March 6, 2019--Jack: T-PAC

It's that time of year when conservatives gather for the annual CPAC conference. 

The highlight this time was the appearance Sunday afternoon of Donald Trump who spoke for nearly two-and-a-half hours! Fidel-Castro, Mussolini-length, and surely a CPAC record for the longest expletive-larded speech ever. 

Trump had a lot on his mind. Most of it from agita. 

Just a few days earlier, while Michael Cohen was testifying before the House Oversight Committee, he was on Air Force One heading back to Washington from the collapsed summit with Kim Jong-un. At about the same time the New York Times was reporting that he personally countermanded his senior intelligence advisers and granted his son-in-law top secret security clearance.

And so he seized the opportunity to get many grievances off his chest and the audience loved every minute of it. They were as one. So much so that they stood and cheered for more than a disgraceful minute when he proclaimed John McCain dead. Tearfully, it will be a moment they will share with their Republican grandchildren.

Slumped and weary-looking as if he were bearing the weight of the world on his shoulders, Trump entered stage right where a lonely American flag stood, forlorn and limp on its pole. As if just happening to notice the flag, slowly he approached it, bending to embrace it. He coddled and rocked it in his arms as if he was comforting a loved one. With a sad smile, moving his lips dramatically so all could read them, he said, "My baby."

While streaming his remarks a day or two later to see if my eyes had deceived me on Sunday, the phone rang, and, as if he knew what I was up to, I was not surprised that it was Jack.


"I was watching your favorite show," he said, without even a greeting. "'Morning Joe.' All they could talk about was that speech. To tell you the truth I agreed with Joe and his guests that the slur about John McCain was way off base. Especially coming from someone who managed to dodge the draft."

"That was the lowest of many low points," I said.

Jack said, "But off that performance, if you guys are not careful you could be looking at six more years of our president." He chuckled at the prospect.

"Enlighten me."

"One of Joe Scarborough's quests, someone from the Washington Post, called Trump insane. He said if you had an old grandfather that crazy you'd lock him up in the attic. Another guest accused Trump of being 'unhinged.'"

"That was Eugene Robinson," I muttered.

"And then Mike Barnicle chimed is to say that the only thing missing was for Trump to show up wearing paper slippers."

"He's a regular," I said.

"I actually thought that was pretty funny. But he and the others totally missed the bigger point."

"Which is?"

"Look, who am I to tell you guys what to do, but if you want to win in 2020 you need to get your act together. Not only have you given Trump a perfect person to run against . . ."

"Spare me. It's a long time before we have a candidate. Now it's just a couple of dozen hopefuls looking to gain traction. It's premature to talk about running against Trump. We first have to sort things out."

"I mean,"Jack said, "We used to have Nancy Pelosi to run against--which I admit didn't work out so well in 2018--but now we have that girl from the Bronx. I can never remember her name . . ."

"Alexander Ocasio-Cortez."

"You have initials for her, right?"

"Some people refer to her as AOC. What's your problem with her?"

"Actually it's the opposite of a problem. She's a gift that keeps on giving. Isn't she the one who wants to ban hamburgers to reduce global warming?"

"Not really, but your guys are accusing her of that."

"She's perfect to run against. She's a socialist and her ego is so large that she can't get enough air time on TV. I know she turns a lot of your people on but she's too far out for the people I assume you are hoping will vote your way. If she's the new face of the Democrat Party, Trump will be a shoe in."

"Before we declare him the winner let's see what Mueller and the House committees come up with."

"You need to remember that the more dirt that came up about Clinton the more popular he became. And he won a second term. But OAC is not your major problem. The fact that after maybe the worst month of his presidency, Trump, like Clinton is seeing his favorables going up. Just this week by three points. To 46 percent or so."

"What then is our major problem?"

"You're doing it again."

"What again?"

"Just like last time around when you thought Trump was just a joke. You couldn't imagine him beating Hillary. And guess what--he did. Mainly because she and the rest of you wouldn't take Trump seriously and looked down your noses at him and his supporters. And now you're doing a version of the same thing. Again take CPAC. Rather than trying to figure them out and especially Trump' appeal to them--they listened and cheered for him for two-and-a-half hours--you're busy making fun of him. How his speech was incoherent and that he's crazy. Things like that. By doing this you're motivating his people to stay loyal to him and are turning off a lot of people who are on the fence about him."

"I don't disagree with that," I conceded. "All during the last presidential campaign I thought Hillary and the liberal media were missing what was happening in the middle of the country and therefore we made a huge mistake by not showing respect for people who live and vote there. Rather, we too frequently mocked and disparaged Trump and those who turned out to be his voters."

Jack said, "And your reaction to CPAC shows me you're doing the same thing all over again. Which, for me is just fine. But to win you need to recognize that Trump, when it comes to politics and marketing himself, is crazy like a fox. He's totally brilliant at that. I know you think he's dumb and maybe about things you care about he is. But about appealing to his base and a lot of independents he's a version of a political genius. 

"If you want to win, first, you need to not nominate one of your crazies who Trump will mock 24/7. But you also need to get more comfortable with at least a segment of his followers. To see them as fellow Americans who have some legitimate issues, including some you share. Like worrying about how their children and grandchildren will fare as the economy changes and how the demographics of America are becoming more diverse than even some of your people are comfortable with. Don't fool yourself into believing all your liberal friends are so happy about these changes. 

"So you need to find a way to talk about this that's not bigoted and condemning. You need to have and show more understanding of the views and fears of people who you disagree with. You have to stop pointing fingers of contempt at them. Again, I'm talking about just some of Trump's people. From your perspective most are, to quote Hillary who was right about this, irredeemable. One of your problems is that you assume everyone is or should be as tolerant as you try to be. Well, you know what, in this regard you and your friends are far from perfect. You need to take a hard look at what's really in your heart." 

I finally said, "I've been attempting to make that argument for years. Liberals are more tolerant, every poll shows that, but there are a lot of closeted progressives who aren't happy about all the changes you mentioned. But in regard to immigrants and people of color Trump and the CPAC crowd are way out of line. There's no way to paper over that"

"I'll tell you what was really going on with the CPACers."

"I'm all ears."

"They were marking the end of the traditional Republican Party. It's now Trump's party. They could call themselves T-PAC. And his speech, if you can call it that, was like an inaugural address or a comedian's stand-up spritz to celebrate the victory of this new party. That explains the John McCain crack. They saw his death as if it signaled the end of the old Republican Party. A party that they saw him as representing. But again what they did was disgraceful. No two ways about that. 

