Watching it live now. Pelosi opened with a rebuttal to Trump’s claim that the Democrats are preventing him from signing gun control and healthcare legislation by pointing out that she’s piled bills at McConnell’s door. Now she’s talking about the new NAFTA bill, which she says they’re considering.
Impeachment stuff coming up. C-SPAN link here.
ETA: Pelosi criticizing Trump administration for schmoozing with Saudis after they had Jamal Khashoggi murdered and for congratulating China for 70 years of communist repression.
Now she’s talking about impeaching Trump, saying “it’s a sad time.” Says Trump is assaulting the Constitution. Now Schiff is up.
ETA: Schiff update: Expresses concern that Pompeo and Trump are interfering with witnesses, says it will be considered obstruction and draws an adverse inference that allegations are correct.
ETA: Schiff wraps it up pretty quick. Now questions.
NotMax
Just posted this below.
Pelosi traversing all over the map. Stay on target.
Betty Cracker
@NotMax: She’s not great at public speaking. I was relieved when Schiff took over.
Steeplejack
Pelosi is a legislative genius, but she is not a very good public speaker, at least in these situations.
joel hanes
@NotMax:
Stay on target.
Guessing that’s Schiff’s job.
Pelosi delegates, and does not upstage her lieutenants.
Steeplejack
In other news, I discovered that the water is off in my building. (Hadn’t been downstairs in a couple of days to see the notice. Grr.) Normally wouldn’t be a problem, but I have to drive my brother to the airport at 2:30, so possibly I will be showing up unshaven and seedy.
bystander
If Pelosi is all over the map, it’s because twitler is. Leaving his lies uncorrected gives him more clues what b/s he should be working.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Steeplejack: she can deliver a prepared speech well enough, not so much off the cuff. I heard on Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me this past weekend that she left her prepared remarks announcing formal impeachment inquiries on a plane, which is hard to believe. I like to sometimes write things out longhand, the slower process helps, but that’s kind of ridiculous
I’m a Pelosi fan (“stan”?) but I will not be sorry if Schiff becomes the public face of the impeachment effort.
jl
@NotMax: Maybe it’s a little introductory demo that they can do routine public business and enforce Constitutional order and pursue criminality through extraordinary means at the same time.
Meanwhile, Warren has cut Biden’s lead in national polls to 4 or 5 points. I’ve been thinking that Trump has been really so obsessed with Biden that he went on a crime spree, went to the verge of destroying himself over a Democratic primary candidate who very well might not be the clear front runner at all after the first four primary contests. Well, no one made the mentally impaired and unwell, and criminal Trump do stupid and criminal things, except himself.
Edit: if Warren becomes the front runner, clear that Trump thinks he can defeat her by calling her names, and going back to the NA (JMHO bogus) sandalgaffe that most people barely remember. And Trump will deal with that through offensive and childish slurs and stereotypes.
NotMax
What is that brooch she’s wearing? Cannot tell if it is a flower or a fasces.
waspuppet
Trump literally doesn’t know China has a communist government.
Steeplejack
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Yeah. And now she’s hectoring the press on why no questions about these legislative bills, when it’s obvious that everybody wants to get to impeachment. She’s taking advantage of the captive audience, and I don’t see the point. Yes, all that stuff is important, and it could probably use more coverage, but it’s all piled up outside Mitch McConnell’s office anyway and not going anywhere any time soon, so WTF?
Marcopolo
I think Pelosi should consider beginning every one of her pressers by noting all the bills the House has passed on behalf of making American lives better & McConnell’s inaction on all of them. Then something like, “he won’t even allow an up or down vote on them!”
japa21
Actually, I like how she started with the other legislation and also talking about SA and how Trump congratulated China. As she put it, acknowledging is one thing, celebrating is another.
There was a lot of angst on the part of many pundits (looking at you Brooks) about how impeachment would prevent the Dems from doing the job that they were elected to do. She is pointing out that they can chew gum and walk at the same time. She also made the point, as she has done before, that the impeachment process is not a cause of joy (except here at BJ) but is a serious process. She made it clear that Trump gave them no other choice.
Schiff basically just outlined the current status. Key element is that refusal to respond to subpoenas will be considered as obstruction but also that it will result in the adverse presumption that they (the administration) are admitting that the accusations and allegations are true. I think this will be a common theme…what do they have to hide…what are they afraid of…etc.
