December 31, 2020--Out On A Rail

The only people who almost as much as Melania want to see Trump ridden out of Washington on a rail are Mitch McConnell and Mike Pence. 

For different reasons. 

Melania hates Washington itself and longs to resume lazy lunches at the Plaza in New York with her girlfriends. She can't wait to begin to collect her pre-nup money. Just being with him she earned every million and now wants to enjoy it. 

She's been packed up for weeks ready to depart, fearing that her husband will figure out a way to have some entity--the Supreme Court, the Electoral College, the Proud Boys--overturn the results of the presidential election.

My advice to her? Keep packing and before making any lunch reservations, check to see if any of your old girlfriends are willing to be seen in public with you. (Ditto Jared and Evanka.)

Then there is Mitch.

For him it's not about issues he cares about (are there any?) or money or sex. It's about power and with Trump remaining in town McConnell will continue to be left to scrape for crumbs while being expected to continue to serve as enabler in chief.

He has his ideal job--since he was five-years old all precocious little Mitchy wanted was to be Minority Leader. Can you imagine? On the rare occasions he would join other kids on the streets of Sheffield, Alabama, where he spent his childhood years, they wanted to talk about the Crimson Tide while he read Article 1 of the Constitution to them. It is no surprise he was the last one to picked for a softball team. But only after all the girls were chosen.

So he's with Melania--

Then there is poor Mike. 

Pence was thrilled when Trump wasn't reelected. After four years of bondage he finally would be able to stand in places other then the shade of Trump's left shoulder. And finally get his 2014 campaign going. Tomorrow is not a day too soon with Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz stirring about, all but announced. 

More than anything else, though, what Pence wants is a Pence of his own. 

A mini-Pence willing to put up with big-Pence's incessant flexing, primping, and blow drying. And be OK delaying his own presidential aspirations. Willing to be Pence-Lite for eight more years.

I know this scenario is not as much fun as the old GOP clown car. But I'll take it.

August 17, 2020--In Plain Sight

Not hiding in plain sight, last week, without even having to listen closely, Trump told us why he is messing with the postal service:

To interfere with the gathering and counting of mail-in ballots.

This is an example of what political pundit John Heilemann calls Trump's propensity to either project or confess 

It is Trump's view that there is massive fraud when it comes to these ballots and claims, with a straight face, that he wants to insure that everything is on the up and up.

Is there a bridge in Brooklyn for sale?

The good news may be that he is shooting himself in the foot.

How so?

For example--if voters who want to make sure their ballots count change their minds about voting by mail and decide to do so in person, whose demographic--Trump's or Biden's--is more likely to be able and willing to wait in line for three hours to vote?

A 67 year-old white guy with a beer belly or a 32 year-old teacher who jogs five miles a day?

It may be for this reason that behind the scenes Mitch McConnell is pleading with Trump to back off. He knows mail-in ballots traditionally favor Republicans.

Mitch is right. Play on Donald.

June 9th Primary In Georgia

February 4, 2020--Impeachment Post Mortem

As our president once so eloquently put it, "Who gives a shit about Ukraine?"

Other countries were on his shit list, but it turned out that Ukraine would wind up in the headlines and at the center of his impeachment, which will be resolved tomorrow when the Senate votes to find him not guilty of having committed high crimes and misdemeanors. 

He will have the boys over for a beer and then jump onboard Air Force One and head south and west on his exoneration tour.

It is likely to be nauseating so I recommend pulling the plug on your TV to block out MSNBC and CNN for at least a month. It will take more than that to recover.

While tuning out I suggest we force ourselves to do an impeachment forensic to ask how we got into this mess, especially how the Dems, sorry, screwed up and helped to bring it about. How we got snookered by Trump into impeaching him so he could take advantage of the foregone conclusion, knowing, as we should have, that the disposition would be that Trump would walk. 

Trump knew that, Mitch McConnell especially knew that, and even we knew that. 

It didn't take a neurosurgeon to add up how many votes the Democrats had (51) and that the Constitution stipulates two-thirds plus one senator (67) need to vote guilty to remove a president.

So what were we up to while seeking to find grounds to impeach and try Trump?

The usual--doing all we could to show how smart we are and how stupid the Republicans are. So by any rational measure we turned out to be clever and lost while the Republicans, not interested in rational measures, proved to be stupid and won. 

Great.

We knew that at most we'd get perhaps two Republicans to break ranks and that Mitch would get all but two from his caucus. (Though I suspect Susan Collins will vote with her colleagues to acquit Trump. Mitch in return will pay her off with a couple of more Zumwalt-class destroyers to be built at the Iron Works in Bath, Maine.)

Here's how Trump did it--

He knew Dems in the House had their eyes wide open, looking for something to grab onto, anything to launch the impeachment process. Trump knew that whatever they came up with for their Articles wouldn't matter. With Mitch fulminating and twisting arms, he'd easily defeat them in the Senate and remain in office. He was gambling that getting impeached, especially for something exotic like hanky-panky in Ukraine, would sound like a witch hunt to his fervent base and assure he would be exonerated and his favorability poll numbers, like Clinton's, would rise.

Nancy Pelosi knew Trump was setting a trap and for months resisted allowing her committee chairmen and women to begin an inquiry.

Her strategy was working until Trump dangled Ukraine in front of them.

Here's how that worked--

Trump learned that there was a whistle-blower report that outlined how Trump and his senior staff were attempting to blackmail the new president of Ukraine, holding up the delivery of already approved military equipment until President Zelensky announced that he was going to begin an investigation into Hunter and Joe Biden's allegedly corrupt dealings in Ukraine.