"But here's the bottom line," Jack continued, "Trump and many of his people are really anarchists. You should call them out for that just as they accuse all of you of being socialists. But you should make a distinction between that part of T-PAC and the others who aren't so radical. As I've been saying, you need to find a way to reach out to and appeal to some of them. You also need to recognize that a large part of Trump's appeal is that he's entertaining. Which politically is not a bad thing. We are an entertainment-obsessed nation and you should look for someone to run against him who average people can enjoy listening to."

"I agree with that."

"Otherwise you're cooked."

January 29, 2019--The Wimp Factor

I'm sure you remember that during the campaign Trump frequently said it's all about "winning." 

He got in trouble when draft-avoider Trump said he didn't respect war hero John McCain because being shot down and held prisoner for years was evidence that he was a loser.

He told us if he was elected there would be so much winning that we'd get tired of winning.

Thus far, considering Trump's short list of accomplishments, I am managing to avoid winning fatigue.

He set this dialectic in motion so it is only fair that he is now being brought down because these days he seems to be doing a lot more losing than winning. And to be perversely consistent, he is looking tired of so much losing.

Catching myself enjoying his evolving fate I thought a bit more about this winning and losing business. Employing it as a prism through which to sum up how he is doing, vis-à-vis, say, Nancy Pelosi may not be the best rubric to be using.

During the 35-day government shutdown most of the stories in the media were about who was up (Nancy) and who was down (Trump). Most of the polling cited in the coverage focused on who was to blame (mainly Trump and the Republicans) and how Trump's approval ratings were faring (badly).

A special focus of much of this reporting was how Trump was being regarded by his Fox News followers, principally how he was being treated by conservative columnists and radio talk-show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.

Coulter especially got under his skin. This could be because among other taunts she called his (fragile) manhood into question.

On one occasion she said we thought we were electing Trump but instead "got Jeb."

In a weekend tweet, after Trump gave in to Pelosi, Coulter wrote--

"Good news for George Herbert Walker Bush: As of today, he is no longer the biggest wimp ever to serve as President of the United States."

Trump was being savaged by his old friends who said that while seeking to build a wall he wound up with a cave. As in "he caved" to Nancy and the Dems.

One obvious common denominator--it has been primarily strong women who have made him crazy.

If true, maybe we should back off from some of the winning and losing talk. Especially if there are significant gender aspects connected to it. As there are. Do we want a hyper-riled-up Trump, worrying about his manhood, as we move though more and more perilous times?

War could be looming in Venezuela, Israel, and North Korea. And of course Syria, with us unwisely withdrawing, is in danger of further unravelment. All places where in wag-the-dog terms Trump might be tempted to have us intervene.

I'm not suggesting that Nancy and her supporters back off but just that we should continue to look for opportunities to weaken him politically (to "win") but not make too big a deal of the personal contest that is at the heart of the matter.

I have always felt that in many hotly contested situations winning without gloating is the preferred way to go. This is a glaring and frightening example.

December 3, 2018--Cozying Up

He wouldn't agree to fly the flag at the Capital at half mast and it took two days after he died for him to squeeze out a few words of condolence. 

So, after treating John McCain's death shabbily I've been wondering why Trump so quickly had appropriate words to offer about his passing and generously ordered Air Force One to fly to Houston to bring George H. W. Bush's body back to Washington. 

When thinking about Trump's true feelings about Bush and his sons "generous" and "appropriate" aren't words that come quickly to mind. 

This from a man who during the campaign mocked Jeb for having "low energy" and who said, "We need another Bush in office about as much as we need Obama to have a 3rd term." In Trump's political cosmology that's about as nasty as it gets--including Bush and Obama in the same sentence.

But there you are.

Could it be, then, that behaving with uncharacteristic moderation is Trump's way of thanking our 41st president for dying at just the right time to distract the nation and the media from the bad news for Trump emerging daily from the Mueller investigation?

Since for Trump it's always about himself, now that we know him as intimately as we do, this helps explain his unexpectedly thoughtful behavior. 

Though Trump resents and hates his betters (a very long list that includes all former presidents except Jackson, about whom he in fact knows nothing), he has an instinct for spotting his betters and for our outer-borough president that includes the Kennedys, Obamas, and Bushes. With each he has a complicated hate-love relationship. 

Trump so craves positive attention that by thrusting himself into the events that are following H. W.'s death he likely hopes that by cozying up some of the personal characteristics that made 43 respected might rub off on him. 

This is a case of legitimization by association.

The tributes flowing in about Bush do not fit Trump's character but since he is not someone to be shy about pushing his way into all available spotlights, during the services expect Trump to be on camera more than anyone other than Bush family members.

In any list of Bush qualities, Trump palls by comparison. 

Among the many things being said about George H. W. Bush, he was thought to be temperate, inclusive, generous, bipartisan, thoughtful, informed, collaborative, modest, ethical, graceful, gracious, moderate, self-effacing, playful, and deferential. 

He was far from perfect and he should not be over-adulated now that he is gone, but even without the inclination to forget limitations and faults after one's passing, this still sounds like the real George H. W. Bush. 

Inverting this list, where generous becomes greedy and modest become narcissistic, would produce an accurate picture of the man who now occupies the former president's chair in the Oval Office.

Then, by this week's end Mueller will be back on the case and places for Trump to hide from culpability will be even more limited. Also, Bush's example won't be able to help protect Trump from himself. In fact, attempting to claim he is worthy of sharing in our former presidents' example Trump will find that the spotlight not only illuminates but can also scorch.

November 30, 2018--Appalled

With a heavy heart, reflecting on Donald Trump's effect on the country, historian Walter Isaacson said that more than anything else Trump has stolen our capacity to be appalled.

He has accomplished this by normalizing outrageous behavior.

From early in his campaign for the presidency, by not being forced to pay a political price for recklessly attacking John McCain for not being a "winner" because he was shot down over North Vietnam and held prisoner for five years--"I like people who weren't captured"--Trump quickly realized he could say anything and could even, he claimed, literally get away with murder.

And so, since that time, daily, he says something outrageous to the point, Isaacson said, that we have become numb to his transgressions and lies. 

Everything becomes trivial; everything becomes essential. It is impossible to sort things out--to identify what is important, what is best to ignore, what to resist.

Trump does this in part because he cannot control his inner demons, he lacks impulse control, but mainly to shut down discourse and dissent, to overwhelm and anesthetize the population with him eventually the one remaining voice. The goal ultimately of all narcissists.

