April 10, 2019--My Roy Cohn

As so many things have continued to close in on Trump, it is no surprise that he might be pining for, as he put it, "his" Roy Cohn.

Cohn, as you likely recall, is best known for having been Senator Joseph McCarthy's chief counsel during the years McCarthy had Washington and the rest of the country in thrall as he pursued, by mainly nefarious means, communists who, without verifiable evidence, the senator claimed had infiltrated the highest echelons of our government. 

Communists who did so, he alleged, included the Secretary of State as well as President Truman and even the beloved Republican President Eisenhower. They were suspicious and in this unhinged way McCarthy was decidedly bipartisan--communists and their sympathizers were everywhere. 

As difficult as it may be to imagine more than 60 years later, considering the preposterousness of the senator's claims, McCarthy was trusted by nearly half the population and some feel, if he had run for president, might very well have been elected.

Roy Cohn was McCarthy's go-to person when it came to engaging in the most slanderous of activities. He was McCarthy's enabler, pressing him to up the ante, to probe deeper into the government, to make things up if that were necessary, which it generally was since the hundreds, perhaps thousands McCarthy maligned and whose lives were shattered were innocent, including one of my uncles who was purged from his teaching job at Weequahic High School in Newark because his parents were Russian immigrants.

After McCarthy fell, drinking himself to death, Cohn returned to New York City where he became the fixer for many prominent and wealthy New Yorkers, particularly members of the high-end real estate community.

This included the young and flamboyant Donald J. Trump, who was engaged at the time in so many nefarious activities, including being in bed with members of the Mafia, that he needed a virtual full-time lawyer to defend him from literally hundreds of lawsuits.

When hauled before the court, Cohn famously advised Trump that rather than play defense or cop a plea, he should turn things on their head, and relentlessly, in return, attack, attack, attack. And when he wanted something, he should relentlessly sue everyone and everything that could be included in the litigation. 

It is difficult to quantify just how many times Trump was sued and in return countersued, but surely over the years it has been thousands of times.  

Any of this sounding familiar?

What we are seeing today comes right out of the Roy Cohn playbook. But with Cohn no longer around, he died of AIDS in 1986, we can understand, considering the many-faceted pressures Trump is experiencing, that he would plaintively ask, "Where is my Roy Cohn?"

But, with Cohn gone he has little choice but to rely on the increasingly ridiculous Rudy Giuliani to represent him to the media, and, for help with strategic thinking, such as it is, his youthful policy aide, Stephen Miller. 

A Roy Cohn clone, even in appearance, if ever there was one.

Trump and Miller share one policy obsession--immigration. And so when he learned of Miler's views about the borders, it was love at first sight since building the  wall that Mexico would pay for was essentially what Trump's 2016 campaign was all about. 

Before coming to the White House, Miller was Senator Jeff Sessions' chief of staff and while working for the Alabaman, who saw nothing but evil in all forms of immigration--legal as well as illegal--Trump realized he was just the person, after all else failed (including declaring a national emergency which is currently stalled in the courts), to turn the mess over to.

Miller also represents what is dearest to Trump: his views about the limitlessness of presidential power.

Disturbingly, in February 2017, Miller said, "The powers of the president will not be questioned." 

Note the totalitarian syntax. The only thing missing is a German accent.

In Miller, Trump has finally found his Roy Cohn.

February 27, 2018--Trump Unfettered

As much as I am enjoying following along as special counsel Robert Mueller makes Donald Trump and those close to him who not only colluded with the Russians but obstructed justice, as much as I like to see them squirm while their world continues to implode and they are forced to face justice--I like schadenfreude as much as the next fellow--I am beginning to worry about some of the unintended consequences of, one-by-one, Trump's people being indicted or copping pleas.

I do look forward to seeing the Trump boys' comeuppance, Hope Hicks being exposed for the enabler she is, as eager as I am to see Ivanka brought down for taking commercial advantage of her First Daughter status, as much as Jared Kushner likely deserves to be exposed and prosecuted for financial shenanigans, and of course above all how I crave the outing and perhaps impeachment or prosecution of the Godfather of the Trump Crime Family, while impatient for all of this, I am beginning to worry what Trump will be like when he finds himself essentially alone in the White House with Hope and Jared and especially Ivanka gone, as one way or the other they all likely will be.

No matter what Mueller finds, even if the Democrats in November take over the House of Representatives and impeach Trump (40/60), he will not be convicted by the Senate, and since he delusionally is not a quitter (his whole being depends upon viewing himself as winning at everything), he will not take a Nixon and resign and we will be faced with two-and-a-half more years of Trump as president with the nuclear codes not far from his night table. 

As fundamentally corrupt and perhaps as felonious as they are, Hope, Jared, and Ivanka may be the only ones who have the access and capacity to have a chance to moderate him, such as moderating Trump can ever be.

With them gone, do we want to see a White House with weaselly Stephen Miller even more empowered, former UN Ambassador John Bolton brought in as head of the National Security Council, and Steve Bannon re-ensconced, this time as Secretary of State?