To ensnare the Democrats, who were eager to initiate their own investigation--this one into Trump--he declassified notes of a phone call with Zelensky in which he asked the Ukrainian president to do "us a favor, though" by looking into what the Bidens were up to.

In other words he got the impeachment process going by revealing the smoking gun at the outset. That was brilliant. He turned Watergate on its head by in effect confessing up front. This released him from needing to concentrate on every aspect of the prosecution's case and thus he was free to lash out unfettered.

The Democrats took that bait and Nancy Pelosi had no recourse but to allow the inquiry. 

The Democratic House managers were well prepared and presented an open-and-shut case. The only problem was that more than half the "jurors," all the Republicans in the House, had their minds already made up and his attacks on the process were unrelenting. (For the sake of fairness, virtually all the Democrats also had their minds made up before the inquiry began.)

So it became a reality show. Something about which Trump knows more than a little.

Again, none is this is arcane or difficult to figure out. The difference is that the Dems got lost in the details of the narrative and the evidence that they unearthed and wove into their Articles of Impeachment. The Republicans ignored the evidence and didn't challenge Trump's lawyers' lies. The GOP kept their eyes on the prize--again, winning. Feeling good about our virtue, many progressives assumed our familiar role as losers in these kinds of ugly confrontations.

As disturbing as it is, it is essential to do the forensics because if we are to rescue our country from Trump and his crowd, we need to know how this happened and how we became our own worst enemies. An all too familiar phenomenon.

January 31, 2020--His Majesty the President

If you are wondering why Nancy Pelosi took so long before authorizing the House Intelligence Committee to begin an impeachment "inquiry," wonder no more. 

Just look around at what is going on and the reasons should be clear.

As I write this (Thursday afternoon), it looks as if Mitch McConnell has the votes needed to beat back attempts to call witnesses and  turn documents over to the Senate where the impeachment trial is underway.

If this is true--and we will know by Friday afternoon when the vote about witnesses takes place--Mitch if nothing else is as good a vote counter as was Lyndon Johnson when he presided over the Senate. And, if necessary, Mitch is about as good as it gets when he sees it necessary to twist arms.

So, expect to have witnesses voted down by at least one vote from among the Republican caucus of 53. And almost immediately after that, Friday night, under the cover of darkness, expect to see Trump exonerated by all 53. He will be able to trundle off to the Super Bowl where he will take a bow and then, a few days after that, deliver his State of the Union address before an  ecstatic sea of congressional Trumpers and disgruntled Democrats.

Susan Collins and her wobbly colleagues will be able to say they voted for witnesses; and even though they ultimately voted to find Trump not guilty, this they feel will provide enough political cover for them to eek out close reelection victories. Thus this means the GOP will retain control of the Senate.

How will this be regarded by Democrats, those in Congress and millions among the general population? Not well. With a likely weak candidate nominated to take on Trump, his reelection is more likely, but not certain, than when the impeachment process began.

Anyone who knows political history and human psychology, like Pelosi, knew these outcomes were easy to predict.

How then to think about this? 

I am hearing from friends and family members that, "It's all over." With the "it" being our way of life and representative democracy. The Constitution, they contend, failed us.

When I disagree they accuse me of being a lazy optimist.

Perhaps.

For what it's worth here's what I think--

Yes, if the obvious scenario plays out, we will indeed be in peril. Four more years of Trump could see us as a people"crossing a bridge" of no return.

Those who feel this way, to me, are missing the three most powerful of our remaining checks and balances--an activated free press, the federal courts which have as yet not weighed in, and ultimately the people themselves when we vote in November.

In regard to the courts, perhaps the most significant aspect of the Senate trial is the fact that Chief Justice Roberts was required to sit through dozens of hours of debate where Trump's lawyers came up with preposterous arguments to bolster their defense. It is difficult to imagine that as Trump-related cases make their way to the Supreme Court Roberts will forget what he witnessed and how dangerous the Trump view is of the president as monarch.

But, if the free press is abrogated, if SCOUS because of a perverse reading of Article Two votes to allow the president to "do whatever he wants," and, by far most important, if we either sit out the election or nominate weak candidates, it is indeed over.

So, our future is in our own hands. Where it should be.

January 30, 2020--Chaos Theory

If you're obsessing as I am about the Trump impeachment trial, your focus is likely on the struggle about witnesses.

Almost all Republican senators appear to oppose having any and want to get to the business of exonerating Trump to allow them to get home in time to watch this weekend's Super Bowl. (This is literally true.)

And it appears that all Democratic senators will vote to include witnesses. Especially John Bolton.

To include witnesses and documents the Dems have to secure at least four maverick Republicans to get to the required 51 votes. This Kabuki drama is being fueled by the cable news networks that like nothing better than covering political horse races.

Republican senators are saying if four members of their caucus bolt and vote with the Democrats to call witnesses, as a quid pro quo, they will insist on subpoenaing Hunter Biden, who, along with his father, they contend, is at the center of all things Ukrainian. Including corruption. 

A few reflections--

If the Republicans are so eager to haul the Bidens in to testify under oath they can arrange that for later this afternoon. 51 votes are all that are needed to compel that and with 53 members the GOP already has the votes they need to force the Bidens to appear before the House.  

Speculate away as to why they do not seem eager to do so. My view is that they really do not want to have even the Bidens as witnesses since they know there is no significant dirt there to stir up and one never knows what will leak out if there is an open process. Perhaps, the truth.