I am finding that as time goes by and Trump rages on that I am becoming inured to his bluster and outrageousness. I am falling victim to his efforts to limit my ability to be appalled. In my case becoming desensitized and less and less able to retain my sense of outrage.

I need to fight this off so I can continue to resist and do the few things I can to push back.

Walter Isaacson

November 13, 2018--Pour It On Mr. President

I know this sounds counterintuitive but I welcome the appointment of Matt (The Hulk) Whittaker to be acting attorney general.

I love the idea that he is totally unqualified to hold that office for even a day. I love the fact that he is somehow implicated in a scheme to defraud clients who were paying a company for which he was an official a fee to secure patents they never received. (Sound familiar?) I especially love that he has been a flunky for Trump for at least two years and seems eager to do his bidding, including and perhaps especially shutting down the Mueller investigation. 

I love this since even firing the special counsel will not thwart the investigation, only further sully Whitaker and Trump by piling on additional counts of obstruction of justice. With Democrats about to control the House, this guarantees that Mueller's report in one way or another will become public and lead to Trump's impeachment. If the Pentagon Papers leaked out so will the ultimate Mueller report. 

And I love the fact that Trump is in open warfare with journalists, acting like a bully and in the case of black women exposing his deep racism. Wouldn't it be great, I am thinking if he would ban a few more from the White House.

To keep his opposition motivated, the worse the better.

On the international front, I like the way Trump behaved over the weekend in France at the gathering of world leaders to mark the 100th anniversary of the end of the First World War.

It was perfect that he arrived late and left early. (As did his best friend and handler, Vladimir Putin.) Since the gathering was not about him, he saw no purpose in being there and was not shy about letting everyone take note of his petulance. 

I can't tell you, though, how happy I am that he did come to Paris and am overjoyed that he didn't show up for a memorial gathering at a cemetery for American soldiers killed in action, claiming that since it was drizzling he would have to be driven to the site rather than helicoptered in and that it was too foggy even for that.

I suspect that the real reason Trump skipped the ceremony was because if he got wet his orange-dyed face might run. Also, in his twisted cosmology, as a perverse commander-in-chief, he deems men killed in action "losers," not unlike John McCain was a loser because he was captured. He likes only winners such as himself who couldn't hold onto the House of Representatives. 

I do not need to speculate what veterans might be feeling about this draft dodger who didn't serve in Vietnam because he got five deferments and allegedly had a bone spur in one of his feet. But if as a result fewer vets vote for him in 2020, so much the better.

Do not worry that the alliances he is undermining can never be reestablished. Quite the contrary. Our true allies know the problem is Trump, not America nor the American people. Days after he is defeated two years from now French, German, and English leaders will be be on the first flight out to meet with the president-elect to begin the reconciliation process.

The more Trump does things of this kind the better it is. And so I say, bring it on. 

Please Mister President, keep up your outrageous behavior because the more you do things of this kind the more likely it is that you will not be reelected. Keep up the hissy fits and white supremacist talk because the more you behave this way the more likely you lose.

That's the next prize to keep eyes on. We did good work last week in regard to the House and local elections around the country, but that was the intermediate prize. The big one is now teed up.

Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker

This is my 3,500 blog posting. The first one appeared August 26, 2005.

September 5, 2018--Boooooring

Mika got it right yesterday morning.

I dosed off Morning Joe for a couple of weeks, needing respite from all-Trump-all-the-time, but with the onset of the new season (the "year" starts up again the day after Labor Day) I felt the atavistic compulsion to reconnect to what is going on. Including trolling for subjects to write about that do not have anything to do with Trump.

Lots of luck with that I realized on Tuesday as early as five-after-six, with the first five minutes of MJ devoted to Joe and Willie exchanging barbs about the crumbling fate of the Yankees and the Red Sox's historic run.

Just two minutes into their joshing you could see Mika cringing. Up to their old schtick. If looks could wound her look would draw blood.

"Can we get on with things?" exasperated, she said. They ignored her. "There's lots going on and we need to talk about that."

"Yes, John McCain. His funeral," Joe said without enthusiasm, still more interested in baseball gossip.

"It's over," Mika said, cryptically.

"Not until it's over," Joe said, he thought slyly, quoting Yogi Berra, winking at Wille, with baseball still more on his mind than McCain.

"Not the funeral, but the presidency."

"Over?" Joe said, paying attention to his cohost and fiancée for a rare moment. 

"This show is so boring," she said. 

I grew excited, expecting a family spat. Mika pops off a few times a year and videos of her meltdowns usually go viral. I thought--what an inventive way for her to launch the year. Trashing her own show.

Having the floor she pressed on. "Nothing is new. In fact, nothing can be new. Everything is predictable. We know exactly what he is going to say. Or tweet. His whole presidency depends on a steady stream of surprises. In there own way, excitements. Engaging outrages. He's the producer of his own reality TV presidency and it's about to be cancelled."

"You know, Mika's half right," one of their panelists, off camera, said. You could sense he was worried that the "half right" could be misinterpreted, come off as patronizing. Which it did. Though smacking of enough truth that she and the others let it go. She was happy just being paid attention to.

As a result there was no more sports talk. They were off and running, making being boring interesting. 

"If his people start to get bored with him," Sam Stein of the Daily Beast said, "he's cooked. Don't mishear me, they believe him, more important they believe in him. They are also there for the show. If you live in some, forgive me, godforsaken place like Fargo, North Dakota, where the most exciting thing is the Charley Pride concert, it doesn't get any better than going to one of his rallies after standing in line for hours to get a seat for his political standup spritz. But before we get giddy about this, at the Fargo rally Trump people claimed 6,000 turned out, though the local press had the number much less than that."

"Like the ongoing numbers game about the size of the crowd at his inauguration," MSNBC's Kasie Hunt chimed in.

"One thing Trump knows for certain," this from WAPO columnist and editor Eugene Robinson, "Is how to pay attention to ratings. The Apprentice didn't go off the air because Trump was running for president but because the ratings were heading south. If the ratings and demographics had continued to be strong NBC would probably still have it on the air. I don't believe the Emoluments Clause in the Constitution forbids that. Making money from a TV show. Look, he's still getting away with making a killing from his hotels and resorts. I'm not hearing about anyone giving up their Mar-a-Lago membership or the Trump hotel in Washington offering weekend discounts."

Willie said, "There are reports that attendance at his rallies is declining. It's not such a hot ticket anymore. And more than a few who show up appear to filter out before his act is over."

"You're right," Joe jumped in,"politics is all about numbers. And enthusiasm. He could be slipping in both realms. If he is, as Mika said, it's all over."

