October 30, 2019--Nancy

In a government of incompetents--executive and legislative--there is one shining exception: how the House of Representatives has been handling the impeachment process.

Actually, how Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is managing the investigation.

It easily could have been a fiasco. Three or four committees of the House competing with each other for the lead role in conducting hearings would have sown more confusion than light. The public by now, with short attention spans, would have tuned out and drifted back to watching sports and Dancing With the Stars on TV. 

Trump would be tipped back in his Barka Lounger, puffing on a victory cigar while the rest of us would be left to dread what it would be like to have another four years of Trump, Fox News, Republican senators, and Rudy Giuliani.

But under Pelosi's firm direction we have seen a manageable procession of witnesses who, in the aggregate, are producing a narrative that is coherent and almost certain to lead to the impeachment of Trump and a trial in the Senate.

It is considered unlikely that the Republican-controlled Senate will vote to turn Trump out of office. Acknowledging this, allow me to spin a fantasy--

The aggregated evidence of how Trump's behavior has imperiled our national security is so compelling that before Thanksgiving he is impeached by the House. New evidence emerges that his high crimes and misdemeanors are so felonious that 20 GOP senators vote to expel him. This, along with all Democratic senators, is enough to turn him out of office. 

Mike Pence becomes president and as in the past we do not have a Vice President. (For example during the second term of the Nixon presidency.)

The House Intelligence Committee continues its work, this time with Pence under the microscope. Evidence accumulates quickly that he was even more directly involved than Trump in impeachable behavior when it came to pressuring Ukraine to dig up dirt about the Bidens. 

As a result he is impeached and voted out of office, again by the Senate.

We thus do not have a president until the next in line is sworn in.

The 25th Amendment on presidential succession requires that when there is neither a sitting president nor vice president--the Speaker of the House becomes president.

This means Speaker Nancy Pelosi becomes president.

We would finally have a woman serving as our commander-in-chief. A tough and competent one at that.

September 24, 2018--Rosencrantz & Rosenstein Are Dead

Friday afternoon the New York Times, in a bombshell report, revealed that deputy attorney general, Ron Rosenstein, after just two weeks on the job, was so upset by the president's aberrant behavior that he thought seriously about "wearing a wire" to record some off the mayhem. 

He even thought about talking to the vice president and attorney general (his boss) about the possibility of invoking the 25th Amendment, which sets forth the conditions under which a president can be removed from office. Mind you, again, all this after just two weeks on the job.

Not only did Rosenstein contemplate this but he also told work colleagues about his concerns. Hence, the leak to the Times and the revelations.

This may have a devastating affect on the Mueller investigation in that he reports to Rosenstein and could easily wind up being fired by Trump along with the deputy AG, thereby potentially driving a stake in the heart of Mueller's efforts.

From this self-inflicted error, Trump must feel as if he died and went to heaven. 

Just as Trump was reeling from Paul Manafort flipping and the Kavanaugh nomination potentially collapsing he gets handed a get-out-of-jail-free card by his nemesis, Ron Rosenstein.

How stupid is Rosenstein? Let me count a few of the ways--

If he was so upset by what he was witnessing in the Trump White House and needed to talk about it are FBI and Justice Department colleagues the best people to whom to confess? We can only assume that as soon as Rosenstein finished unburdening himself and drifted down the DOJ hall they speed-dialed 1-800-New York Times. They had some story to share!

Doesn't Rosenstein have a wife with whom he could share this? One who would say, "I hear you darling, but one thing--make sure not to talk about any of this in the office. Especially anything about a wire or the 25th Amendment."

I know I'm sounding cynical but Mueller's investigation is as a result more precarious and Republicans now have validation for their conspiracy theories--witch hunt, rigged investigation, Deep State. I wouldn't be surprised to see GOP poll numbers increase for their midterm election candidates.

To be frank, between now and November 6th all I'm interested in is winning. Until then I don't care who's telling the truth or, for that matter, what the truth is. We're in a political life-and-death struggle and everyone has to be persistent, ruthless, and smart.

In other words, behave like Republicans.

March 5, 2018--Trump: "Pure Madness"

Saturday night I violated Rona's 7:30 PM rule--No Internet surfing after 7:30--and paid the price. 

I didn't sleep much after reading the Washington Post's, "'Pure Madness': Dark Days Inside the White House as Trump Shocks and Rages."