Barbara
@Steeplejack: Pharmaceutical pricing is supposed to be priority number one for the President, the Senate and the House. I am not going to say more, other than Trump was supposed to be giving a speech tomorrow on that exact same subject. I am not saying it is more important, but I think she is probably affirming that for her, the legislative agenda on behalf of the people is more important than getting rid of Trump. You don’t have to agree.
Another Scott
OT – One for schroedinger’s cat – https://phys.org/news/2019-10-peek-schrodinger-cat-disturbing.html
Cheers,
Scott.
Ceci n est pas mon nym
@Steeplejack: No harm in reminding people that one House of Congress is actually doing its legislative duty and the other has completely shut down any pretense in legislating. Extraordinary times indeed.
NotMax
@Steeplejack
Willing to bet you could count those in the room familiar with H.R. 3 on one hand and have enough fingers left over to explore each nostril.
jl
@Steeplejack: As I said, I think a demonstration that Democrats are grown up enough to do regular business and extraordinary business at the same time. Want to make clear that if regular business is brought to a halt, it is a dishonest tactic of Trumpsters and their appendage, the national GOP.. And point out that the Trumpster noise about how impeachment will bring everything to a halt is an implicit threat to the welfare of the country to lay off or they will break things.
I’m not sure, let’s see how the presser develops.
OGLiberal
@Steeplejack: It’s because the press keeps saying that voters are saying that impeachment isn’t a top priority for them – legislation that helps them is. (which may be true but is also what GOPers are telling them because the GOP don’t want to talk about the numerous scandals) But then when Dems start talking about legislation and policy the media’s two second attention span for stuff that isn’t scandal kicks in and they forget that they were bothering Dems about not talking about legislation and start screaming, “but what about the scandal!”
Can’t win with these fuckers.
jl
Several posts at Big Picture blog showing that now medium term signs of recession flashing orange.
I’ll just give the blog link, since two posts this morning a couple more over last few days.
https://ritholtz.com/
Elizabelle
Best Nancy response so far on protecting WBs. “President probably doesn’t realize how dangerous his statements are.”
“I don’t see impeachment as a unifying thing for our country.”
germy
“is it possible you’re making too much out of one phone call?”
Not surprising, this question from TV broadcast news reporter.
Patricia Kayden
I hope she denounced Trump’s death threats against the Whistleblower and his imps’ refusal to cooperate with the House’s oversight.
Another Scott
OT – Warning – Politico:
Cheers,
Scott.
Elizabelle
Yeah. Schiff is so much better and more clear at a presser.
psycholinguist
Schiff is good at this. Keeping the focus on the transcript. Liked the – if corrupting a foreign power for personal gain doesn’t rise to the level of impeachment, then ask the republicans what does
Nancy needs to let it alone after Schiff speaks
Woodrow/Asim
@Ceci n est pas mon nym:
She’s protecting the House from accusations that Impeachment will stop legislative work — people using “we can’t pass bills!” as a way to distract (no matter truth, we all know, now, it’s about who yells the loudest). Yes, she could be stronger on that point, yet fighting in the media is not Pelosi’s wheelhouse. That’s part of why Schiff is up there, today.
Elizabelle
Strong response from NP on the Ukraine telephone call. Trump is stooping to a level that is below …. talks about constitutional guardrails. They (founders) never thought we’d have a POTUS who would kick the guardrails over.
Steeplejack
@Barbara:
“You don’t have to agree.” WTF?
I have no disagreement on the importance of the Democrats’ legislative agenda. What I am saying is that if, say, a police chief has a press conference after a shooting incident it’s bullshit for him to start out with something like “First I’d like to talk about our staffing and resource plans for the coming fiscal year.” Situational relevance.
Well, they’re on to Trump’s malfeasance now.
Gelfling 545
And on the lighter side: Does your pug want a career? Voice acting may be the answer
Elizabelle
I love NP’s comments about Trump in dismissing them (is he too cowardly to do anything about gun violence, etc.)
Spoke passionately on Benj Franklin’s comment about “a republic, if you can keep it” and the importance of the constitution.
rikyrah
Report: Two Out of Every 5 White Harvard Students Got In Because of the White Privilege-Affirmative Action Loophole
Michael Harriot
Yesterday 5:25pm
NotMax
Meh. Destined for the memory hole by tonight.