"Well," Mika said, now all smiles, "at the beginning of being over."

Glancing at the clock, also smiling, Joe said, "We made it to six-thirty without being boring. I think we're off to a good start for the year."

September 4, 2018--Negative Partisanship

This weekend's series of tributes to John McCain caused me to wonder again why so many conservatives and, especially, Donald Trump feel animus toward the late senator from Arizona. 

It wasn't because he was such a maverick and voted solidly against Trump's agenda. In fact, with notable exceptions (among a few others his thumbs down vote not to repeal Obamacare) he voted for at least 90 percent of the legislation supported by Trump.

And, I recalled, Trump savaged McCain early in the 2016 campaign, well before it was known who would win the nomination. He mocked McCain for what can only be viewed as heroism during the Vietnam War, a war that Trump did all he could to dodge. Perhaps, I thought at the time, Trump was jealous of McCain's unstinting courage. Trump knew in his heart that McCain was a hero while he was a blowhard coward.

I also thought at the time, well before Trump loomed as the frontrunner, that taking on McCain in this gratuitous way would doom his changes. Candidates traditionally drop out of contention for doing a lot less. But not Trump. There is little that is political traditional about him. His people stuck with him and he rolled inexorably toward the White House.

More surprisingly, it appears that the vast majority of Republicans detest McCain and are even comfortable mocking his service.

So I continue to be puzzled about why Trump is so bulletproof. A recent article in the Washington Post, "Republicans' Anger at McCain Speaks Volumes About Tribal Politics," offers some additional insights.

From the article--

Over the past few decades, Americans have fled to the political poles, leaving fewer in the once vibrant and decisive middle. Increasingly, those partisan voters are being driven more by fear and loathing for the opposition party than admiration for their own party’s leaders--a phenomenon that political consultants call “negative partisanship.” 

Today, partisanship has a “stronger influence” on voters’ behavior than at any time since the 1950s, Alan Abramowitz and Steven Webster, two Emory University political scientists, wrote recently. One result: Any act of compromise with the enemy--or opposition party--is greeted with anger and derision.

The article includes a few quotes from conservatives who hated McCain. They offer a glimpse of the intensity of their fury--

“Sorry, phony, fraud and a traitor,” Shawn Halan, a Southern California real estate agent, wrote in a social media post. “He was a pathetic egomaniac bent on fighting conservatism and did it as a pretender!” 

“Faux conservative,” added another supporter of President Trump. 

“We can admire his service in Vietnam, but also realize he was a scoundrel and backstabber as a politician,” wrote a photographer based in the New York area. “I don’t mourn.”

Negative partisanship it is.

August 27, 2018--As He Lay Dying

A day or two before the end, as his old best friend, John McCain, lay dying, as we have seen Lindsey do before, he couldn't keep his hands off his new best friend, Donald J. Trump. 

Senator Lindsey Graham is such a suck up for hunky men that when he encounters one, or one pretending to be one, he seemingly can't control himself.

This time, with Trump, the gift he brought was to clear a path that would enable him to fire the Attorney General with minimal political dissent or outrage. This he gift-wrapped for Trump, the one man John McCain clearly despised. At least he could have waited until after the funeral. We know Trump won't show up, isn't welcome, and now I wonder about jilted-by-death Lindsey. Will he have the cajones to show his face at the service. 

This gift about when and how to dump Sessions was hand delivered by the same swooning Lindsey who only a few months ago said that if Trump fires Sessions there will be "holy hell to pay."

Late last week Graham noted that Sessions has clearly lost Trump's confidence (this is news?) and that he, Lindsey, a leader in the Senate, did not necessarily object to Trump replacing him after the midterm elections. 

Presumably the congressional elections will result in deep loses among Republicans and, Graham suggested, as presidents in the past have done, Trump should "reshuffle" his cabinet mainly to deflect blame for the election results from himself to his hapless underlings. 

And by reshuffling Graham means dumping a few cabinet officers, not just Sessions, so he won't stick out so much. It would appear to be more a house cleaning than retribution because Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation and refused to see his job as protecting Trump from his own worst proclivities.

I suppose this advice constitutes something other than what Lindsey considers hell to pay.

Think Clinton in 1994, George W. Bush in 2006, and Barack Obama in 2010. All of whom reshuffled their cabinets after off-cycle election results.

And think how President Lyndon Johnson got around being pressured to make Bobby Kennedy his running mate in 1964. LBJ despised RFK even more than McCain hated Trump or Trump hates Sessions. 

He announced that his choice would not be from anyone serving in his cabinet (Bobby was still Attorney General) because there was so much work to do that he couldn't spare anyone's full-time attention. 

Everyone at the time knew what he was really doing--jettisoning Kennedy--and before long Johnson had become so politically toxic that he little choice but to withdrew from the 1986 race.

If only history could in this case repeat itself.

Rona has another theory about what Lindsey Graham is up to--

She thinks he is too smart and weaselly to give into his infatuation and is trying to trick Trump into not firing Sessions until after the midterms. He believes that Trump firing Sessions before November would so inflame voters that the Republicans would do even worse than is currently predicted.

Interesting. 

In that case let's hope Trump fires Sessions at the end of  October. Let that be the October Surprise. That would be better than bombing North Korea.

Then we could begin to speculate who Trump will attempt to appoint (I say "attempt" because Democratic senators will filibuster).

Top of the list could be Rudy or Chris Christie (remember him?). Or perhaps from Trump's world of reality TV--Judge Judy, Judge Jeanine, Judge Nepolitano, or Laura Ingraham who is a lawyer.

Perhaps most confirmable by the Senate is, why not, Lindsey Graham.

May 14, 2018--"Rudy" Awakening

During our first week in Maine we turned the TV on exactly one time and at that for a total of only about half an hour--last Sunday night to watch a little American Idol. We would have watched more but fell asleep after driving seven hours to get here.

So it was a rude awakening or, forgive the pun, a Rudy awakening when we finally turned it on again this past Saturday after pretty much a full week of no TV. 

It was all Rudy of Rudy Giuliani all the time because his antics as Trump's new lead attorney were splashed all over the news. None of it good. All off it tumultuous, out-of-control, or just plain crazy. 

Whoever said this has it right--he's lost a step. Though from all the messes he created or stepped into during the past two weeks working for Trump, I'd say he's lost more than that. It looks as if he's lost his entire mind.

First, when pooh-poohing Trump's other personal lawyer, Michael Cohn's paying off Stormy Daniels, Rudy said that was no big deal. It's the sort of thing he and his firm routinely do for his and their famous and wealthy clients. Shrugging, he boasted, we just write the women "a couple of checks." What's $130,000? No big deal.