And, if they are ready to vote to keep Trump in office, they also have the votes for that and could get that done in time for the kickoff.

I therefore see it to be likely that Mitch McConnell has the votes to squelch any move to call witnesses and therefore will let the witnesses and expulsion votes occur on Friday. He and Trump and all but two or three Republican senators are on board for that. They also assume the public, 75 percent of whom want witnesses, will be upset about a Senate coverup but within just a week or two will have moved on to the next outrage. Call it outrage overload. 

If you've been following what I've been writing you know none of this disturbs me. In fact, the opposite as I wrote last week--"the worser the better." 

The more things drift toward chaos, the better it is for Democratic chances to defeat Trump in November and take control of the Senate. The voting public will make Republicans pay for this shameful coverup.

I would feel otherwise and be focused on the upcoming House votes--on witnesses and Trump's fate--if there was any chance of attracting, say, 10 Republican to vote with the Democrats. That would be a different story with very different outcomes. 

I am thus a proponent of chaos. 

January 23, 2020--The Worser the Better.

I'm hearing from people who are so frustrated that they are stepping back from paying attention to the 2020 election. They can't take any more either from or about Trump.

They are trying to do other things with their lives. Things such as listening to music, reading again, talking to their spouses, and watching diverting programs on TV. Rona and I, for example, via Netflix, have been working our way through the 153 episodes of Gilmore Girls--seven years worth!--and immersing ourselves in Miles Davis CDs. 

I can't say that I blame my exhausted friends. They need to get their rest. And a grip.

The current predicament is the struggle to disengage from the day-to-day while still obsessed with the impeachment trial underway in the Senate. Not exactly a sitcom, but still it's an historic event and hard to click away from. And how much Shark Tank can one take?

Those who I'm hearing from haven't yet managed to kick the Trump habit and can't stop themselves from watching the trial. It will take awhile for them (and me) to detox. 

Is there a 12-step program we can join?

Knowing that there is no way for Trump to be removed from office by the Senate--Mitch has the votes to prevent that--we are zeroed in, therefore, on whether or not my Maine senator Susan Collins, to save her political skin, can find three others to vote with her to force McConnell to subpoena witnesses. Actually, not witnesses but John Bolton, who claims he has a story to tell. It must be a really good one because he has a $5.0 million book deal.

I've been saying to friends who see having Bolton testify as the meaning of life that they are failing to keep their eyes on the prize. That prize is making sure Trump is defeated in November. If we agree about that, the best way to help that along would be for the Republican-controlled trial to turn into a fiasco, including screaming, yelling, and ignoring the Chief Justice who is presiding and will plead for civility.

McConnell does not agree to witnesses and will ram a vote to acquit down the throats of his people. And once Bolton's book is published (I suspect right after Labor Day) everything he has to say will enter he public record just weeks before the election. That will be the October Surprise.

All the major news outlets will clamor to interview him. He will appear on the five Sunday talk shows and be on Sixty Minutes for the full hour. Reviews will be published above the fold on the front pages of the Times, Washington Post, and WSJ.

What Bolton will have to say will be a disaster for Trump.

The only down side? Trump will try to get us into a distracting hot war.

But one way or the other, Trump may be cooked.

In sum--the worse things get the better they are.

January 20, 2020--Hunter Biden & John Bolton

The current fight among senators is about whether or not to call witnesses during the Trump impeachment trial.

If he could get away with it (and he may), Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell would exclude any testimony and this afternoon would get the trial over with after an hour's debate and a voice vote to dismiss the whole thing. In other words, not only no witnesses but no trial. Next.

The Democrats of course want what they are calling an "open and fair" trial with witnesses and testimony.

If there are to be witnesses, the Republicans have indicated they want to cross examine Congressmen Adam Schiff, the Democrats' lead investigator, and Joe and Hunter Biden.

The Democrats have said no way. Adding that they want to gather the testimony of acting White House Chief of Staff, Mick Mulvaney, Rudy Giuliani, and especially John Bolton, Trump's former National Security Advisor who called the Trump machinations in Ukraine a "drug deal." 

Both sides are dug in and there seems to be no way out.

I have a suggestion--

Rather than resisting subpoenaing Hunter Biden the Democrats should agree to calling him as part of a Bolton for Biden deal. Better, with, as he claims, nothing to hide, Biden himself should indicate that not only would he agree to appear but wants to testify--"Give me 24 hours notice and I'll be there."

Not a bad tradeoff. Republicans get to interrogate Biden and the Democrats get Bolton, who has signaled he has a "story to tell." The fact that he has a $5.0 million book deal suggests it's quite a story.

January 2, 2020--Jack: Impeachment

"I can't believe you guys stepped in it."

"Make it quick Jack, I only have a few minutes for you." 

This was not true, I had time on my hands as I usually do during the holiday season, but I was in no mood to get involved with him. I'd rather be staring at the ceiling. 

"I'm talking about impeachment. Especially what your Dems are up to."

"Going after Trump, that's what we're up to. And I say, it's about time."

"So he's got you snookered too. I love that." I could hear him chuckling. 

"I repeat--I only have a few minutes for you."

"I'll bet you never heard of this one." I stifled myself, not responding, and so Jack continued, "She fell right into his trap. Trump's" He paused, trying to engage me. I continued to hold my tongue, "How did this whole impeachment thing get started?"

"Enlighten me." I didn't know where he was going with this.

"By Trump ordering the release of the written transcript of his conversation with the newly-elected president of Ukraine. The so-called extortion or bribery conversation where he told Zelensky he would release the authorized military assistance money to Ukraine if they agreed to dig up dirt about the Bidens."