Barbara
@Steeplejack: Okay. Not trying to start a fight just recognizing that there are a lot of priorities competing for Pelosi’s time and attention. A lot of people do consider impeachment to be more important than drug pricing just now, even if they also consider drug pricing to be important.
[Individual 1] mistermix
Nancy finished very strong and you can tell that she means it.
Ceci n est pas mon nym
@Another Scott:
And in the future of our country, if we manage to have a future.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@germy: was it Alex Witt? Sounds exactly the kind of thing she would follow up AM Joy with of a Sunday morning, with her patented Concerned Contrarian Grimace.
@Barbara: also pre-emptively answering questions that are going to come up, including from the above-mentioned Ms Witt, and quite possibly including quite possibly from some of the Dem candidates on the trail.
Marcopolo
@rikyrah: This was a pretty depressing read coming after the court decision upholding Harvard’s policies.
The kicker for me was that these policies notably dilute the quality of Harvard’s student body. The Caucasian students the are admitting are definitely lower caliber academically than the students they are displacing.
dww44
@Barbara: And I don’t. Agree, that is. Getting rid of Trump is job number 1. A majority of the country apparently thinks so as well. Methinks she’s placating the more conservative parts of her caucus. Or, she thinks that talking about this will put pressure on McConnell to do something. Unlikely.
NotMax
@NotMax
Put another way, when engaging a roomful of creatures whose primary diet is soundbites, feed them soundbites. TV politics 101.
Amir Khalid
@waspuppet:
In fairness to Trump, China’s authoritarian, pro-business (i.e. fascist) government is communist only in name.
rikyrah
@Marcopolo:
But, the lawsuit doesn’t attack those groups. Only attacks Affirmative Action that includes diversity via race.
IF they had actually sued and said that LEGACY students are unqualified, I’d actually have respect. But, as is…go pound sand.
NotMax
(No edit function).
#40 amended:
Put another way, when engaging a roomful of hungry creatures whose primary diet is soundbites, feed them soundbites. TV politics 101.
Elizabelle
@NotMax: Yup. Missed opportunity. Whole thing felt like … nothing.
Although Pelosi’s final remarks were very good, and impassioned. She was sincere. Also like that she opened with Thomas Paine.
Frankensteinbeck
@NotMax:
Asking if anyone in the room is interested in drug pricing is a damned fine soundbite, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the whole point of Nancy’s half of the presser. She’s made the point: Democrats care about you. Republicans and the press don’t.
NotMax
@Elizabelle
Although the same Paine citation she used last week.
Timurid
So the meeting with the State Department IG has been pushed back to Friday?
gwangung
@rikyrah: That lawsuit (if it’s the one I’m thinking of) was by white assholes using Asian American (specifically East Asian Americans) as cover for their assholery.
Of course they wouldn’t want to bring up legacy admits.
NotMax
@Frankensteinbeck
Except that for any other than those who watched live, drug pricing will never be mentioned in reportage.
sdhays
@rikyrah:
But then how would Harvard be able to build a $3 trillion
slush fund for executivesendowment?!!?Gravenstone
@Steeplejack: Precisely that. She wants to make it a regular part of the conversation that the House is doing its job. Mitch is preventing the Senate from doing theirs.
Elizabelle
@Frankensteinbeck: Yeah. That was stunning, actually.
NotMax
@Elizabelle
No animus aimed at Pelosi (as others have rightly pointed out, it’s not her forte) but do get the impression that no one on her staff owns a TV.
Jay C
I saw a retweet somewhere from the “President” basically trying to rebut Speaker Pelosi’s points about legislation (tweeting DO-NOTHING DEMOCRATS! among other nonsense) as she was making them. As usual with Trump, it will probably make things worse, as – impeachment talk aside – Pelosi and Schiff’s presser will probably throw at least some unwanted attention on Moscow Mitch’s obsessive obstructionism. Our idiot MSM probably won’t run with it, much (“moots” full of alligators are more fun to talk about), but at least the talking point has been gotten out there.
Japa21
@Timurid: Schiff was talking about the IC IG I believe.
Kay
@[Individual 1] mistermix:
Of course she means it. She never, ever would have started it if she didn’t think she could finish it. She doesn’t bluff. That’s just not part of her process.
