The Late, Great G. Gordon Liddy

“When the legend becomes fact, print the legend,” as the famous line from an old Western says, and G. Gordon Liddy was certainly a legend.

Most famously, Liddy was the man in charge of the so-called “Plumbers,” assigned to stop national-security leaks in the Nixon administration after the “Pentagon Papers” were published. It must be remembered, when we are discussing the Watergate scandal, that Nixon was trying to bring the Vietnam War to a successful conclusion by forcing the Communists to negotiate a ceasefire agreement. The so-called “peace” movement in the United State was an impediment to that effort, despite the fact that no one was more eager than Nixon himself to end U.S. involvement in Vietnam. By 1972, Nixon had drastically reduced the size of the U.S. troop deployment to Vietnam, but he was at all times an enemy of Communism, and the Commies were doing everything they could to undermine Nixon’s presidency. This is crucial to understanding why the “Plumbers” morphed into a dirty-tricks squad, engaged in intelligence operations against the Democrats in 1972.

The great irony of the Watergate break-in is that it was completely unnecessary. Nixon was on his way to a re-election landslide over the hapless George McGovern, and no dirty tricks were needed. Liddy never denied his responsibility in the scandal that destroyed Nixon’s presidency, but famously refused to cooperate with the investigation:

Mr. Liddy refused to cooperate with prosecutors and Congress, and was sentenced in March 1973 to a 20-year prison term for conspiracy, burglary and illegal wiretapping. President Jimmy Carter commuted Liddy’s sentence in 1977 and he was released after 52 months behind bars.
By his own account, the Liddy of the Watergate break-in was a product of the culture wars of the 1960s. “The nation was at war not only externally in Vietnam but internally,” he said in his 1980 autobiography “Will,” which sold more than 1 million copies. “I had learned long ago the maxims of Cicero that ‘laws are inoperative in war’ and that ‘the good of the people is the chief law.’ ” . . .
Mr. Liddy refused to testify before the grand jury investigating Watergate, saying he had not been raised to be “a snitch or a rat.” But his silence failed to prevent the disintegration of the coverup after Nixon’s reelection in November 1972. When [James W.] McCord began to cooperate with investigators in March 1973, Dean and other Nixon aides concluded that it was every man for himself and negotiated their own immunity deals.

How many people do you know who would be willing to go from a White House job to federal prison, rather than turn snitch?

Liddy believed he had done his patriotic duty, and if that meant he must go to prison, so be it, but his code of personal honor did not require that he act as a witness against others involved in Watergate. Liddy never hesitated to denounce John Dean as a selfish coward after Dean became a chief witness against Nixon in the impeachment investigation.

“Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time” — that’s all you need to know, when it comes to situations like this. Trying to get a break from prosecutors by ratting out your accomplices is a punk move, and whatever you say about G. Gordon Liddy, he was no punk.

Some 20 years ago, I was first interviewed as a guest on Mr. Liddy’s talk-radio show, which at its peak reached an audience of 10 million. I returned for many other interviews with “The G Man,” who famously described himself as “virile, vigorous and potent” into his 80s.

Mr. Liddy relished his reputation as a right-wing tough guy, a scourge of liberals everywhere, and his success in talk radio let him have the last laugh against those who tried to destroy him. Think about this — is John Dean a hero to anyone? No, but Mr. Liddy was a hero to millions who shared his belief that re-electing Nixon in 1972 was a patriotic duty, and if that duty involved a few dirty tricks against Democrats . . .?

Well, he served his time in federal prison, but he was no punk.

R.I.P., G Man.




 

What the Princess Said

“We are trying to do all we can to help our gallant sailors, soldiers, and airmen, and we are trying, too, to bear our own share of the danger and sadness of war. We know, every one of us, that in the end all will be well. For God will care for us, and bring us victory and peace.”
— Princess Elizabeth, October 1940

What sort of suffering has Meghan Markle ever endured that could be compared to what the English people endured during World War II?