"Of course I know about that. It was pretty stupid for your boy to try to get away with that."

"At the time a lot of media people and liberals were also gleeful, thinking he gave them the smoking gun up front. With Nixon the smoking gun was at the end of the impeachment process with Trump it was up front. Your people thought he shot himself in the foot and off they raced to get impeachment going. You remember, I'm sure, that Nancy didn't want to go there. She was worried that like with Clinton if Trump got impeached by only the Democrats his favorables would go up. It would help him get reelected. But when he released the transcript Pelosi couldn't continue to duck going for impeachment. She had no choice but to unleash Schiff."

"So far, we agree."

"Good. Now let's look at this from where the situation is going rather than where it is--stalled in the House because Nancy doesn't want to send the articles of impeachment to Mitch in the Senate until she has rules in place to call witnesses and examine subpoenaed documents. Mitch is happy about her slowing the process down because as soon as he gets back from New Years he'll start to claim the Dems are engaged in a coverup. They know Trump is not going to be voted out of office. That the Democrats are engaged in a witch hunt. Blah, blah. You've heard all this before. But best of all Nancy is playing right into his hands. She's been smart up to this point but very soon her political strategy is going to come crashing down."

I said, "About this we disagree. Mitch is going to have to allow a few witnesses since if he doesn't it will look like what it is--that he and his senators are engaged in a coordinated coverup. Can you imagine what Bolton and Rudy have to say as witnesses? They may turn out to be the real smoking guns."

"Some of this could happen," Jack said, "but it won't matter. Whatever the Dems come up with--witnesses, emails, stuff like that--Trump is not getting kicked out of office. He's going to be found not guilty and ten minutes after that vote he'll embark on a 10-city Exoneration Tour, boasting there was no collusion, no bribery, no obstruction. Then he'll get the Clinton bump."

"What a nightmare," I said under me breath.

"If you see things unfolding that way--and I'm sure you do," he chuckled again, "it's obvious Trump is behind the whole thing. He's the only one smart enough to come up with this scenario and sucker the Democrats into moving against him. He wanted to be impeached. He engineered the whole thing. And now he'll expose Nancy's failed strategy and take Biden down at the same time. Sort of like a trick shot in pool. Two for one. And that will leave the Democrats with Bernie as their candidate. A trifecta for our president."

My head was throbbing. Was I ever sorry I answered the phone. I swore that next time . . .

November 25, 2019--Move The Goalposts

It's time for Democrats to move on from impeachment. 

Considering Trump's many crimes and misdemeanors, impeachment is the constitutional right thing to do--impeach Trump in the House of Representatives and initiate a trial in the Senate.

But there's the rub. With Republicans in charge of the Senate there is no chance, I repeat, no chance, zero likelihood, that Trump will be voted out of office.

Rather than witnessing an impartial trial, we will experience an attempt to portray Trump as an innocent victim of the Democrats, persecuted by a Dark State "witch hunt," aided and abetted by the "enemy of the people"-- the press.

Senate Majority Leader, Moscow-Mitch McConnell will be in charge. He will make and promulgate the rules (to be fair, as did Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi in the House) and people such as Lindsey Graham--chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee--will be in flagrant political ecstasy.

We won't be hearing more from Fiona Hill or anyone like her. Rather it will be left to Devin Nunes to whine to the Senate how Trump was railroaded in the House. Adam Schiff will be assigned by Mitch a small desk by the men's room.

As good as it felt the past two weeks to see young bureaucrats put their careers and perhaps lives at risk to tell the truth about how Trump led the effort to undermine the stirring of democracy in Ukraine to advance his own political agenda, that's how bad it will feel when Chief Justice Rogers gavels the trial to commence. We will hear nothing but conspiracy theories 24/7 even on MSNBC. It will be as if it had morphed into Fox News.

And at the end of the day, Trump will still be in office, his favorabilities will have risen, and the Democrats will be viewed by an increasing number of voters as politically-motivated obstructionists. Defeating Trump next Election Day will be considerably less likely. Reelecting a majority of the new class of Democratic House members will also be more difficult. 

This is why since 2018 when the Democrats gained control of the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi resisted the move to impeach Trump.

But there is a relatively easy way for the Democrats to get out of this pickle and actually gain political standing--move the goal posts from impeachment to censure. 

Get the House to condemn Trump's behavior and move on. Take impeachment off the table. Censuring a sitting president is a big deal and would demonstrate to moderate voters that the Democrats are capable of behaving decisively and moderately.

They can do this as it is possible for one house of Congress on its own to censure colleagues and members of the administration, including the president.

It would also free up the Democratic senators who are seeking the presidential nomination--Senators Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and Amy Klobuchar. As impeachment "jurors" they would be like hostages in the Senate for at least a month during the height of the primary season. Mitch McConnell will relish muzzling them. And Lindsey will launch investigations into everything from the Bidens to Hillary Clinton's server.

Spare us.

November 19, 2019--Jack: It's the Senate, Stupid

"How are things in Sodom on the Hudson?" 

I heard Jack's snickering laugh. We were back in New York City and, unlike in Maine, I was enjoying not running into him.

I put the phone on speaker, set it on the end table, and went to make myself a cup of decaf. I thought I'll just listen to what he has to say and not engage him directly. It's crazy enough in the city and I didn't want to make it worse.