He’s a bad negotiator because he has no actual interest in other people and doesn’t understand them, or even try to understand them. He can’t “read” anyone because to him no one else exists.
Aleta
On CSPAN Rosenzweig is tenderly telling call-in Kenneth Starr that some things Starr just said are dead wrong, a misleading use of info, and wrt the clinton impeachment, hypocritical. Starr having joined the disinformation biz.
Rosenzweig worked for Starr at the OIC investigating Clinton. R-winger I believe, and very conservative I know. (R-Street) Has defended the credibility of the W.b.’er against the administration attacks.
It’s interesting to hear him fielding callers who are mouthing the rw paranoia propaganda on Fox about Biden, etc. by stating facts that defend Biden, facts about impeachment and the evidence for quid pro quo.
NotMax
@Kay
Ivanka excepted.
;)
Jeffro
@sdhays: I think at some point, as a country, we will need a law that says “ok rich alum, it’s fine if you want to give a couple million to your alma mater, but every dollar above X is going to be taxed at 50%, with the proceeds going to a fund that builds the endowments of less-well-off/newer/more diverse schools”
Let’s say they set the line at a million. If you want to give $5M to your alma mater, either give $9M (so that your university nets $5M and $4M goes to more needy schools), or give $5M knowing that $2M is going to be taxed away and used to help students at other schools. You’d still be helping tremendously.
It’s ridiculous that these gifts in the tens or even hundreds of millions keep dropping on schools that – just by virtue of being around much longer – already have billions in endowments.
Jeffro
@Jay C: Yup – he called what the Dems are doing “BULLSHIT”
Keep talking, old guy at the end of the bar. Keeeeeep talking and tweeting away.
Kay
@NotMax:
Yeah, I disagree. He hasn’t given her anything. As a transactional relationship Trump gets all the upside of that. It must have been sad when she was a girl but now she’s an adult so I hold her responsible for putting up with it. He’s a freak. There’s no real human being in there. She took a bad deal. Maybe she’s a lousy negotiator too.
cain
@Elizabelle:
That’s because they thought the EC would protect them from electing a leader who would do such. They thought it was the voters would be the problem. Ah, the irony, it has been the EC that has allowed a party that has no interest in governing to win and assault our institutions.
JGabriel
@Ceci n est pas mon nym:
Even more extraordinary: The party that “has completely shut down any pretense in legislating,” is the party as the President. Usually, it’s the Presiden’s opposition that wants to block legislation.
TomatoQueen
@rikyrah: Rec’d a 405 error the first time I submitted a reply to this dreck, so I’m already a more than a little annoyed, nonetheless allons-y!
Two problems–the moronic level of ignorance shown in the remark about “rowboat pedaling”, deserves a full-throated fuck off asshole, you never worked so hard for so long in your life, and all at an activity requiring mind-numbingly long hours of training in horrendous conditions, and a fine sense of rhythm. See the 1936 US Olympic men’s crew for further details. 2nd, the legacy problem. An embarrassing, bonehead error: George W. Bush, like his father and grandfather, went to Yale. The legacy problem exists at every school, large through small, good and bad: as parents educate their children, preference will be given to relatives of alumni, who donate with some regularity, creating among other things, those trillion dollar endowments that in at least 3 Ivy schools within the last 20 years have allowed lower income students to attend tuition free, which would be a life-changing gift. okay, bring on another 405 error.
JGabriel
@cain:
The Electoral College is a national security issus at this point. It’s a lot easier for a hostile foreign gov’t to rig a few swing states than to rig a national contest with 135 million plus voters.
Ladyraxterinok
@Another Scott: Thanks for link. Emailed to my ex, a retired theoretical physics prof
Barbara
@TomatoQueen: GWB also went to Harvard, albeit for graduate school. Nonetheless, Harvard’s MBA program is highly competitive and it is doubtful he would have been admitted without his storied name and connections.
Betty Cracker
@JGabriel: That’s an excellent point. I hadn’t thought of it in those terms before, but you’re right.