Based on 22 interviews of White House staff and Trump friends, some of them on the record, it paints a deeply disturbing picture of Trump--

At times angry and increasingly isolated. He fumes in private that just about every time he looks up at a television screen, the cable news headlines are trumpeting yet another scandal. He voices frustration that son-in-law Jared Kushner has few on-air defenders. He revives old grudges. And he confides to friends that he is uncertain about whom to trust. . . 

Friends are increasingly concerned about his well-being, worried that the president's obsession with cable commentary and perceived slights is taking a toll on the 71-year-old. "Pure madness," lamented one exasperated ally.  

Retrired four-star general Barry McCaffrey said the American people--and Congress especially--should be alarmed. 

"I think the president is starting to wobble in his emotional stability and this is not going to end well. Trump's judgement is fundamentally flawed, and the more pressure put on him and the more isolated he becomes, I think his ability to do harm is going to increase.

There's more, but this should offer a flavor of the full article and an indication as to why I tossed and turned Saturday night. His "ability to do harm" made me think, of course, about where next and what--North Korea? Nuclear war?

"Pure madness" is not the best orientation for a president in an increasingly dangerous world.

Before my attempt to sleep a friend called, all excited.

"Did you see the piece in the Post?" I said nothing. "Very exciting, no? He's going down! We got him! He's unravelling, which is great. I'm so excited. I think it's terrific that they have him and his family in pincers. The sooner they take them away in handcuffs or, in his case, a straight jacket, the better."

I continued to say nothing, letting him go on and he eventually hung up, laughing gleefully.

The call was disturbing for reasons I at first did not fully understand. Why was I not also feeling gleeful? I have been coming to despise Trump since early in the campaign and later enjoyed watching and chronicling his decline as Robert Mueller and his investigators pressed closer to Trump's inner circle, his family of grifters, and especially Trump himself.

So the report in the Post was good news, no?

Yes, but also, I came to feel, no. 

The "yes" is obvious--Trump has been a political and cultural disaster, driving wedges of fear and hatred between Americans. Along racial lines. Along gender lines. Along religious lines. And of course he has taken the lead in coarsening political discourse, whatever little of it that remains.

The "no" case, less so. On a personal level I do not enjoy seeing any form of human suffering even, as in Trump's case, when deserved. And so to see him being driven literally mad has not given me much pleasure. OK, I admit, some.

And I have been enjoying the spectacle of his political implosion. The more things that contribute to that the better. He brought this and more upon himself. To be destroyed by the forces he himself largely unleashed seems Aristotelian, Shakespearean, Freudian. 

At some highest level of human retribution the self-imposed form of being held accountable is most just and satisfying. It also, in political terms, suggests that even when fully tested the "system" has the capacity to work.

Nothing that new here. 

But then why the continuing rub and agitation?  The sense that something extra-dangerous is happening? The very things I was feeing most satisfied about--the ways in which retribution was wicking out--after reading the Post article felt as if the very devolution of that reckoning has been contributing to the danger.

How, I wondered, would pushing Trump over the edge, watching, gleefully or not, as he approached the edge of his own capacity to survive, why was it feeling as if these facts themselves were contributing to making things worse, more dangerous?

His decline into pure madness increased the likelihood of Trump doing additional harm. Back to that.

By 2:00 AM Sunday morning I came to feel we should be focusing on how to help Trump no longer be president.

I use the passive voice intentionally. To suggest that it no longer primarily should be about seeking to remove him from office, from invoking the 25th Amendment to pressing for impeachment. Since the Republicans control Congress all of these strategies are likely to fail. It is thus urgent to find other strategies that lead to not having Trump any longer serving as our president. A subtle distinction.

About this I have not as yet formulated many things to suggest to contribute to this. But, I am coming to feel that the ceaseless attacking may no longer be effective. Perhaps it is having the opposite effect. He is digging in deeper, doubling down.

I sense we are not any longer helping by spending hours each day eager to pounce on, comment about, or make mocking reference to his every unhinged tweet ("Alec," not "Alex" Baldwin). 

No matter how satisfying it feels, inciting him will only contribute to his further unravelling and the likelihood that as he is further isolated and cornered he will, as General McCaffrey warns, do more actual harm.

Let things topple under their own weight. They already are and they will continue to do so.

And so we should encourage "Alex," as much as he tickles us, to put aside his version of Donald Trump and let things run their current course. 

In many ways the Trump presidency is already over. Where it isn't, however, where as commander-in-chief he can act unilaterally, dangers lurk. Thus we should seek ways to not inadvertently contribute to unleashing them.