"I'll bet you've got MSNBC on day and night and are enjoying the impeachment reality-TVshow. I can only imagine what Rachel is saying. She must be having a  field day.''Trump did this and then he did that. Impeachment is not good enough for him. Blah, blah, blah.'" 

He ranted on, "The Dems must be drooling over the prospect of impeaching him. I bet half of you are having dreams where he's perp-walked out of the White House and, in leg irons, shipped north to New York where he'll be prosecuted and hauled before a firing squad."

Then he said, "Tell the truth, you and your New York friends are getting your jollies from the so-called hearings. By now you must be in love with Shifty Schiff running things with an iron hand, cutting the mics whenever a Republican raises a point of order or wants to have witnesses of their own. Admit it. It's a done deal, right? Wired? Nancy Pelosi's counting the days before calling for a vote. She wants to get it done before Christmas so her people can run home to their districts and tell their constituents what good boys and girls they've been.

"They must be all puffed up, convinced that the things they're uncovering is the truth about Trump's corruption though most of the testimony is second and third hand. All of it hearsay, which is not admissible. Yes, I know, this is not a conventional trial and trial rules do not apply. But one could say that what they're working on--trying to turn a president out of office--is a bigger deal than almost any trial. So shouldn't Schiff use only the most legitimate tools and processes?

"But your pals are forgetting one thing as they race ahead." I almost broke my vow of silence to ask him what that might be. But it wasn't necessary as Jack said--"It's not about the House which the Dems control, the House can only bring charges. The Senate is the ballgame. They hold the real trial if Trump is in fact impeached. And if this happens the process moves across the capitol, to the Senate, which the Republicans control and where they make all the rules. I should say, Mitch McConnell runs the show. And what do you think he'll do? Nothing that will make you feel good. It will be a full bore, all out assault on the Democrats. They'll be the ones begging for points of order. As good as you're feeling now, that's how bad you'll feel when Mitch is running the show.

"For example, don't be surprised if they subpoena the Bidens. I don't see anything constitutional getting in the way of that. Or, for that matter, Hillary. Expect to hear about her emails."

So, I thought, now Jack is seeing himself as an authority on the Constitution.

"How do you think that'll go down? I know you're thinking--though you're clearly not talking--that it was wrong for Hunter Biden to get so tangled up in the Ukraine, making tons of money, while his father was Vice President. How else would he have been qualified for a job over there that paid him $50,000 a month?

"What I'm trying to say it that it's not always good to get what you hope for. Like the impeachment of Trump. Even Nancy worried out loud about how doing that might help him get reelected. The public would feel that the Dems are wasting everyone's time and spending millions of taxpayer dollars on a goose chase."

"You know, Jack, I agree . . ."

Before I could complete my thought, Jack had already hung up.

November 6, 2019--VA & KY

The big takeaway from yesterday's elections in Virginia and Kentucky, especially KY, is that a goodly percentage of Trump voters were comfortable crossing party lines to vote for Democratic candidates.

Up to this point progressives and independent-minded voters wondered if that was possible. Many saw Trump people as a obdurate cult who would do anything their leader asked of them. In Kentucky yesterday this meant voting for the Republican who was unpopular. Trump made a special trip to KY the night before the election to fire up his followers.

But what did they do in a state that went for Trump in 2016 by 30 points? Enough voted for the Democrat, Andy Beshear, who, as a result, won in a squeaker.

A version of the same thing occurred in Virginia.

These results should not be taken for granted. To defeat Trump, particularly with admittedly weak presidential candidates, Democrats and independent voters will have to work hard, very hard.

But yesterday demonstrated, more voters than assumed are up for grabs.

My hope is that Mitch McConnell had a sleepless night. Wouldn't it be delicious if in 2020 Mitch . . . ?

October 22, 2019--Jack Sputtering

Jack, alone, was slumped in a booth, seemingly talking to himself when we arrived at the Bristol Diner. 

Rona poked me and mouthed that maybe we should leave him alone. 

She whispered, "I think he's unraveling."

"If he is then maybe we should sit with him."  She nodded and led the way. 

"What's up Jack? You seem all out of joint?"

"I'm sick of those assholes."

"Who might they be?" Rona asked.

"Senators."

"Senators?" I said, "All of a sudden you care about them? I thought all that interested you was your president."

"That's my point."

"I'm not following you," I said. "Though I assume you're bent out of shape about the Republican senators."

"You assume correctly."

"I don't see why you're so down on them," Rona said, "They've rolled over for him. They'd be among those who wouldn't care if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue. All they're interested in is covering for him so he doesn't sic his base on them. Primary them, for example. They'll do anything to get reelected and believe if they cover for him, if they look the other way he won't come after them."

"It may surprise you," Jack said, "that I agree with most of that. They're a bunch of slimy hypocrites."

"Of course they're hypocrites. But I'm not getting your problem with them. As Rona said they're protecting him. I assume that's what you'd want them to do. Protect him from the Democrats."

"My problem is that these senators don't care about him but only about themselves. They'd throw him under the bus if they thought they could get away with it. This means the protection they provide is very thin and that makes Trump vulnerable."

"From your mouth to God's ear," Rona said. "I am hoping, to be honest, that they do throw him under the bus. My fantasy is that Pence becomes president. As bad as I think he would be he'd be like a breath of fresh air."

"His own people hate Trump and that scares me."

"Hate him?"

"If you were a Republican senator . . ."

"What a nightmarish thought," Rona said.

"If you were a Republican senator wouldn't you hate him? I don't mean express that openly. No one in their right mind who wants to remain in the Senate or run for president in four years would openly criticize him. As I said, they depend upon him to get reelected. So they show support for him and he reciprocates. Talk about quid pro quo."