It appears, though, that it is a big deal to the law firm in which Rudy is (or should is say, was) a partner. The other partners met and voted to force him to resign. We don't do that kind of thing, they said.

But he appears to continue to serve as Trump's butt-boy lawyer, slamming Stormy Daniels' attorney, Michael Avenatti, who challenged Rudy to a one-on-one debate (I'd pay to watch that), sneering, "I don't get involved with pimps."

Avenatti couldn't restrain himself from noting the obvious--in effect saying, "You pay off women for your rich and famous clients and you call me a pimp?"

Just as this was reminded me what I've been missing since cutting the cable, along came more breaking news--what White House aide Kelly Sadler cruelly said at a meeting in the West Wing about critically ill John McCain.

The meeting included a discussion about the upcoming vote to confirm or reject the nomination of Gina Haspel to head the CIA. Her appointment is controversial since as a high-level CIA staffer she presided over one or more so-called "black sites" where accused terrorists were tortured.

McCain, having been tortured in a North Vietnam prison for years, is on record as opposing her nomination and this may mean she will not be confirmed. Not willing to vote for her, Sadler said, "doesn't matter. He's dying anyway."

So here it is early Monday morning and I'm torn. 

I know Trump is about to start tweeting and Rudy is soon to crawl out of bed after dreaming about all the outrageous things he can do to stir the pot and make everyone crazy. Should I turn on Morning Joe? Should I  . . . ?

But no. I think I'll take a pass and watch the sun rise over Johns Bay.

Left to Right--Rudy and Donald Trump

December 18, 2017--A Corker

What did it take to get Senator Corker to switch his vote on the so-called tax reform bill?

Not much.

Fending off criticism that he flipped from opposing it to supporting it for mercenary reasons, he claimed he did so in part because John McCain's illness is preventing him from participating in the final vote. Corker suggested he became a supporter to, in effect, offer his vote in place of McCain's. A supporter, in McCain's case, largely because of huge tax advantages it offers to the Arizona senator himself and his family. Specifically his heiress wife.

Then Corker, to defend himself, expressed outrage that he had anything to do with provisions added to the bill that would be of significant financial benefit to him--a technical addition that provides a "carve out" that will allow certain kinds of real estate investments to become part of the pass-through provision of the bill and thus make them more valuable to large investors.

Large investors such as Corker, with a net worth of more than $50 million. Much of it in real estate.

He claims he knew nothing about this and it wasn't part of a deal to get him to flip. As a congressional insider for 11 years he certainly would know how these kinds of deals work. Here's how it worked in his case, something I know about as I used to do this sort of thing with Congress--

To provide Corker and his ilk plausible deniability staffers search around in a major bill to find things they could expand and, without having to be asked or prompted, slip into a bill to please someone whose vote they are looking to secure.

This is clearly what happened in Corker's case. He didn't need to wink or ask for the bill to be sweetened for him and, in spite of the fact that he hates Donald Trump, who has publicly humiliated him, he is going along with the bill because it is just too bountiful a deal for him and his family. It is so good that, deficit hawk though he is, because of this covert process, he could pretend his vote did not contradict his alleged passionate concern that the GOP bill will add at least $1.5 trillion to the national debt.

Cash is cash and his vote is for sale.

December 15, 2017--John McCain's Thumbs Up

Many admired John McCain, recently diagnosed with incurable brain cancer, when he appeared on the Senate floor past midnight in late September to vote thumbs down, literally thumbs down, on the Republican bill to repeal Obamacare.

Many were looking forward to a repeat performance next week when the Senate appears set to vote on one of the most regressive budget-busting tax-cut bills in modern legislative history.

Alas, McCain has indicated he will vote for it. Actually, try physically to vote for it if the wicked side effects of radiation and chemo therapy will allow him to do so. 

If he cannot make it to the Senate, the Republicans will have an even smaller margin to pass it. Thus, if Susan Collins of my beloved Maine comes to her senses and changes her mind and votes against the bill, it has a chance of being defeated. 

I have been wondering, why McCain, at times a legitimate maverick, was or is set to vote for it, considering how much he despises Donald Trump. I came to the one obvious conclusion--he and his family would be enormous beneficiaries of the GOP bill.

It would be kind to him and especially his heiress wife who own no fewer that eight homes (remember how that was revealed during the 2008 presidential election?) since this bill is quite friendly to people with large real estate holdings.

More than that, with his and his wife's net worth topping $100 million (she inherited a fortune in beer distributorships) by doubling the current $11million one can pass along tax free--John and Cindy McCain's heirs will net at least $11 million more than they would at present

Not the kind of political legacy I would imagine he seeks. But I guess when it gets right down to it, money is money. 

October 31, 2017--Lindsey's New Bromance

Lindsey is about to be dumped by John McCain who is insensitve enough to his feelings to be dying from brain cancer. No more get-away trips together to Iraq and Afghanistan.

But Lindsey, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, can't resist a hunky tough guy. Even while McCain is still alive, he's moved on to another one--Donald Trump. 

Though Trump is anything but a real tough guy. Recall, while McCain was flying jets over North Korea and held prisoner by the Viet Cong, Trump was avoiding the draft with a series of student deferments and a bone spur in his foot that miraculously cleared up when the draft ended.

Doesn't take much to get poor Lindsey's heart fluttering--just a few tete-a-tete rounds of golf with the big guy who has his little hands on the nuclear codes and a ride or two back and forth to Camp David, that well-known trysting place in Marine One--the president's personal helicopter. That's all it takes to get Lindsey all googly-eyed.

Graham says he's just being practical--it's better to have the president's ear (not his literal one of course) than to be made fun of or to have his cell phone number outed in a presidential tweet. 

And, he told the New York Times, there are a lot of Trump supporters in South Carolina and by being cozied up to Trump helps him back home, on the rare occasions that he's there and not junketing.

It also takes the ability to forgive and forget. Including the things The Donald said about him during the campaign. You do remember that Lindsay was one of the 19 seeking the nomination and Trump disposed of him without needing to break a sweat.

Not only did he torture him by revealing his telephone number and mocking the fact that Lindsay was in low single digits during the primary season, but he also, just a couple of months ago, after the white-supremacist rally in Charlottesville, after Graham criticized Trump's comments about racial violence, blaming equally both sides, Trump tweeted--

Publicity seeking Lindsey Graham falsely stated that I said there is morale equivalency between the KKK, neo-Nazis white supremacists. . . Such a disgusting lie. He just can't forget his election trouncing. The people of South Carolina will remember!