In October 1940, when 14-year-old Princess Elizabeth went on the BBC to assure her nation’s children that “God will care for us,” England had been under attack by Hitler’s Luftwaffe for three months. More than 14,000 British civilians died during the Nazi bombing campaign, to say nothing of the hundreds of brave RAF pilots who died in aerial combat against the Germans. England was entirely alone against Hitler for more than a year between the collapse of France in June 1940 and the U.S. entry into the war in December 1941. What enormous sacrifices the British people made, and what terrible hardships they endured, during that lonely fight against Hitler’s war machine, ought to inspire eternal admiration. Alas, most of us have forgotten what the British did in “their finest hour,” just as we have forgotten our own courageous history:

One of the great insights of Edmund Burke’s monumental treatise Reflections on the Revolution in France is his defense of the principle of inheritance in government. Burke argued against certain radical theorists who claimed that Britain’s limited monarchy meant that the King of England’s title was dependent upon the “right” of the people to “choose” their ruler. No such right existed under the British constitution, Burke made clear, citing the pedigree by which the king held his crown as an inheritance, just as the king’s subjects held their liberties as an inheritance.
This principle of heredity as the basis of government might strike most Americans as archaic. If they would take time to read our Constitution, however, they would find that it was the solemn intent of the Founding Fathers to “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” Thus, our rights as Americans have been bequeathed to us as an inheritance — a gift from our remote ancestors — and we can see in Burke’s argument how the rights of Englishmen were likewise inherited, through the same historical processes by which the king inherited his crown. . . .

Read the rest of my latest column at The American Spectator.




 

Rush Limbaugh, R.I.P.

The talk-radio legend has died at age 70, and his frequent guest-host, Mark Steyn, has a tribute to the man who attracted the largest radio audience in the world. Did you catch that?

Throughout his entire time on air, there were genius GOP consultants who, in reaction to any electoral setbacks, would insist that what the GOP needed to do was come up with a way to ditch Limbaugh. As I said on air many years ago: Really? For almost a third of a century, Rush’s audience was over half the total Republican vote. How many do all you genius “Republican reformers” bring to the table? I’ve recounted previously the first time I was asked to guest-host, back in 2006, when I happened to be down in Australia and the Prime Minister, John Howard, asked me to some or other event a day or two hence. And I politely declined, saying I had to get back to America to host The Rush Limbaugh Show. “I hear that’s a pretty big show,” said the PM.
“Yeah,” I replied. “Twenty-five, thirty million listeners.”
“‘Strewth,” said Mr Howard. “Rush has more listeners than we have Australians.”
Indeed. And all these GOP clever-clogs never explain, once you throw Rush and his millions overboard, what’s going to replace them.

Most critics of Limbaugh simply never acknowledged this truth. From the time Fox News began to be recognized nationally — the 2000 election was a turning-point of sorts — there was an inordinate amount of attention paid to Fox while, the whole time, Rush was reaching a larger audience. Five days a week, three hours a day.

Rush was the best there ever was, and to all intents and purposes invented an entire new media category. Until Rush came along, “talk radio” was about interviewing guests. Rush seldom had guests, and instead focused on using actualities (“sound bites”) from current news events as the fodder for his commentary. His use of sound bites was the real innovative breakthrough in what Rush did, more so even than his interactions with call-in listeners. The main thing about Limbaugh was, he was a radio professional before he ever became a political commentator. He had worked as a Top 40 deejay from the time he was a teenager, and understood how radio works. His braggadocio — “Talent on loan from God,” etc. — was part of his genius as an entertainer.