August 16, 2017--Donald Trump's Hostage Tape

Does anyone believe that the statement President Trump finally made on Monday, two days after the violence, murder, and deaths in Charlottesville, came from his heart?

If so, everyone should now know better.

In his initial comments on Saturday, after failing to call out by name the Ku Klux Klan, white supremacists, and neo-Nazi thugs, he was excoriated on all sides, by some Republicans (kudos to Marco Rubio) and most Democrats, for his unwillingness to do so and especially for striking the absurd, moral equivalent comparison when he condemned violence "from many sides."

He tried to clean it up on Sunday by having a White House spokesman release a statement that most still felt did not go far enough because it failed to mention white supremacists by name and included criticism of violence allegedly perpetrated by "other [presumably liberal] hate groups."

Still under immense pressure, on Monday, sticking close to the text on his teleprompter, he called out hate groups by name and restrained himself from making any reference to those from the many sides--

Racism is evil [he forced himself to say]. And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the K.K.K., neo-Nazis, white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.

If he had uttered these words closer to the time of the act of domestic terrorism, he probably could have retained at least some credibility. He could have made reference to his claim on February 16th when he boasted--"I am the least anti-semitic, least racist person ever. [My italics.]

Of course, that would have been suspect based on things he actually said and did for at least the past two years.

On July 8, 2015, less than a month after announcing he was running for president he, defamed Mexicans--

When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. . . . They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problem with us [sic]. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some I assume are good people.

He also has failed to explicitly mention Jews even when recalling the Holocaust. On February 27, 2017, for example, critics say, his failure to do so "generalizes" one of the worst genocides in history.

And, of course, his rise to political prominence was based on his five-year racist assault on Barack Obama's citizenship and thus the legitimacy of his presidency.

The list goes on. Stating a version of, "Some of my best friends are (fill in the blank) doesn't work. In fact, it makes his denial sound even hollower.

Monday morning, on Morning Joe, marketing expert Donny Deutsch told it like it is. He said--

He is a racist. Can we just say it once and for all, when we look at his history? When we look at the housing issues [in 1973 Trump was sued by the Justice Department for discriminating against African American renters], when you look at what he said about reverse discrimination against whites, the birther movement. We have a racist as a president who is a man who cannot stand up and condemn the Ku Klux Klan and Nazism is a racist.

From Trump's facial expressions and body language on Monday as he read the comments prepared for him by those trying to "handle" him, it looked as if he was delivering a hostage tape. And he was.

He is a hostage of his own devising. How many more bridges will he burn as he becomes more and more desperate to hold on to his dwindling base of supporters?

Three days ago, David Duke, former head of the KKK and fervent Trump supporter told the truth. He said, "We are determined to take our country back. We are going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump."

Trump continues to repay that scabrous debt.

And by yesterday afternoon he again reversed himself, saying the counter demonstrators were "very, very violent."

From his fury we knew he was unscripted and speaking from his heart.

It is time to consider implementing the 25th Amendment. He is not fit to be our president.

July 3, 2017--Jack: Political Bull Fight

"I know you love Joe and Mika."

"Not really," I said to Jack who has taken up residence in the Bristol Diner.

"Don't you watch Morning Joe all the time?"

"Not so much in Maine where we limit our TV watching. Especially cable news."

"But I assume you're aware of the flap between them and Trump?"

"How could I not be, though I already disagree with you."

"I'm all ears."

"It's not between them. It's a situation that Trump created by his venomous tweets. And I mean them since the tweets were almost as nasty about Joe Scarborough as they were about Mika Brzezinski. I think the president called him a psycho, among other things. And of course got into all that blood business again, this time about Mika bleeding from the chin."

"And you think Mika and Joe are wholly innocent?"

"Whatever they might have said about Trump is not in any way equivalent. He's the president of the most powerful country in the history of the world and they are talkshow hosts."

"Let me quote a few things to you that on the air they said about Trump. Let's see if you feel they crossed the line."

"Before you begin let me agree in advance to one thing."

"I can't wait to hear this."

"During the campaign for the Republican nomination Joe and Mika, like a lot of other TV and print people, cozied up to Trump because he was a good story, quotable, and whenever he was on the air they would see their ratings skyrocket. And of course it was good for Trump as well as it gave him many millions of dollars worth of free air time. It was win-win for them while for the country it was lose-lose."

"And then," Jack said, "after he was elected they thought he would continue to be their pal and remain available to them. But once he was in the Oval Office he was no longer so eager to be on their show. He had other ways to communicate with his base. Mainly via Fox News. And tweeting of course. Joe and Mike admitted at the end of last week that he cut them off when they began to criticize him after they tried to influence his appointments and policies. He ignored them and they felt used, left out, conned. All of which they were."