It must be that they serve wonderful snacks on Marine One.

Lindsey Graham In Marine One

October 27, 2017--Trump's Get Out of Jail Free Card

Up to now here's how I thought Donald Trump's presidency would end:

For many months I've been writing that the real threat to him is not the ideological split among Republicans, the opposition of the Democrats, his failure to accomplish anything, or his intemperate and outrageous behavior. Like the sort of things he said recently about John McCain, Senator Bob Corker, and gold star families, among the many targets of his ire.

Most perilous, I have felt, would be the looming findings of the investigation being directed by special council Robert Mueller. This, I thought, will turn out to be the ticking time bomb that would bring him down before the end of his term. 

We would learn about collusion between Trump and the Russians who worked together to doom Hillary Clinton's candidacy, Trump's corrupt business practices in Moscow and elsewhere, illegal money-laundering activities that would be discovered through an examination of his personal finances, and his various efforts to obstruct justice as this investigations unfolds.

That the weight of evidence would turn out to be so overwhelming that he would either be impeached and voted out of office by the Senate or, like Richard Nixon, be forced to resign.

None of this is any longer likely.

No matter what Mueller finds it will be at most a one-week story.

Here's why--

Trump and his enablers have come up with a winning defensive strategy. Much of it focused on Hillay Clinton, the Clintons (plural) and Trump's favorite nemesis, Barack Obama.

They are working on three themes--

First, they are in the process of turning the focus of the collusion-with-the-Russians narrative from Trump to Hillary. Earlier this week Trump and his people basked in the revelation, reported in the fake-news Washington Post of all places, that the infamous BuzzFeed dossier that outlines in literally explicit detail Trump's nefarious business activities with Russian oligarchs and frolics with prostitutes was largely paid for by Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee. More than $10 million worth.

People close to Hillary Clinton acknowledged this, claiming that it was routine opposition research. Everyone does it they blandly said. Well, that may be true, but from a political perspective it is ruinous to any attempt to use the dossier revelations as part of a case against Trump. Now the whole episode will become a case against Hillary. Slimy political jujitsu at its best.

Then there is the uranium flap. 

This was reported by the New York Times many months ago and at that time I had a few things to say about it. The paper of record alleged that at the behest of Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton herself while Secretary of State and Barack Obama was president approved the sale to Russian business interests of the Canadian company that produces of 20 percent of our uranium supply. 

Bill Clinton was shown to be in the middle of this--he was paid $500,000 to deliver a speech in Russia after which more than $100 million was donated by Russians to the Clinton Foundation. These, it is speculated, lubricated the approval process by U.S. governmental agencies, including Hillary Clinton's State Department. 

Republicans at the time did not make that big a deal of it. They were focused more on pillorying Hillary about Benghazi. But periodically during the campaign Trump alluded to it. Now, reprised earlier this week by Trump's Minister of Propaganda, Sean Hannity on his radio and Fox TV shows, it is proving to be another effective diversion from the Mueller investigation, which reportedly is moving along quickly.

Then, to finish the trifecta of Trump preemptive defensive strategies there is the slow boiling process of sliming Robert Mueller. 

Again, Fox News and Trump himself are beginning to bring up things, I should say, make up things in an effort to undermine Mueller's reputation. They are saying he was and is chummy with fired FBI Director James Comey and that he has ties to the law firm that was paid by the Hillary people to come up with the BuzzFeed dossier. Thus, they are asking how can we trust anything Mueller and his staff uncover.

Couple this with a large part of the public's disinterest in anything critical of Donald Trump and the very recent reports that Republicans in Congress are rolling over for Trump and giving him standing ovations, afraid that if they don't Steve Bannon and his people will come after them with pitchforks and toss them out of office, putting all of this together, I am coming to think that whatever Mueller reports and recommends will be largely ignored, except on MSNBC.

With the resignation of congressmen such as Jeff Flake and Bob Corker, the Republican Party is in the process of becoming the Trump Party. 

He may be all the things critics say about him, but one thing he surely is--when it comes to fighting back he's shameless and effective.

July 25, 2017--Rudy & The Mooch

Desperate, Donad Trump and Republicans in the Senate are pulling out the stops--

First, there is the psychodrama playing out in the White House communications operation.

They pushed poor Sean Spicer so hard that he finally, in frustration and humiliation, resigned. Not only did he have to endure the mockery brilliantly served up by Melissa McCarthy on Saturday Night Live, with her motorized lectern, he also had to endure insults from his boss who couldn't get over Spicy's pudginess and ill-fitting suits. It didn't help that those off-the-rack outfits were a muddy brown and didn't include a pocket square.

So off he went to be replaced by Anthony (The Mooch) Scaramucci. After hijacking poor Sarah Huckabee Sander's live-on-TV news conference on the first day of her being named press secretary, after his overlong and obsequious "I'll-take-a-question-or-two" Q&A with the press, he asked her to make sure that the person who did his hair and makeup continued to be available to him.

So we know what he's about--in his bromance with The Donald ("I love the guy!") he knows the Boss will be checking out how he looks on TV. The good news is that he has the hair and bespoke outfits to keep Trump happy at least for a week or two.

Speaking of bespoke, did you notice what son-in-law Jared Kushner was wearing yesterday morning when he was set to testify before the staff of the Senate Intelligence Committee? For the "prince of having it both ways" (called that in the Sunday Times by Frank Bruni), he knew who was watching on TV. From the threads and hair alone, we know daddy-in-law was for an hour or two feeling all was right with the world. Everyone was looking good. (The president in the meantime was continuing to swell up like a Macy' parade balloon.)

In the meantime, showing contempt for his own caucus, GOP Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell,  was getting ready to have his minions vote for a health care reform bill the contents of which were still, hours before the vote, unknown to them.

Would it be straight repeal or repeal-and-replace and if it was that, replace with what? Doesn't matter. What matters is that they vote for something. Anything. Since he and Trump do not care if what might come before the Senate will kick 30 or "only" 20 million covered now off the health care rolls, let's just vote and then move on to what really counts--a White House beer party for Republican senators and then the signing ceremony.

To make sure the vote goes his way, McConnell held off until poor John McCain could get out of his hospital bed to be trotted out just days after brain cancer surgery to vote yes, again for anything that has a chance to be passed. That McCain, who has his own existential healthcare issues to deal with, would allow himself to be used this way about such an issue, is a sad commentary on McCain himself who has gotten away with pretending to be a maverick during his too-long career in the Senate.