To be successful on radio requires that the host establish a personal connection with the audience, and so Rush had to humanize himself for his listeners, to get them to think of him as a friend, to create a sense of shared experience — “we’re all in this together.” Listeners would sometimes complain when Rush would talk about anything except politics. He’d come on the air Monday afternoon and start talking about the previous day’s NFL games, or he’d talk about playing golf, and after 15 minutes or so, he’d remark that the callers were on the line complaining that he wasn’t talking about politics. But you can’t be 100% politics all the time, or you’ll burn out. Politics isn’t everything in life, so there was Rush on the radio talking to millions of people about the football game he’d watched on TV Sunday. This is what I mean by Rush humanizing himself to the audience. Radio was his job, and doing an occasional change of pace — that’s called entertainment.

Three or four times, Rush actually read my articles on his show, and I’d get phone calls and messages from friends I hadn’t heard from in years: “Man, I heard you on Rush!” It was a pretty big deal.

One of the oldest maxims in show business is “always leave ’em wanting more,” and Rush Limbaugh has certainly done that. R.I.P.




 

‘Fame Whore’ Update: Hurry Up, Guys, Julia Allison Is Available Again

Julia Baugher, a/k/a Julia Allison, in a 2012 interview.

“Young women who believe they can whore their way into a committed, long term relationship with top quality men have mental health issues.”
— from a recent Reddit thread about Julia Allison

Readers may remember Julia Baugher, a/k/a Julia Allison, the erstwhile Internet celebrity who tried to make Sex in the City her guide to the happy life, only to suffer shame and heartbreak as a consequence. At one point in 2010, she was publicly recognized as the girlfriend of John Sidney “Jack,” McCain IV, son of the Arizona senator and then a 25-year-old Navy pilot, but like all of Julia’s relationships, that ended badly. About six months into their affair, after she had moved into Jack’s apartment, Julia was reportedly evicted by Jack’s mother.

In 2014, Julia “married herself” at the Burning Man festival and, falling head-first into the whole “alternative” culture, began dating a New Age hippie musician who called himself “Rain PhuturePrimitive.” That ended in 2017 when he decided he was into “polyamory,” and in 2018, Julia had an epiphany and decided it was time to settle down with a “reasonable choice” — a relationship which a few months later predictably went down in flames like the Hindenburg at Lakehurst.

“File it and forget it” is my usual modus operandi, and I hadn’t given any thought to checking up on Julia Allison for more than two years until Tuesday, when I noticed some incoming traffic from a Reddit thread, reporting that Julia had been dumped — again! — and was now back on the dating market at age 39. Unfortunately, the anti-Julia hate site “RebloggingDonk” has disappeared, so there is no longer an online clearinghouse for gossip about the erstwhile relationship-advice columnist. According to a tipster, however, what happened was this: Julia had been dating a doctor in the San Francisco area, who shall remain nameless. She used the COVID-19 pandemic as an excuse to move in with him, but after a few months of her craziness, he kicked her out.

Allegedly, I hasten to add. Julia’s father is a lawyer who has been known to threaten lawsuits, and it is therefore my obligation to emphasize that this is just “sources say,” as unverified as anything a D.C. journalist reports from anonymous “White House officials.” However, a quick glance at her Instagram account reveals that Julia is now in Bali, and has apparently deleted all posts about her previous relationship.

Did you know that Julia Baugher once published a 73-point checklist of conditions for any guy who wanted to date her? A digital copy of the complete list has been archived at Reddit, and you have to marvel at the lack of self-awareness of a woman who begins her list by stating that a man must love her “unconditionally,” then sets out 72 conditions necessary for her to reciprocate his love. Meanwhile . . .

Speaking of updates, you are simply not going to believe this one. Do you remember Kaitlyn Hunt, the teenage Florida lesbian who briefly became a gay-rights cause célèbre in 2013 after she was charged with illegally having sex with a 15-year-old? What made that story so fascinating was not necessarily Kaitlyn’s legal problems — what part of “take the plea bargain” is so hard to understand? — but rather the deranged behavior of the online #FreeKate cult that sprang up around the case.