"But I don't get the hate part. Why do they hate him?"

"They, all senators from both parties think of themselves as being members of the world's most exclusive club. There are only 100 senators, and they pride themeless on their independence and like to pretend they're above the grimy fray. In their own minds they're statesmen and compare themselves favorably to members of the House where representatives are comfortable doing whatever their leaders tell them to do. For example, how to vote. Look at how powerful Nancy Pelosi is. If she says jump, they jump. These days she even has AOC under her thumb. She housebroke her. Pun intended."

"I'm with you so far," Rona said.

"So how do you think it makes senators feel when they find themselves jumping when Trump tells them to do so? Or when Trump's lackey Mitch McConnell tells them to jump? Not too good, right?"

"I imagine not," Rona said.

"If true, then, a whole lot of Republican senators are not feeling very good about themselves. They're not the independent-minded big shots they like to think they are. They're a bunch of lackeys too. And politically and psychologically that can be dangerous for Trump. It means support for Trump in the Senate is thin because it was coerced and therefore is ready to explode or collapse. If Romney or Lindsey Graham, both still wanting to be president like half the senators do, were to pull the plug on their support for Trump, his presidency could come crashing down. Again, because most of the Republican senators hate him for what he has turned them into. How he has diminished and humiliated them. They know he has contempt for them. He doesn't even make the effort to pretend to pay attention to them much less take them seriously."

"This is quite an indictment," I said, "Sorry, though, for the indictment reference."

For the first time that morning Jack smiled.

August 6, 2019--My Kentucky Friend

For a kid from Brooklyn I seem to have a lot of friends from Kentucky. Here's an email from ABO who is from those parts and among the best people ever--

S&R

That was a great dinner at Jill’s last night.  Loved it!!   

If, today for any reason (not Jill’s wonderful cooking) you’re feeling nauseous, don’t read this.  It’s about food offerings at the Kentucky State Fair. It’s hard to believe, actually.  I wonder what this has to do with Trump winning Kentucky?  

Consider the Hot Brown Tater Tots.  Maybe you would like the Philly Cheesesteak donut burger?  https://www.courier-journal.com/picture-gallery/life/events/statefair/2019/08/05/kentucky-state-fair-food-through-the-years/1923575001/

Next to this article is one about Rand Paul having lung surgery because of the assault from his neighbor, and another about Mitch’s broken shoulder when he fell yesterday.  Also a new nominee for district judge nominated by Trump who thinks the FBI should report to the President. 

Kentucky is falling apart.  There will be nobody left to vote for Trump after they all die because of eating at the State Fair.

Love, 

ABO

February 15, 2019--National Emergencies

Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell unintentionally just set the agenda for the Democrat who will be elected in 2020 to succeed Trump as president.

He was good enough to set both the programmatic and the strategic agenda. With the latter being about how to govern.

Thank you Mitch.

Mitch did this when attempting to discourage Trump from declaring, in his case, a phony emergency.

Do not declare a national emergency, he urged Trump, to get your way with the border wall because if you do you will set a precedent for future presidents. Like the Democrat who will come after you in less than two years. A progressive who might use your precedent to declare emergencies involving gun "rights" and the climate.

When it comes to Trump, McConnell is whistling in the wind because for Trump there are no precedents. A precedent is something that applies to the future, but with Trump there is no such thing as the future. He is all about the now, caring only about himself, ignoring who or what comes next; and thus he will declare an emergency this morning to allow him to reap political credit from his base (meaning Ann Coulter, who two days ago called him a "weenie,"  and Sean Hannity) for building, or pretending to build the wall.

But for a normal person who might become president, governing by the strategic use of national emergencies in an era where nothing can be enacted by a broken and hyper-partisan Congress may make sense and to declare at least two emergencies--one to deal with the scourge of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of murderous people and the other for another genuine emergency, global warming--sounds like a plan for Kamala Harris or Joe Biden or Amy Klobuchar.

November 21, 2018--IvankaGate

According to a story in yesterday's Washington Post, presidential First Daughter and official senior advisor to the president (her daddy), using a personal account, Ivanka Trump, sent hundreds of emails last year to White House staff and Cabinet officials. 

According to sources, "hundreds" violated federal rules about the dissemination and retention of official papers and correspondence. 

Sound familiar? Do you hear "Lock her up. Lock her up" being chanted in the background? This from rabid Trump supporters who packed themselves into mass rallies during the primary and general election campaigns of 2016-17, the same time Ivanka was using personal email for official business  

If you were paying attention, so must have been Ivanka. And she as well as we knew the "her" bing chanted was Hillary Clinton and the reason Trump claimed that Hillary should be locked up was because, while secretary of state, she used a private email system rather than one provided by the government.

Also like Hillary, Ivanka is now asserting she did not know that by doing so she violated well established rules.

Clearly she wasn't paying attention. Or, more likely, felt that federal rules about official papers did not apply to her or, for that matter, her princely husband, Jared Kushner, also a senior presidential advisor, with whom she shared a personal network or domain.

As might be imagined, the mainstream media are having a field day with this example of blatant hypocrisy. How delicious it must seem to Democrats (very much including Hillary Clinton) who have had to endure Trump's mocking while blaming the former First Lady for all our troubles. He did so as recently as Sunday while trying to deflect probing questions from Chris Wallace on Fox News.