"So far there's nothing new about this," I said, "Talkshow people like Sean Hannity, Mika and Joe, and real journalists are all about their contacts and sources. They live off access and leaks."

"That's why they snuck off to Mar-a-Lago New Years. To hobnob with Trump."

"It's an ugly business all a round. But remember, Trump's the president and what he said about the two of them went way over the line. Though as Maureen Dowd said yesterday, he's not a sexist pig but a pig."

"I'll get to her in a minute," Jack said, "but before I do, do you disagree that over the past few months Mika and Joe have questioned his stability, mental health, and ability to serve as president? This is different than criticizing his policies and the activities of his cabinet and White House staff. This is to call him crazy."

"But again," I said, "he's the PRESIDENT (all caps) of the United States. They are, what, by comparison small time operators. If he could manage to keep his mouth shut or stop tweeting, basically ignore them, that would be the best way to retaliate. Ignoring them is the best way to deal with people with big personalities and egos."

"But again, I mentioned Mika and Joe not to talk that much about them but about something that should be of greater concern to you."

"I'm happy to move on. Do you want to talk now about Maureen Dowd's column where she did in fact call him a pig?"

"Not about that," Jack said, "but about something else she wrote. More in line with what Brzezinski and Scarborough and the people appearing on their show have bene staying about him. Let me read you something she wrote this weekend--

"He is not built for this hostile environment [Washington, DC] and it shows in his deteriorating psychological state."

"What's wrong with that?"

"First of all, Joe and Mika and Maureen are not psychiatrists. Calling him reprehensible is one thing, but attacking his mental health is another matter. Are they beginning to make the case that he's psychologically impaired and so it's time to roll out the 25th Amendment and declare him incompetent to continue as president? If so, expect people in the streets with torches and pitchforks."

"I could see that happening," I said, "His people are pretty riled up. Many, worse than that."

"One more thing--there was that New York Times' lead editorial on Saturday--'Mr. Trump, Melting Under Criticism.'"

"I saw that."

"And what did you think?"

"I basically agreed with it."

"I have to agree with some of it as well--particularly the part that criticizes him for all his disgusting references to bleeding, really women's bleeding. It's obviously some sort of reference to menstrual blood. He must have male menophobia--an actual condition. But now here I go playing psychiatrist! What concerns me is the title of the piece. How it too suggests Trump's unfit, maybe psychologically unfit to be president. The Times even praises Nixon, if you can believe it, for the 'grace,' that's the word they used, with which he handled the press during the height of Watergate. That's as low a blow as anyone could deliver to a president--comparing him unfavorably to Nixon."

I said, "I too thought that was way below the belt. Nixon was disgraceful when it came to the press. He illegally wiretapped dozens of them and got the IRS to audit many of their taxes. That doesn't qualify as grace."

"But here's my real concern--do you and your friends really want to see Trump meting down, cornered? I mean, he appears to be very thin skinned and if he feels trapped who knows how he might act or, worse, retaliate. And I'm not talking tweets and stupid videos of Trump body slamming a fake CNN reporter at a WrestleMania  match. I'm talking Syria, North Korea, Putin, China, and a few other little things like that."

"Say more," I said, "And by the way, you're being very reasonable this morning."

He ignored that and said, "From your perspective would you want an out-of-control Trump or Mike Pense in charge? Pence who could probably work more effectively with Congress?"

"I'll have to think about it. I did write a few months ago that from a progressive perspective a weak Trump for three-and-a-half more years may be the best thing to hope for."

"You told me once that when you spent a half year in Mexico and during your times in Spain you enjoyed bull fights."

"I admit that I did. I know it's not politically correct, but I went to a lot of corrida de toros."

"And as part of every fight in an attempt to weaken the bull the banderillas planted barbed sticks in its shoulders. This did weaken him, lowered his head, but also enraged him and, my point, made him more dangerous."

"I am getting your analogy."

"I know you and your friends are enjoying Trump's fall, but maybe you're also making him more dangerous. If I were you, I'd think about this."

April 5, 2017--25th Amendment

Monday on Morning Joe, Joe and Mika reviewed the storm of tweets that poured forth on Saturday and Sunday from Donald Trump.

They were clearly dismayed.