Indian River County Jail inmate Kaitlyn Hunt in November 2013

It was, really, not much different from most other statutory rape cases, except that Kaitlyn and her deranged supporters seemed to believe they could pressure prosecutors to drop the charges by accusing them of “homophobia.” The problem with that belief, however, is that such a precedent would have rendered Florida’s age-of-consent laws effectively null and void. If the people of Florida really wanted to declare 15-year-olds “fair game,” they could lobby their legislature to change the law, but the #FreeKate lunatics thought they could turn Kaitlyn into a civil-rights hero for underage homosexuality. There were several obvious problems with this belief, including the fact that Kaitlyn was sending sexual videos of herself to her underage girlfriend, providing prosecutors with digital evidence that could not be ignored. When all was said and done, Kaitlyn spent Thanksgiving 2013 in the Indian River County Jail. She was eventually sentenced to three years probation. She then married an older lesbian named Latisha Thomas, with whom she had a son, reportedly conceived by artificial insemination. Well, guess what?

1. Kaitlyn and Latisha broke up;
2. Last year, Kaitlyn announced she was engaged again;
3. And also, pregnant;
4. She recently gave birth;
and
5. She’s actually in a relationship with . . . a man!

How she boomeranged around into heterosexuality is, I’m sure, a very interesting story. When a tipster informed me of this development, I could scarcely believe it, and asked if there were some online evidence. Now that I’ve actually seen the photos, I believe it, even though I find it impossible to understand. How does someone go from being a lesbian cause célèbre at 19 to being a heterosexual housewife at 27?

Is there a moral to this strange tale? Well, I guess if you’re a guy looking to settle down, you’ll have better luck with a lonely lesbian than you would with Julia Allison. But your mileage may vary.




 

Blondes (Still) Have More Fun

Is it a matter of opinion?
Or just a contradiction?
But from where I come from,
All the blondes have more fun.
Well, just watch them sisters on a Saturday night,
Peroxide causin’ all the fights.

Oh, the memories of those days, when my glorious golden mane made the girls stop and stare! Walking around with shoulder-length rock star hair as a skinny teenage boy in the Deep South was slightly dangerous, but the benefits — well, Rod Stewart knew what he was talking about.

Amid this grim season of post-election gloom, I found something to smile about this morning when I saw Alana Stewart — Rod’s first ex-wife, and also the ex-wife of movie star George Hamilton — tearing it up on her Twitter. Now a 75-year-old grandma, Alana is on Team #MAGA.

Screen-capped for posterity, because it’s probably just a matter of time before she’s banned like everybody else who’s not a Democrat.

She’s a Texas girl, you know. Texans love a good fight.




 

‘Mi Casa en Beacon Hill’

It was discovered that Alec Baldwin’s wife, who pretended to be a Spaniard named “Hilaria,” is in fact a New England WASP of colonial stock who was known as Hillary Hayward-Thomas to her private-school classmates at the Cambridge School of Weston, growing up in a five-bedroom home in the prestigious Beacon Hill neighborhood of Boston.

The most interesting aspect of this fraud is how Alec Baldwin himself has acted as an accomplice in his fake-Spanish wife’s hoax. Ace of Spades pointed out that there are video clips of Baldwin making media appearances in which he mocked his wife’s “Spanish” accent:

Obvious question: How could Baldwin not know the truth?

Obvious answer: It’s impossible. We must assume that Baldwin has met his wife’s parents, Dr. Kathryn Hayward and attorney David Thomas Jr. Since her parents are entirely American — they retired to the Mediterranean resort of Mallorca, but living on a Spanish island doesn’t make you a Spaniard — Baldwin must know his wife’s accent is phony.

Just FYI: My oldest daughter’s husband is Argentine, and she spent a full year in a Spanish-language immersion program in Argentina. She is fluent in Spanish, and they use both languages in their home, but my daughter doesn’t speak English with an accent. Do you see the point?

No matter how fluent in Spanish one might become, a native speaker of English doesn’t lose the ability to speak English, yet “Hilaria” Baldwin pretends she doesn’t know the English word for “cucumber.”

