From the start, I've had the gnawing feeling that there was something not quite kosher about the Jackson allegations. There's an aspect to this tale that we've not yet been told. From the NYT
Dr. Ronny L. Jackson, the White House physician nominated to lead the Veterans Affairs Department, provided such “a large supply” of Percocet, a prescription opioid, to a White House Military Office staff member that he threw his own medical staff “into a panic” when it could not account for the missing drugs, according to a summary of questionable deeds compiled by the Democratic staff of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee.
A nurse on his staff said Dr. Jackson had written himself prescriptions, and when caught, he simply asked a physician assistant to provide him with the medication.
And at a Secret Service going away party, the doctor got intoxicated and “wrecked a government vehicle,” according to the summary.
The two-page document, distributed by committee Democrats, fleshes out three categories of accusations — prescription drug misuse, hostile work environment and drunkenness — that threaten to derail President Trump’s nominee. Committee staff members say the summary details the testimony of 23 current and former colleagues of Dr. Jackson, many of whom are still in the military.
An aide to Senator Jon Tester of Montana, the top Democrat on the committee, said each allegation included in the document was based on information provided by two or more individuals.
Jackson "categorically denies" the car accident allegation. Here's my concern: An accident of that sort cannot be a mere claim
. We're not talking about a "he said, she said" situation." Records are kept. Either a car was wrecked or it was not.
Would Jackson deny the claim if he knew that evidence could prove him wrong? I don't think so.
Jackson seems determined to brazen it out -- which means that he really does have a way to answer these charges, at least some
of these charges.
And if that's the case, then we have to ask: Who informed the Democrats? What is the basis for that document? From the WP
The Democrats’ document provided no evidence for the allegations, nor an explanation of the methodology of the investigation, which has been spearheaded by the office of Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). According to Tester’s staff, every allegation has been substantiated by at least two people.
Two can be party to a lie.
We all recall what happened to Dan Rather. I smell a plot.
I'm with her all the way. Hell, I don't think that I could have gotten through the past year without her.
A tweet from Charles Pierce
So we get a month of Laura Ingraham's sponsors bailing, and a week of Sean Hannity being a hack and a profiteer, and, suddenly, Joy Reid is under fire.
I am not a great believer in coincidence
All I'm saying is that this is some deep, and conveniently timed, archaeology.
Indeed. Malcolm Nance thinks that Reid is the victim of a propaganda operation. Greenwald and the BernieBros seem particularly eager to pronounce her guilty -- which leads me to suspect that Nance is right.
We let these sneaking bastards take down Franken (who, in a sane world, would be a frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination right now). If we let these manipulators take down Joy Ried, then who is next? I presume that Maddow would be an obvious target.
I think this story
may offer some insight into what happened to Reid. We need not automatically presume that the hacker is Russian. Cambridge Analytica used an Israeli firm called Black Cube to hack Nigeria’s President Muhammadu Buhari.
According to Wiley, Cambridge Analytica also contracted its subsidiary company, AggregateIQ, to use the data obtained by Black Cube to spread anti-Muslim videos on Facebook in an effort to damage Buhari’s presidential campaign.
Buhari, who is Muslim, had run unsuccessfully for president three times previously, but was elected president in 2015 despite the alleged smear campaign against him.
Those who presume Reid guilty scoff at the idea of hackers planting smear material. But that idea is not
incredible. Is what happened to Buhari so terribly different from what happened to Reid?