices include the Holocaust, the Rwandan genocide, and whatever ISIS did today. In a Sunday post, Washington Monthly blogger D. R. Tucker offered an absurdly unreasonable choice: the last ten Republican national conventions. Tucker did comment hopefully that “perhaps this year’s GOP convention will be so sick, so sordid, so sour that the general election will effectively be over by the end of July.”

 



The TV networks are heavily promoting the word “historic” in Hillary Clinton’s presumptive-nominee status – and “historic” is correct. This surely is a first.  “Historic” can be a factual adjective, but in the hands of the networks, it often carries a highly positive ring, often attached to liberal victories. By contrast, consider the historic nature of Mitt Romney’s nomination in 2012. On May 29 of that year, Washington Post reporters Sandhya Somashekar and Jason Horowitz reported Romney was the first Mormon major-party nominee.

How did the networks cover that? Most didn't. ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, MSNBC, and Fox didn't report it. CNN was the TV exception.



The right’s widely varied response to Donald Trump’s presidential bid may be the political story of the year so far, but many liberals have ignored it in favor of arguing that Trump’s worldview is a pure product of conservatism. For example, in a Sunday article, Chauncey DeVega claimed that Trump is “the logical result of at least five decades of Republican political strategy” and defined Trumpmania as “a mass political temper tantrum on the Right caused by a potent mix of authoritarianism and racism.”

“Much of the rhetoric, policies, and goals of the Republican Party and Donald Trump in 2016 are disturbingly similar to those of…the Ku Klux Klan,” declared DeVega. “This should be no surprise. The Republican Party is the United States’ largest de facto white identity organization. Conservatism and racism is now one and the same thing in the American post civil rights era.”



Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton believes we're supposed to be impressed by the idea of putting her husband Bill, in the Associated Press's words, "in charge of revitalizing the economy." Yep, the old "2-for-1" offer from the early 1990s is back.

In 1993, President Bill put First Lady Hill in charge of health care. Fortunately, nothing tangible resulted, but we did get an early lesson in the extremes of Clintonian secrecy and stonewalling. This time, a President Hill would put "First Dude" Bill — as the AP's Lisa Lerer and Catherine Lucey, brazenly stealing Sarah Palin's description of husband Todd while she was Alaska's Governor, prospectively described him on Monday — effectively in charge of the economy. Here's the big problem the press is virtually certain to ignore: Bill Clinton guaranteed in 2012 that the economy under a reelected Barack Obama would not need revitalization by now.



Donald Trump has wasted no time in "going there": accusing Hillary Clinton of being an enabler of Bill's sexual misconduct with women. So will the MSM ask Hillary about her role in hushing up the scandals, intimidating the women, etc? No, according to Mark Halperin, not unless the MSM is "forced" to do so.

Said Halperin on today's With All Due Respect"I don't think a reporter will ask unless they're basically forced to." Halperin and Heilemann did hold out one intriguing possibility: that some "new information, some more recent information" about Bill's peccadilloes could force the MSM's hand. Added Halperin tantalizingly, with Heilemann's agreement: "Trump thinks he knows some new facts, by the way."



The Black Lives Matters folks and their enablers in the press won't like this one bit.

On Wednesday, Washington Post writer Tom Jackman, at the paper's True Crime blog, reported on a rigorous study of police behavior which found that, in his words, "even with white officers who do have racial biases, officers are three times less likely to shoot unarmed black suspects than unarmed white suspects." Talk about busting a meme.



On Wednesday's CNN Newsroom, during a discussion of Donald Trump accusing Hillary Clinton of playing the "gender card," host Brooke Baldwin declared that the comment reminded her of Mitt Romney using the words "binders full of women" which she asserted "really hurt him" in the 2012 presidential campaign.

CNN's Nia-Malika Henderson went on to complain, "We often think of women as only having gender. Men have a gender, too," and, after accusing Trump of playing a "gender card" by acting like an "alpha male," she concluded that "men certainly benefit from the gender card, too, and in some ways benefit more because it's more subtle in some ways for men."



On Wednesday's The Situation Room on CNN, host Wolf Blitzer suggested that GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz would not do well in a general election with minorities and women as he discussed Idaho Republican Senator James Risch's preference for Cruz over Donald Trump as his party's nominee: "After losing in 2012 when President Obama was reelected, the Republican National Committee did what they called an autopsy, how to bring in more support from women, from minorities, from young people. How's that working out so far?"



Welcome to the club, Mika: file this one under A Liberal Discovers Media Bias . . . Back in 2012, George Stephanopoulos was somehow permitted to moderate a Republican primary debate, and proceeded to harangue frontrunner Mitt Romney on the arcane matter of the right of states to prohibit contraceptive sales, thus abetting the Dems' "GOP War on Women" narrative. Republicans were rightly outraged.

Now, in an ironic twist, it's the turn of some liberals to doubt Stephanopoulos' ability to serve as an impartial moderator . . . of a Dem debate. On today's Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinski repeatedly expressed skepticism at the notion of Steph moderating a debate between Hillary and Bernie Sanders, given that George served as a senior aide to President Clinton and has been a donor to the Clinton Foundation. 



As CNN Newsroom host Poppy Harlow on Saturday tried to suggest Republicans like John Kasich deserve blame for not speaking out against Donald Trump when he was pushing birtherism against President Barack Obama several years ago, she was taken aback when her guest, Ohio GOP chairman Matt Borges, turned the tables by implicating Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign in dabbling in similar mischief against her then-opponent Senator Obama.