Sorry, senator, I know I am being insensitive, but you are bringing this final legacy down upon yourself. What you are too dramatically going along with will result in the premature death of hundreds of thousands of innocent Americans and even in your desperate condition you need to be called out for this act of, yes, cowardice.

Then there's poor Jeff Sessions. While he clings to political life it appears that Donald Trump and his nepotistic family are already making plans for what to do after they torture the attorney general into resigning.

Here's what they appear to be coming up with--

Sessions is twisting slowly in the wind (to resurrect an old Watergate trope) and we know will soon, Spicer like, say enough and resign. This should conveniently occur when the Senate is on its well-deserved 8th vacation of the year and Trump will make an interim appointment--name a new attorney general without requiring a vote of the so-called upper chamber. He should be able to find someone compliant enough to allow him to do this and in return will do the Big Guy's bidding and put the screws to special counsel Mueller.

Who, you might wonder, is so eager to please Donald Trump that he is willing to destroy his reputation by becoming his lapdog?

That's an easy one--Rudy!

So here's what we'll then have--a New York City all-star team of sycophants. Rudy, the Mooch, and all sorts of Goldman people in his cabinet or close-in advisors and flunkies.

To make this a trifecta of Tristate flunkiness, let's think about what Trump might come up with for Chris Crispy (as my mother used to call him). One thing we know, Christie will need to get a whole new wardrobe. If he's going to work for Trump, it's time for him to move on from the Men's Warehouse.

July 18, 2017--John McCain Would Already Be Dead

He would already be dead from his sub-dural hematoma if it weren't for his platinum senatorial health care plan which assures that he will be treated in the best hospitals and taken care of by the best doctors at virtually no out-of-pocket expense.

He's 80 years old, has a number of serious preconditions, including melanoma, and still suffers from various medical problems that are the result of his being held for six years as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam.

In other circumstances, if he had a job that didn't offer benefits, in the absence of Obamacare, if he needed to buy insurance in the free market Republicans revere, he would be refused coverage by insurance companies thinking only of their bottom lines. It would cost him at least $30,000 a year and he would have a deductible of tens of thousands of dollars.

And, if the bill currently before the Senate were to be approved and then passed in the House and signed by President Trump, he would not be able to secure any heath insurance at all. He would be among the tens of millions who will either lose their coverage or be unable to afford any.

Because of his current medical situation (he's recovering in Phoenix), the GOP Senate leadership is delaying the vote on its version of repeal-and-replace Obamacare legislation since they need McCain's assent to help assure there are enough votes to move it along in the process.

Here's my question--

Why would John McCain even for a minute think about voting for this nasty piece of legislation?

Again, he's 80 years old, is in his last term in the Senate, does not need anything from Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and has a proud record of being a "maverick."

Some maverick.

In addition, we know he hates Donald Trump. Why would he want to be party to helping Trump have a cheap and mean-spirited political triumph?

Perhaps as he takes a few weeks off to recover from the cranial surgery he had over the weekend he'll think about those less fortunate than he and decide that 20 or so million cut from the health care rolls means that hundreds of thousands will die prematurely.

That's the real bottom line--thousands dying unnecessarily.

One last question--

Where are the plans for a five-million-person march on Washington to oppose the Republicans' dirty dealings? I suppose there isn't one because the people who have traditionally organized massive protests of this kind are in good shape with their employer- and government-sponsored coverage. If it doesn't affect me . . .

Who was it who said, "Let them eat cake"?

April 19, 2017--Crazy-Fat-Kid

That's how John McCain last week referred to Kim Jong-un, president of North Korea.

It's understandable that Senator McCain would be feeling frustrated. Most American are. Kim may be crazy or crazy like a fox, but it is indisputable that he is a very dangerous threat to peace in the region. And then some.

Even the Chinese finally seem to be taking the situation seriously. Until now they have been his principal "ally," largely responsible for propping up the collapsed economy of North Korea through their involvement in multiple trade deals that are of sustaining benefit to the North Korean leadership class.

Perhaps because of coming to some sort of agreement to work together during Chinese president Xi Jinping's visit with Donald Trump two weeks ago in Palm Beach, or because the Chinese are concerned that Trump is a crazy-fat-president and might, if provoked, decide to bomb North Korea's nuclear facilities and missile delivery systems. This would mean all-out, possible nuclear war on the Korean peninsular, resulting in millions of refugees crossing the Yalu River to seek sanctuary in China.

The Chinese crave stability and predictability and Trump represents neither and so they may be taking the lead to see if there is a way forward, out of this unfolding doomsday scenario.

I do not think of Kim as leading a suicide cult. War would likely mean we would go after him and his elite followers--the one's who get fancy uniforms, electricity, cars, and food to eat. They and he like living and have many of the good things life offers. And they are not ideological. Fanatical, yes, but in a materialistic way that suggests they might be more interested in living and enhancing their national stature than going down in martyrs' flames. We saw that with the Japanese during World War II, but Korea is no Japan.

If Kim and his followers desire recognition perhaps we should move carefully to begin to provide that as part of a deal that would have them, under Chinese monitoring, begin to phase out their nuclear program. Muammar al-Gaddafi did this is Libya, surprising many who thought he would never agree to such a thing. He saw the writing on the wall and din't want to be obliterated. Of course he eventually was, but that's another story.

During the campaign Trump said he would be willing to meet with Kim Jong-un to see if a deal is possible. Kim might jump at this chance. It would have to be after a number of other conditions were agreed to to test Kim's seriousness. The process would not begin with a Kim-Trump summit but would be a reward when the two parties were, say, halfway to an agreement.

When Barack Obama said during the 2008 campaign that in pursuit of peace he would be willing to meet face-to-face with Iranian leaders, Hillary Clinton's mocked him, claiming he was naive and suggested this demonstrated that he was unsuited to serve as commander in chief. But then, during his first term, Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, worked hard behind the scenes to bring this about. A year or two later, with John Kerry having replaced her, the U.S. and Iran made a deal and as of today much of Iran's nuclear weapons program has been shut down. It is not perfect (as Trump took relish in pointing out almost daily during the campaign) but so far we are not at war with the Iranians. And, as a demonstration that Trump may not always act impulsively, he has not (yet) abrogated the treaty.

My scenario may be a stretch, but most analysts who attempt to understand what is going on in North Korea and what Kim is thnking are feeling pessimistic. The New York Times has concluded that we are moving to a confrontation similar to the one the world faced during the Cuban Missile Crisis. But this time with a potentially unstable leader on one side.