So what’s this about? We know that “Hilaria” owned a chain of yoga studios in New York. Is it possible that there is some sort of government program in New York that grants favorable treatment to minority-owned businesses, and that she was taking advantage of that? Because otherwise I cannot think of any other reason why this Yankee WASP would pretend to be Hispanic, except perhaps that she might be mentally ill.

Well, she did marry Alec Baldwin . . .




 

No More Mr. Nice Kruiser

Stephen Kruiser is normally a nice guy, a comedian, a joker. Humor is his natural métier, but yesterday he announced a new policy:

“I didn’t used to be this mean-spirited about politics but after what they did for the last four years I find myself a bit bereft of any charitable feelings for the Democrats.”

That got him a shout-out from Rush Limbaugh, referring to the massive Trump rally in Georgia over the weekend:

[Democrats] thought all this was gonna go away. They believed that the Republicans would give up, that they would recognize that they’ve been defeated and just go away. And it isn’t happening. . . .
The whole point of making America great again or putting America first, it is as important now as it was in 2016. And just because there’s been a potential electoral setback, it doesn’t mean that they’re gonna disband, and they’re not gonna become the Tea Party where you can’t see ’em anymore. They’re gonna be active. They’re gonna continue to be a thorn in the Democrat Party’s side. And that’s going to be fun.

This is not the kind of “fun” we might have wished for, but you have to take what you get and be grateful. No more Mr. Nice Guy.

Remember: There will be a giant #StopTheSteal rally Saturday in D.C.




 

Erstwhile #Resistance Spokesman Now Presumes to Lecture Republican Voters

It’s bad enough that the same people who spent four years denying the legitimacy of the Trump presidency — because RUSSIA! — are now lecturing us about the need to accept a Biden presidency. The people who claimed the 2016 election was “hacked” by Putin are now telling us that it is an outrageous conspiracy theory to doubt the election result based on video showing hidden troves of ballots being counted in the wee hours of the morning after election monitors had left the room.

We have actually seen obituaries of the dead people who “voted” this year, yet we are told there is “no evidence” the election was stolen.

As bad as all this is — and I’ve deliberately avoided paying attention to it, out of concern for maintaining my sanity — do we need fat Democrat millionaires lecturing us about our health?

Filmmaker-activist Michael Moore attempted to reach across the aisle and speak directly to Trump supporters in the latest episode of his “Rumble” podcast this week. But he ended up using his olive branch to deliver a spanking, blaming MAGA nation for spreading the coronavirus and predicting that “many of you are going to die.”
In his podcast, Moore plead with Trump supporters to wear masks and practice social distancing. “I don’t want you to die,” he said, adding perhaps jokingly that it would give him too easy a victory in his battle with the right.
“If we don’t pull together as Americans, we’re not going to get out of this,” Moore said, noting that “It’s in all the red states, it’s growing faster there than anywhere else.”
Moore also offered a grim forecast for those who refuse to get on board with the program. “Many of you are going to die.”
Growing audibly more agitated, the Oscar-winning filmmaker began lashing out at Trump supporters.
“Why do you want to die? Why — to take a stand against us liberals, to show us a thing or two?” he asked. “You’re showing us how to die. Why do you want to do that?”
He added: “In all the places that voted for Trump, people are dropping like flies.”

This is simply not true. It is demonstrably false. In Democrat-controlled New Mexico, for example, the virus is out of control, despite (or perhaps because of) the state’s drastic lockdown regime. The daily death toll from COVID-19 has spiked to record levels in Democrat-controlled California, and this week, the state with the most COVID-19 deaths was not a pro-Trump “red state” stronghold, but Democrat-controlled Illinois.

Anyone — even someone as profoundly stupid as Michael Moore — can find these facts with a quick Google search, so if the truth was easily available and yet Michael Moore is not telling the truth, is there a word for that? Yes, he is lying. Michael Moore is a big fat liar.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to watch some college football. It’s for my mental health. Hit the freaking tip jar. Thank you.