Barbara
@Aleta: Starr and Barr are what you get when you marry legal talent with zero principles beyond service to wealth.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Kay: there was a skit on their game show where Ivanka “returned” to the family business from her shoe-shipping “company”, or whatever the hell it was. MSNBC played it on one of their shows. It involved Herself coming into the boardroom to be interviewed by her Beast of a father about why she should be hired back. In careful lighting, she explained that the Trump Org had the most exciting and sexiest projects in New York City. Leaving aside the idea that branding other people’s buildings could be exciting, much less sexy, she gave a little shoulder shimmy when she said “sexiest.” Again, the conceit was that she was interviewing for a job with her father. And millions of voters thought they were watching a documentary.
jl
@rikyrah: Funny how legacy admissions, especially if previous generations at the school were big donors, is a kind of very common affirmative action that is never discussed in the corporate media.
As for faculty, I’ve heard grad students and junior faculty say that there is a kind of racket at many schools: junior faculty of various backgrounds are hired to meet affirmative action reporting requirements and then let go at tenure time. I don’t know how true that is. Public disinvestment in pretty much everything in US includes disinvestment in education, so everyone except grand poohbahs are treated more and more like day laborers, so a lot of complaints to go around. For years people have been waiting for the older generation, particularly those who were hired long long ago during the boom years of hiring to retire and make room for younger people. But to save money, there is a racket of retiring faculty and them bringing them back on ‘recall’ and similar programs under a different name. I’ve been to several retirement and good-bye parties, only to see them back in 90 days. A few of these old duffers keep up with the times, but most don’t.
rp
@TomatoQueen: I don’t think anyone doubts that crew is hard work that requires a lot of dedication. the question is why people who do it should get preferential treatment from places like Harvard. Does Harvard really need a top crew team? It’s a complete waste of an admission slot IMO.
TomatoQueen
@Barbara: A legacy study at the undergraduate level wouldn’t be comparable to one at the graduate level, as you’re dealing then with two different cohorts with so many uncontrollable variables. Further, competitive in today’s admissions parlance is far more measurable than it was when GWB was a young man. It would be better to say that admissions in his youth was much more exclusive, and influenced by social class, than it was competitive. GWB also epitomized the cliché of the gentleman’s C student, and there were a lot more of them in his youth than there have been since the late 60s, when academic achievement started to mean something at the same time that college all of a sudden started to get expensive.
Ladyraxterinok
@Timurid: Giving Trump gang time to work on/threaten him and family!!
Barbara
@TomatoQueen: I am simply pointing out that your statement was at least as incorrect as that found in the original article. And it was. What he should have said was that Yale was just like Harvard, that Harvard is not unique, see, e.g., the Bush family’s disproportionate admission to Yale, which includes GWB’s own daughter. And yes, Malia Obama probably got preferences to go to Harvard. I don’t KNOW that but I don’t think it unlikely.
TomatoQueen
@rp: Ha! Yes, Harvard needs a top crew team, in order to beat Yale, which ought to have a top crew team, but rarely does, due to lack of resources and a much much tinier river to practice on. Crew at both schools is approximately equal to football in terms of age, rivalry, tradition, and money required and later earned. Disclosure: I grew up within walking distance of both Yale Bowl (one of the oldest and largest football stadia in the country, seating over 70,000 and fucknose where they all park) and the little trickle where the crew used to practice before they moved downriver to New London.
TomatoQueen
@Barbara: It wasn’t at all, nor was it all encompassing. I also notice that you seem to have some sort of personal beef with me, as you never respond to me unless you think I need correcting and you do so invariably using snotty language. I don’t know what your problem is, nor do I want a conversation about it. Just knock it off please.
rp
Harvard, Yale…who the f*ck cares? There’s no difference on this particular issue.
RedDirtGirl
@NotMax: It is a replica of the Mace, which symbolizes the legislative authority of the House of Representatives.
Ladyraxterinok
@jl: In 80s it was believed that prestige schools let go most young hires before awarding tenure.
Many faculty I knew said you applied and were happy to take the job but knew you wouldn’t/couldn’t stay.
It was a major plus on your resume when you applied at other schools.
Ladyraxterinok
@Barbara: Most probably because father was president.
IIRC Carter daughter was admitted to prestige school. Thought at time it was because dad was/had been president.
Chelsea went to .Stanford IIRC. Because dad was president at time, pretty sure.
The Lodger
@Barbara: No more Starrs and Barrs!
Steeplejack
Maybe Pelosi was responding to Trump’s Twitter ranting this morning.
If that was her intent, she could have made the connection more explicit.
