Pun Salad

Glenn Greenwald points out a clear and present danger:

When journalists broke the story of how the Biden Admin was weaponizing the US Security State to coerce Big Tech to censor the internet of dissent, jealous and partisan corporate journalists told everyone to ignore it all because it was a "nothing burger." Then: pic.twitter.com/KTWc0DVhAc

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 5, 2024

The NYT story is from September of last year, so it's not exactly breaking news.

Our weekly look at how the oddsmakers see the candidates:

Hey! Vivek and Michelle are back with us! Long shots, but managed to hit our 2% inclusion criterion.

But you know who's not even present in that Election Betting Odds list? And, as far as I can tell, never has been present in this cycle?

Also of note:

• Pointlessness, thy name is Chris. Charles C. W. Cooke takes a look at Chris Christie’s Pointless Candidacy.

  When one inquires as to why, at this late stage, Chris Christie seems resolved to stay in the Republican-primary charade when he is obviously destined to end up as an ignominious also-ran, one is usually told that Christie is sticking around so that there is at least one candidate on the stage who is willing to stick it directly to Donald J. Trump. I come today to puncture this idea, which is both overstated and over-accepted, which deserves to be set within a context that is far less flattering to Christie, and which, when extrapolated out, renders the stated rationale for his presence entirely hollow.

  It is certainly true that, in 2024, Chris Christie has rebranded himself as the most principled anti-Trump candidate within the firmament. But there is branding and there is reality, and, in this case, the two remain distant cousins. Chris Christie can, indeed, be described as an anti-Trump candidate. But he cannot fairly be described as a principled one. There are certain figures within the political universe who have paid a price for their opposition to Trump. Christie is not among them. In 2016, it suited him to be a Trump lackey; in 2024, it suits him to be a Trump critic. In between those eras, Christie experienced no discomfort whatsoever as a result of his positions. He did not, like figures such as Liz Cheney, lose his leadership position and then his career. He did not, like some writers and broadcasters, miss out on lucrative opportunities. He coasted, moving where the wind took him. That has a profound effect on his credibility.

  CCWC makes a compelling case that Christie's early endorsement of Trump in 2016 (which he now says was a mistake) was because Christie "wanted to be rewarded with a position in the Trump White House, and he believed that a well-timed recommendation of the front-runner might secure one."

• LFOD Watch. Christie noted that we may have to change our license plates, according to this CNN story:

  Christie brought up Trump's comment that he would be a dictator only on the first day of his presidency, and told the room of New Hampshire voters "you voted for him in '16," prompting one voter to call out "no, we didn't."

  "Unfortunately, you're saddled with it, babe, you're saddled with it," Christie responded, continuing to detail Trump's winning record in past New Hampshire primaries.

  "You vote for him in 24 ... Live Free or Die sounds like bull to me. Right? Because this guy doesn't want you to have freedom," he said.

  OK, Chris, fine. But why should we vote for you?

• Scurrilous! Ben Jacobs reveals The Plan to Get New Hampshire Liberals to Vote for Nikki Haley! He points out that "undeclared" voters can waltz into their polling place and demand either a Republican or Democrat ballot (but not both). And (furthermore) they may have "repeatedly determined the winner" of the primary.

  That is what Robert Schwartz hopes to make happen. He’s the leader of a group called Primary Power that looks to push Democratic-leaning independents to vote against Trump in the GOP primary. Schwartz said the group has raised more than $670,000 through small and large donations, though as a 501(c)(4), its contributors are not publicly disclosed. A Democrat who spent his career working in foreign policy focusing on countries like Venezuela and Nicaragua that have suffered significant backsliding toward dictatorships, Schwartz said he is trying to make sure the same thing doesn’t happen in the U.S. with a second Trump presidency. At this point, he’s settled upon Haley as the option. “She seems to respect the Constitution,” Schwartz said. “We would have a peaceful transfer of power and free and fair elections with her as president.”

• OK, looks like I'll have to hold my nose a little harder to vote for her.

  Sheesh:

  We have to secure our schools the same way we secure our airports.

  — Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) January 5, 2024

  I assume this was a quick reaction to the Thursday school shooting in Perry, Iowa.

  But do we really need to turn schools into airports? After extensive research, Reason's C.J. Ciaramella says: No, Nikki Haley, We Don't Need to Turn Schools Into Airports, the Place Literally Everyone Hates.

  Haley's thinking here seems to hinge on the notion that airport security is effective and efficient, which is not something that most Americans who have flown in recent memory would be familiar with (unless they have TSA PreCheck, a scam in which you pay the government for the convenience of not having your genitals grabbed).

  The hardening of American airports post-9/11 resulted in ridiculous security measures that, because of bureaucratic inertia and obstinance, we are still saddled with more than two decades later. "Don't forget to take your shoes off!" It's often called security theater, and by that definition, it's one of the longest-running shows off-Broadway.

  Shockingly, all Iowa primary and secondary schools have been declared "weapons-free zones". So Perry High School was a soft target.

• In other Iowa news… Barton Swaim reports in the WSJ from Coralville: Trump Summons the Furies in Iowa. Excerpt:

  True, Mr. Trump has always delighted in sounding like a strongman. Plainly he admires autocrats, but he admires them for their media savvy and panache rather than their accomplishments and wouldn’t know how to arrogate new powers to himself if he wanted to. His enemies can be counted on not to notice that distinction.

  Give the Never Trumpers this much: Lately Mr. Trump has turned up the volume on his strongman bombast. His campaign speeches often include the tag line “I am your retribution.” In September he claimed that Gen. Mark Milley, who reportedly conferred with Chinese officials about Mr. Trump’s erratic behavior after the 2020 election, behaved so egregiously “that, in times gone by, the punishment would have been DEATH!” He has talked of revoking broadcast licenses of news outlets he dislikes.

  I prefer media savvy and panache exhibited by non-autocrats, OK?