By Tuesday morning, on CNN and MSNBC, chat was all about Ivanka's let-them-eat-cake hauteur. But, on both networks, while gleefulness was universal, Jeffery Toobin, CNN's chief legal analyst, and John Harwood, Washington correspondent for CNBC, on Morning Joe expressed second thoughts. Both claimed that this was not that big a deal. Nor for that matter, retrospectively, was what Hillary did, though both confessed to having spent too much time on the Hillary flap. They cautioned that we should not to make the same mistake again. 

Mika, Joe, and Alisyn Camerota went ballistic. It would be irresponsible to give the story short shrift since is was such an open-and-shut opportunity to get back at the Trumps.

I agree with Joe, Mika, and Alisyn, but perhaps for somewhat different reasons.

Progressives need to take this on aggressively. Not only to get even with the Trump crime family but to demonstrate that like Republicans we are capable of fighting aggressively. 

There is a tendency within the educated, professional class to reason rather than fight. In many instances this is the appropriate option but in most political situations it needs to be more about winning than reasoning.

One reason Republicans have done as well as they have (including electing Trump) is because they have the capacity to battle relentless for things they want to achieve. Like getting nominees confirmed for federal judgeships. Change the rules if necessary. Keep an eye on the goal--winning.

Progressives often lose because they are too quick to be understanding and reasonable.

This is not an argument to emulate Mitch McConnell but to stop being such wusses when it comes to confrontations and political battles. A cold political war is underway and we demur at our peril.

October 23, 2018--Political Slut

Midterm election day is just two weeks from today. 

Two weeks at the end of a campaign can be a lifetime in voter mood swings. And, if you agree that this is the most consequential election of our lifetime, I hope you will consider how I am viewing it.

More than anything else voters need to restore some check and balance to the current political situation. James Madison was right--our system is designed to have divided government in order to prevent the emergence of a totalitarian leader. We face that prospect today. It is aided and abetted by the fact that the president and both houses of Congress are in the control of just one party.

Since the president is not on the ballot (except as a self-nationalizing surrogate), it is essential to flip at least one House. I think, forget the Senate. If anything, Republicans are likely to increase their majority there by at least two seats. Three or four incumbent Democratic senators are likely to lose and at most two states will switch from red to blue. Thus, the Senate will almost certainly remain in Mitch McConnell's gulag.

The House, though, is another matter. There, I am projecting, that as many as 35 Republicans will be defeated but only two or three Democrats. Enough to return the House to Democratic control.

But with Trump, the unusual often turns out to be the new usual. He has made this election about himself and has demonstrated the capacity to bring about electoral surprises. For example, two years ago by winning the presidency.

So, I say, when considering who to vote for forget totally issues that may be close to your heart. Become the same kind of political slut I am--obsessed about only one thing: winning.  

If you are passionate about gun control (I am) ignore the fact that the Democrat from your district running for the House is against what you consider to be meaningful gun control, hold your nose and vote for him or her anyway. (The Democratic House challenger here in Maine is featured in his TV ads as comfortable at a rifle range.)

If you are committed to single-payer healthcare--Medicare for all--(as I am) and if your Democratic candidate opposes this because he or she sees it as a budget-buster, for the moment forget that and vote for her or him.

And if you feel so strongly about preserving unfettered abortion rights that in all other circumstances it would be a litmus-test issue for you (I generally do feel this way), for the good of the larger cause, take a few deep breaths and pull the lever for the Democrat running in your district who supports some limitations on abortion--say, late term abortions--because unless he or she does take this position, to line up with the will of her or his potential constituents, the Republican will win and this will undermine the larger agenda--the desperate imperative to win back the House.

You get my point.

After we win, we can go back to debating issues. To do so now is a luxury we cannot afford. 

Also, during this final two weeks get involved. 

Make get-out-the-vote calls. Especially to Hispanic voters. Even if you are agoraphobic or have medical issues, you can do this from home in your pajamas. There is no excuse just to vote. Get directly to work. It is that important. 

There is no underestimating how empowered Trump and his people will feel and be if the Republicans retain control of all three branches of government (also, add the Supreme Court with its 5-4 conservative majority to this list). Unless some limitations are imposed on Trump's power by defeating him in at least the House (where serious investigations can take place as soon as January 1st) it will be a dangerous and depressing two or six more years.

Trump needs to be deflated. Right now. In two weeks.

October 8, 2018--Susan Collins: My Summer Senator

For half the year in Maine, Susan Collins is one of my senators.

A self-described "moderate Republican" I have yet to see much moderation in her voting record. 

On occasion she sounds moderate like when two years ago she struggled publicly about how to vote on a bill to repeal Obamacare (she eventually voted to eliminate it) and then last week when she seemed to agonize about how to vote when the roll was called to confirm Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court.

Again, she voted the Republican Party line. In fact, she cast the decisive 50th vote. No one up here was surprised by her seeming to have an open mind but when it came to voting acted as one of the most loyal, most robotic of Republicans.

She is so craven that on Friday she took the lead role in dooming the opposition to Kavanaugh.

With a new outfit and dye-job (he hair no longer looking like roadkill), with three female Republican senators like props seated behind her (Deb Fischer [NE], Shelly Capito [WV], and Cindy-Hyde Smith [MS]), with Lisa Murkowski conspicuously absent (she was too busy writing her own profile in courage), Collins spoke for 45 minutes with seeming feeling about the testimony offered by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. She could feel her pain, she claimed without feeling, but since she said there was no corroboration she was going to vote to confirm Kavanaugh.