It is generally agreed that it will be two to three years before the North Koreans develop the missiles and miniaturized atomic warheads to reach South Korea, Japan, and the west coast of the U.S. But as they are moving inexorably and rapidly in this direction, we need to figure out how to make a deal well before then that provides at least some enhanced sense of security.

Otherwise . . .

February 13, 2017--Jack On "Sane Republicans"

"I read what you wrote the other day about how ridicule has the power to bring Trump down."

Once again, Jack was calling. "That could be true," he said, "It can be powerful when it gets under the skin of someone as thin-skinned as Trump."

"That's what I'm thinking," I said.

"On the other hand," Jack said, "a lot of Democrats are thinking it has to be 'sane Republicans' like John McCain and Lindsay Graham who need to step up and begin to openly take Trump on. Everyone knows they hate him, but so far they have been muted in their criticism. This makes sense to me. You can see them seething and at some point Trump'll do something so outrageous, there will be some sort of smoking gun, maybe from the Russians' secret files, and that will signal the beginning of the end."

"You're beginning to sound like one of us," I said.

"Not one of your kind, but maybe I'm one of those sane Republicans." I knew if we were seated across from each other at the Bristol Diner he'd be winking at me.

He added, "I watched Saturday Night Live on Saturday, knowing they'd be going after Trump again, to check out how potent their humor is."

"So what did you think?"

"I thought the Melissa McCarthy takedown of Sean Spicer was the best of the three political sketches. He's a very angry man and she got to the heart of that. And was savagely funny. One more week and Trump will ready to pull the plug on him. Not just to end the mocking but because he's jealous of Spicer stealing the spotlight. I read some place that his daily press briefings, which the cable news people are carrying live, are getting higher ratings than General Hospital and the other soaps. Not too mention Fox, CNN, and MSNBC. All are seeing their ratings at all time highs"

"People can't seem to get enough of Trump," I sighed. "In any form."

"But then the skit about Kellyanne Conway, where she goes after CNN's Jake Tapper the same predatory way Sharon Stone did to Michael Douglas in Basic Instinct, was so vicious that it went beyond humor and came out on the dark side. It wasn't really as funny as Steve Bannon the week before when he played the Grim Reaper. That was very dark but funny. I guess with comedy there are no limits. But if I'm thinking about political effectiveness--and I do think the SNL people are out to bring Trump down--for me that bit didn't work."

"I felt the same way," I said, "It crossed too many lines to have much impact, though I did think it was bold."

"You're getting to my main point and the reason I called."

"I was wondering about that."

"Take the last sketch where Baldwin played Trump appealing his travel ban to the courts. Not the Ninth Circuit or the Supreme Court but, of course, The People's Court. A reality show court. This should have been funny but I felt it was predictable and more manufactured than inspired. To be consistently funny you need to avoid slipping into into routines and cliches. Things have to be fresh and the Alec Baldwin version of Trump is getting to be overexposed. My sense is that after another week or two people will begin to tune out. Ditto for McCarthy's Sean Spicer. This week the innovation was to motorize the podium. Pretty thin stuff."

"I also was thinking been-there-done-that and started to nod off."

"So, from an effectiveness perspective, SNL, as fresh as it seemed three weeks ago, is feeling stale and a little boring. Boring is the opposite of funny."

"Here's one more thing," Jack said, "I'm thinking that the Trump act is also wearing thin. He too is in danger of slipping into predictability. His act is wearing thin. This could be a good thing--to rein Trump in--or a bad thing--we'll stop paying attention to what he's up to. He might be more dangerous out of the spotlight than basking in it."

December 7, 2016--Fake News: Pizzaagate

Recently, fake news has been much in the headlines. Fake news being entirely made up stuff masquerading as real news that gets posted and circulated on the Internet either to do harm to someone (like Hillary Clinton) of just as scurrilous or dangerous entertainment. Frequently, all three.

The Comet Ping Pong Pizzeria story is quite a case in point.

Back in October, a month before the election, a few Internet sites, including the Vigilant Citizen, that on the surface look like legitimate news sources, began to "report" that the Comet Ping Pong Pizzeria was really a front for child-trafficing activities. In the back room, John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's chief strategist, and Hillary herself, led a ring of child-abusers who kidnapped, molested, and then sold children to other child-abusers to serve as sex slaves.

If you haven't been following the story, yes, this is unbelievably true.

These posting went viral, literally globally, and the pizzeria has become the subject of an explosion of social media postings, most of them from conspiracy theorists. And on Sunday, someone showed up to rescue children from the notorious back room. Showed up with a pistol and an AR-15 assault rifle, which he fired just as police were arriving to arrest him.

As shocking and disturbing as this is, versions of fake news are not new.

What is new are the means through which this "news" is propagated. Now we have the Internet, specifically social media, to get the word out and circulated. In the past we had newspapers of different levels of repute that, usually for political purposes, would print the intentionally false news.

All the way back in 1828, during the presidential campaign that pitted Andrew Jackson against incumbent president John Quincy Adams, newspapers under Adams' control circulated stories asserting, via lurid stories, that his wife was a bigamist. In so doing, they pointed out that this would make Jackson an adulterer and Rachel, how to put this, a slut.

Rachel, Jackson's wife, may or may not have fully finalized her divorce from Captain Lewis Robards before marrying Jackson. The Adams people, of course insisted that she hadn't and launched invectives against Old Hickory that rivaled or surpassed the ones Donald Trump leveled against his opponents.

To complicate matters, in the Jackson situation, there is fake news within the fake news--a friend of Captain Robards in his own newspaper, in an attempt to take the heat off Jackson, knowingly published a fake story that the divorce had in fact been completed. It probably hadn't been.

Rachel died in 1828, months before Jackson, who won in a landslide, was inaugurated. It broke his heart.

More recently, well before the emergence of the social media, fake news to hurt political opponents has been commonplace. For example, in 2000, as George W. Bush vied with Joh McCain for the Republican nomination, it was agreed by most that whomever of them won the South Carolina primary would go on to secure the nomination. To defeat his rival--McCain was favored because of his military background--Bush people circulated the fake news that McCain had fathered an illegitimate black child.

This doomed his candidacy.

Bush won the SC primary, was nominated, and thanks to the Supreme Court, became our 43rd president.

This history is no comfort to the owner and employees of the pizzeria--it is a place to which the crazies have affixed crosshairs--but when we talk with concern about the proliferation of fake news, it's important to know that we have lived with versions of it for our entire history. And figured out a way to survive.

You don't want me to tell you the made-up stories about George Washington!

Rachel Jackson