Beware Easy Lines
The Sunday Night Reader for 3/6/22
I have to lead with this photo by Ukrainian journalist Iryna Matviyishyn taken at the entrance of a train station in Kyiv. Each of us with a kid in our life has this photo, minus the rifle on a city street. We gave to the International Rescue Committee this week, and I hope you will too.
Couldn’t’ve Happened to a Nicer Guy
Michael Madigan was indicted this week on federal racketeering and bribery charges. Using the something akin to the Blagojevich defense, he claims that prosecutors are “attempting to criminalize a routine constituent service.”
Madigan was a massive, terrible influence on Illinois politics for decades, even before investigators got their teeth into him. And, very likely, he was a crook long before that too. Yet, he reigned for more than 35 years.
As we watch the charges make their way through the courts, take a minute to remember that 19 Democratic members finally ousted him. They refused to back him for another term and that led to him abandoning his seat in the General Assembly. You have to ask yourself why they — or people like them — didn’t act sooner. And, if you’re in CU, you have to ask why Carol Ammons’ name isn’t on that list of people who finally did act.
Nonetheless, good riddance to bad rubbish.
(For years, in a former job, I gave tons of tours. There were any number of less-than-perfect experiences — excitable school kids, disinterested visitors who were just getting their day filled by their hosts, pols who were only there for the photo, and visitors from other countries with whom I shared no common tongue. Mike Madigan was, without question, the worst visitor I ever had. Introduced by an aide, he deigned to shake my hand. He did not speak or look at me the rest of the visit, did not speak or look at the bigwigs who turned out to go with him on the tour. Stood there with his hands in his pockets, grimacing and rocking back on his heels the whole time. Truly unpleasant.)
‘Truthful hyperbole?’
A change-over at the top of the Manhattan District Attorney’s office has led to doubts about whether it will file criminal charges against Donald Trump. The investigations center on the “truthful hyperbole” that Trump used to consistently overvalue his assets in order to trick lenders.
The former guy was proceeding with an indictment. The new guy hasn’t ruled out taking action but has pumped the brakes hard. Veteran prosecutors have resigned at a clip — some because they thought things were moving too fast, some because they thought things are now moving too slow.
The New York Times has a deep-dive on “one of the most consequential prosecutorial decisions in U.S. history. Had the district attorney’s office secured an indictment, Mr. Trump would have been the first current or former president to be criminally charged…
For months, the prosecutors had envisioned charging Mr. Trump — and possibly [Trump Organization CFO Allen] Weisselberg and the Trump Organization — with the crime of “scheming to defraud” for falsely inflating his assets on the statements of financial condition that had been used to obtain bank loans.
But by the end of the year, the prosecutors had switched gears, in part because Mr. Trump’s lenders had not lost money on the loans but had in fact profited from them. The new strategy was to charge Mr. Trump with conspiracy and falsifying business records — specifically his financial statements — a simpler case that essentially amounted to painting Mr. Trump as a liar rather than a thief.” Read more.
Has anyone out there read a solid, in-depth profile of Ketanji Brown Jackson or any insightful opinion pieces about her nomination? I’ve been unsatisfied by everything I’ve seen. Drop any stories you’ve found interesting in the comments.
Beware Easy Lines
Historian Mateusz Fafinski posted an astute Twitter thread this week, dissecting how we think about the battle maps of Ukraine we’re seeing. He used this image from The Guardian to illustrate his argument.
He points out that these maps “might actually (inadvertently) represent the way Putin wants us to think…For all we know Putin's forces are present in most of the areas highlighted here as ‘under Russian control.’ But apart from Crimea and Luhansk and Donetsk separatist areas they don't actually control all of it. Even when Russian forces are present in major cities in those areas we have little knowledge of successful attempts to even temporarily administrate them. The reason for it is simple: it is impossible at this stage, if ever in the foreseeable future.
For Putin such a view, the presence of ‘under Russian control’ on these maps, is actually a boon for his narrative. The more of these are in red (and there will be more), the more those maps confirm that Russia securely controls swathes of Ukrainian territory…This presumption of control, due to the general lack of secure info, will be expressed in maps…[E]very map is a projection of power.
As the war progresses and as the intensity of information war increases maps will only gain in significance. And they will be crucial for establishing a settlement. Beware of maps bearing easy lines.” Read more from Fafinski.
Heavy Rotation
You Love to See It…
Circling Back…
Say It Plain…