Usually, Trump's weekend tweets appear only on Saturday mornings when his family handlers, daughter Ivanka and son-in-law Jared Kushner, practicing Jews, are observing Shabbas. On that day orthodox Jews are forbidden to work and this even includes turning on electrial devices such as stoves, TVs, and smart phones.

Knowing this, it is during this window when he is not under surveillance that Trump as the bad boy he is is at his most uncensored and outrageous. But he goes silent when Ivanka and Jared are again wired up or, if he does tweet any more, knowing they are monitoring him, he is more restrained.

But last weekend, perhaps in part because Jared as quasi Secretary of State was secretly flying off for a visit to Iraq, he published perhaps a dozen tweets. As Joe and Mika reviewed them on air, their dismay turned to horror.

"Who is this person?" Joe asked rhetorically, "I thought we knew him." Mika shrugged and smiled. They thought they knew him from more than a year of having him as a constant presence on their program. He would call in most mornings and they would keep him talking often for up to a commercial-free hour. They rode his wave of popularity as he rode theirs. His poll numbers rose as did their ratings. More viewers tuned into Morning Joe than all other cable shows other than the preposterous and inane Fox & Friends.

An early Saturday morning tweet asked--

When will Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd and @NBCNews start talking about the Obama SURVEILLANCE SCANDAL and stop with the Fake Trump/Russian story?

Not exactly a haiku. And, as Joe and Mika noted, the more things capitalized the more agitated the Commander in Chief.

Then they pointed out, "Sleepy Eyes" is not one of Trump's best sobriquets. It doesn't compare with "Crooked Hillary," "Little Marco," "Lyin' Ted," or for Elisabeth Warren, "Pocahontas."

Another email, a non sequitur asked--

It is the same Fake News Media that said there is "no path to victory for Trump" that is now pushing the phony Russia story. A total scam!

And, still obsessed with Hillary (he can't get over the fact that she beat him by almost 3.0 million popular votes)--

Did Hillary Clinton ever apologize for receiving answers to the debate? Just asking!

For the uninitiated, the "answers" he referred to are actually questions that CNN reporters prepared to pose to Clinton during one of her debates with Bernie Sanders. They were passed along to her campaign by Donna Brazil who was vice president of the Democratic National Committee and a CNN contributor. She subsequently lost both jobs.

At that point, Mika Brzezinski, in visible pain, as if to herself, mumbled, "24th Amendment."

Joe corrected her, "You mean the 25th."

"You think it's time . . . ?"

"I'm beginning to think maybe . . ."

Having depressed themselves they stared blankly into the camera for what felt like an endless five minutes.

To review--the 25th Amendment, which was ratified in 1967, spells out presidential succession. The amendment was needed since the original Constitution was ambiguous about who would become president if the chief executive died or was otherwise incapacitated. In the original document it was not clear if the Vice President was to be the successor. So that needed straightening out.

Also, there was insufficient guidance about what would happen if the president were alive but disabled by, say, a stroke or mental breakdown and how that would be determined. They took great care about this as the amenders did not want to encourage coup d'etats based on false diagnoses.

It is this latter circumstance that is addressed in Section 4 and was alluded to by Mika and Joe.

In its entirety, it reads--

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments [Cabinet members] or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

This has never happened, but if the amendment had existed during Woodrow Wilson's presidency, it would not have been possible, when he had a massive stroke early in his second term, for his wife, hiding the extent of his disabilities, for all intents and purposes, to serve as acting president for his remaining three years. Section 4 would have been invoked and the VP would have assumed the presidency.

And during Richard Nixon's final days in office, with the 25th Amendment in place, with the president substantially incapacitated because of the drip, drip, drip of Watergate, because he was so out of rational control, a number of his senior advisers thought seriously about enforcing Section 4.

Though they did not do that, he thankfully resigned, but before he did so, among themselves they agreed to tell the Joint Chiefs of Staff that if Nixon late one night, while reeling and raging from too much alcohol, transmitted the nuclear codes that would send nuclear missiles and bombers on a preemptive strike against the Soviet Union, that they should risk treason and not comply.

We are currently not at that point, perhaps, hopefully, far from it; but Joe and Mika spoke the words of deep concern and none of their guests demurred.

But then, a day or two later, from this current scandal that keeps on giving, we learned about Susan Rice's alleged role in "unmasking" Trump aides and secret meetings with the Russians in the Seychelles prior to the new administration taking office to establish a "back channel" connection between Trump and Putin.

Myself, I prefer Claire Danes and Homeland.

It's only an hour an episode and it's fiction. Though by the day it is feeling more and more like reality.

Claire Danes