Not a word did she offer about the deranged conspiracy-laced statement and testimony Kavanaugh offered last Thursday. Not a word about his judicial temperament, mental stability, or his many contemporary under-oath lies. All that mattered for Collins was a lack of clear evidence about something he may or may not have done 36 years ago.

What a disgraceful show she participated in. Perhaps most disgraceful was her willingness, as a woman, with three female coconspirators backing her up, to ignore the testimony of an impressive, deeply wounded woman.

At least no one wore pink.

I am always loath to make comparisons between events in the United States and Nazi Germany, but I cannot shake the feeling that Collins and her colleague female senators acted like concentration camp kapos. Like prisoners who were assigned by the SS guards to supervise forced labor of fellow prisoners or carry out administrative tasks. For this they were given special privileges. Like blankets and food. 

Collins, who has been in the Senate for 21 too-long years comes cheap. For her staged peregrinations and eventual "capitulation" she chairs just one subcommittee--on aging. How appropriate. 

But for the bit of her soul she sold Saturday, perhaps the majority leader, the already soulless Mitch McConnell (who considers the Kavanaugh confirmation his "proudest moment"), will name her to a real committee, the foreign relations committee, for example which would allow her to junket around the world at our expense.

Mark it on your calendar--she's up for reelection in 2020.

July 27, 2018--Hard Ball? T-Ball

John said, "We have to find a way to stop them." He was talking about Republicans in the Senate, which is considering the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

"I would like to agree but how do we do that? The Republicans control the Senate and I think they have the votes to confirm him."

"You're probably right," he said, sounding flat. "But I wish there was a way."

"Until the Gorsuch nomination and confirmation process a year and a half ago there had been. Since 60 votes were required it wasn't easy to muster that many in a closely divided Senate for someone controversial, someone now like Kavanaugh who has written that a sitting president can't be indicted under any circumstances."

"That's half the reason Trump nominated him," John said. "But Mitch McConnell unilaterally changed the rules so that only 51 votes are needed. A simple majority."

"He has the power to do that as Majority Leader. There's nothing in the Constitution about confirming Supreme Court justices. So the Senate has the ability to set whatever rules it wants to organize and govern itself."

"Yeah, he invoked what they call the 'nuclear option.'"

"What kills me," I said, "is how the Republicans, who consider themselves to be conservatives, have no problem doing disruptive, radical things like that. They're hypocrites who have little regard for tradition or congressional history."

John said, "During the first two years of the Obama administration the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress but they steered away from taking bold action of this kind. It's not just that they are wimps, which they are, but by not invoking the nuclear option because they felt it would undermine traditional senatorial decorum and ways of doing business, they lost the opportunity to enact a bold legislative agenda. They even wound up with a very watered-down Obamacare program. They frittered away the opportunity to govern. Complaining all the time. Which Democrats are very good at. Complaining."

"I agree," John said, "The Republicans play hardball and congressional Democrats play T-Ball."

"McConnell and the Republicans only care about winning. Liberals and Democrats care about being right."

John summed it up, "And so we have what we have."

July 23, 2018--Mulligan Summit

In golf, when you hit a bad drive and your ball lands in the pond or deep in the woods, if other members of your foursome agree to your taking another shot without penalty and you do, it's called a Mulligan.  

It is named for an actual person, David Bernard Mulligan, who in the late 1920s played at the Winged Foot golf course in Mamaroneck, NY and was notorious for asking frequently for do-overs.

That's what Donald Trump is up to as he moves to schedule in the fall and in Washington another summit with Vladimir Putin. Or maybe at his Mar-a-Lago golf course. Perhaps the only place he can best Putin. But then black-belt Putin might insist on a Judo match. Vince McMahon CEO of the World Wrestling Federation I am certain would be happy to promote that.

Having to endure so much heat for wimping out at the recent Helsinki summit, Trump is not only trying to take back or redefine half the things he said publicly at their joint press conference and subsequently at last Wednesday's Cabinet meeting, ("would" was really "wouldn't" and "no" was "yes"), realizing this was not enough to take him off the hook (even Trump flunkies Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell managed to squeeze out a few choked words of criticism), Trump wants a Mulligan. And Putin will grant him one since he knows he can humiliate Trump again at a second press conference.

But then there is a possible other scenario. To me, a more interesting one--


At the summit, especially when dealing with the press, in WWF terms, Trump gets Putin to take a dive.

The meeting of course would be scheduled for a few weeks before the November midterm election to have maximum impact on the vote. 

The intention would be to pump up Trump's base (assuming they can be pumped up even more than they already are). To do so, Putin would have to agree to let Trump dominate the summit and its aftermath. Particularly to let Trump criticize him in public (Putin, though, would have to be allowed to roll his eyes). This would permit Trump to masquerade as the strongman he isn't and thereby rehabilitate his deflating persona. To shed the lingering image of him as Putin's lapdog.

Why would this be a good thing for Putin? Enough so that he would allow himself to appear to be diminished?

Out of public view (where the real action is) since Putin owns Trump and has been able to pull his strings for years, nothing would change. In fact, Trump's behavior as Putin's double-agent would be strengthened. If his image as commander-in-chief can be shored up, that would make him more effective when doing Putin's bidding. 

A stronger-seeming Trump would be a better cover story. It would make it less apparent that Putin owns him.

So look for Putin to play along. He will agree to come to Washington or Palm Beach in October for a Mulligan-summit and will let Trump strut around for a few days at his "expense."

If this is the emerging plan, I doubt that Trump without medication can pull it off. He will have a script but he is not good at following scripts and so expect the Mar-a-Lago do-over summit to turn out to be another fiasco.