ETA: The Electoral College count was actually 304-227.
NotMax
@The Lodger
Well played.
TomatoQueen
@Ladyraxterinok: So you’re saying with certainty that these women did not earn their admissions? Based on what evidence, if any? On the face of it, this looks like a combination of misogyny that only women can harbor, and just plain envy. I’d like to see some facts or links.
Roger Moore
@TomatoQueen:
Bullshit. Not all schools have legacy preferences. Most state schools don’t have them, of course, but there are plenty of private schools that don’t, either. For example, neither my alma mater (Caltech) nor Tom Levinson’s employer (MIT) give any kind of legacy preference. They want the absolute brightest students, regardless of who their parents are.
jl
@Ladyraxterinok: Thanks for into. By the time I was in that rat race, people told me the practice had filtered down to lower ranked schools, where it was not clear at all the old timers were any better than the junior faculty. So, people in the churn were not so glad about it anymore.
Matt McIrvin
@Elizabelle: They thought of that. What they didn’t think was that a house of Congress would just let him do it because of partisanship so strong that it joined them in an effective conspiracy between the branches.
Aleta
I’m not as informed about Pelosi’s ways as others here, but my impression today: I thought she was making a point to the media about not failing in their coverage. If my thinking is wrong or naive, feel free to explain to me.
The Ds are being attacked for spending time on impeachment while ‘doing nothing’ about prescription drugs, trade, xyz. In fact, the positive messages of all Dems who are campaigning can be undermined or just lost if the media doesn’t keep covering news about D legislative work and Rs who are failing their responsibility, as well as the importance of impeachment. All three.
Could it be she’s warning about the danger to Dems of coverage that is flooded by impeachment speculation, instead of focused on evidence as it emerges. Especially if the press drops everything to follow the Trump campaign’s choice of how to avoid talking about their murderous policies (immigration, guns, health care, nonprotection of consumers and environment—all murderous).
It’s telling to me that Trump operatives *don’t mind* tempting the media to jump back to stories about Russia, guided by the mud they’ve working up about Ukraine. (I’m not ignoring the seriousness of Russian desire for money and control or how Trump’s Ukraine concoction is already feeding pizza again to the conspiracy-gate people as well as as his narcissistic obsession with image.)
But maybe Pelosi’s telling the media to write about everything in the last 3 years that the Republicans don’t want to talk about. I also took it as a reminder of how important it is during this impeachment scandal to spend our time and clicks on media content that offers evidence and fact-based opinion instead of unsupported suggestions.
immanentized
@Ladyraxterinok:
Does he study monism? Aethers?
immanentize
@Ladyraxterinok:
Does he study monism? Aethers?
sgrAstar
@TomatoQueen: dear TQ: a little clarification is in order.
(1) GWB did go to Harvard (MBA).
(2) Not all unis admit legacies. UCs, for example, do not.
(3) Reputation-washing donations do not necessarily benefit students
Aleta
@immanentize: that’s very funny
TomatoQueen
@sgrAstar: dear sgrAstar:
1)I never said he didn’t. I did make a point about not comparing in a study the two populations because graduate admissions and graduate students are not the same at all as undergrad. GWB is still an asshole. Happy now?
2)We don’t call them unis here. And many many of our institutions of higher education do admit legacies, some deliberately so. The idea that it’s a bad thing somehow seems to me to be unfounded, specious, and absurd. Utlimately, kids go where they want to go. We have enough schools; what we don’t have is enough funding for everyone’s needs, which leads me to:
3)Reputation-washing donations are what now? The donations that don’t benefit students are the ones that come from board members who demand control over some aspect of academia in return. It was done recently at George Mason University here in Northern Virginia by the Koch Brothers, but somebody was watching, the administration got caught at it, and promised not to do it again. What they didn’t do was give the money back. Conversely, at Yale some years ago, a Yale Corporation or board member, Sid Bass, of oil money, wanted to give a huge enormous substantial eyeball rolling gift, including an endowed faculty chair or two, but only on condition of Bass family approval of not only who was hired, but what curriculum content would be. Judge Jose Cabranes, another Yale Corporation member, told Sid Bass off in no uncertain terms and in the local newspaper (I can’t remember whether this was printed in the FYNYT, might’ve been) too, which was & is still very right wing. Academic freedom won that day and for about two weeks.