Whatever small measure of sanity and constraint John Kelly, Rex Tillerson, H.R. McMaster, and James Mattis provide, with the three children exiled, and the hawks more in charge, what would the next two years of Trump's presidency look like? 

War with North Korea? We have a preview of that right now as Trump didn't even give our ally South Korea the courtesy of an additional day or two to close the Olympics before imposing a form of naval blockade on North Korea, virtually an act of war as blockades are.

One more round of indictments of those closest to Trump and . . . 

The one proven thing for presidents to do when cornered, as Trump surely will be, is to start or intensify a war. John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Richard Nixon did that in Vietnam, Reagan invaded Grenada, and George HW and George W did the same in Iraq. As a result HW's approval ratings shot up to 90 percent as did his son's.

To make matters even more psychosomatically complicated, it appears that First Lady Melania is weighing in on the Ivanka-Kushner-versus-John Kelly blood feud. She is taking Kelly's side in a deeply Freudian struggle that ultimately is about the jealousy she doubtlessly feels as Trump so clearly prefers the daughter to the spouse.

While Trump leers at and talks smuttily about Ivanka and gets exposed for cavorting with pornstars and Playmates, Melania seethes and then draws upon her Eastern European DNA to come up with an appropriate form of revenge, that among other things includes getting rid of the competition.

Some of this may be over-speculation, but is it wise to deny that this scenario is plausible and if true imperils us?

I would prefer to wake up one morning to find that the Trumps, grifters that they are, overnight moved out of the White House. But since that is inconceivable, I am thinking it's prudent to hope the three kids figure out a way to hang in. At least through November. Maybe even until 2020.

January 24, 2018--Losers & Winners

For days after Congress couldn't agree to a short term budget fix, which resulted in the government going dark, and then after three days it's reopening, if you spent any time watching cable news virtually all the talk was about who won and who lost.

Was the "Schumer-Shutdown," as the Republicans derisively referred to it, evidence that Democrats in the Senate "blinked" when they realized they had overstepped when they refused to make a budget deal?

Or was President Trump the political loser (no equivalent alliterative epithet for this) when he agreed to include six years of child healthcare, CHIP funding in exchange for a three-week continuing resolution?

Losers and winners is the way so much of our public life has come to be construed. Not what gets done but who's up and, especially, who's down.

But with their reporters scurrying around the halls of Congress to take the minute-to-minute pulse--especially of the dozen or so Democratic senators who are already running for president in 2020--these news sources missed the big picture--who actually won and what it may mean going forward. May mean.

The deal finally hammered out more than anything else was the result of a bipartisan group of about two dozen senators working together 10, 12 hours a day on something they and their colleagues could live with.

They met in semi-secrecy in Maine Republican senator Susan Collin's "safe office," her "sanctuary office," talking to each other about substantive issues for the first time in their senatorial lives, some reported, largely because they felt they couldn't depend upon their leaders--Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell--to come up with a deal as they were so immeshed in posturing and spinning the truth before the waiting microphones and CSPAN cameras.

Many of the participants in the "gang or 25" said that they were so fed up by being excluded from the sausage-making process of crafting legislation and so disgusted by the equivocation and mixed messages emanating from the president and his White House, where many felt Trump was being "led around by the nose," as Joe Scarborough put it, by "a 32-year-old kid," presidential advisor Stephen Miller, who looks like a picture of evil right out of central casting, that they took matters into their own hands and for a change earned their $174,00-a-year salaries (which, incidentally continued during the shutdown).

Some, after the agreement was struck, said that the experience of working together across party lines to "get things done" was the reason they originally sought public office--and here's the potential big headline--that not only did they feel good about what they accomplished (though the full story about that will not be known for some weeks as the centripetal political forces struggle to reassert themselves as the 2020 campaign heats ups), they said this is how they plan to work going forward. 

They claimed they will stick together and deal themselves in when it comes to what to do about the so-called "DACA kids," hurricane disaster relief, Obamacare fixes, infrastructure, and border security. Some "big stuff."

Are we at last witnessing an outbreak of comity and moderation?

As my grandmother used to say when any of us brought a new girlfriend home to meet her and perhaps (unlikely) pass her special muster, "We'll see."

Every once in awhile she revealed that she could actually smile. That's what I am planning to hope for now--that we are at a pivotal moment and it will take hold.

We'll see.

January 10, 2018--Factotum

Late in the day on Sunday I heard from a number of progressive friends who called all excited about what they saw to be a takedown by Jake Tapper of CNN of Stephen Miller, White House senior advisor.

"I missed that," I said.

"It was on Jake's Sunday show, State of the Nation. Watch it on YouTube. You'll love it.

I did watch it and did sort of love it. At least until I gave it more thought.

In case you, like I, missed it, it was an interview largely about Michael Wolff's Trump tell-all, Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House. Miller was clearly offered around to the Sunday talkshows as a counterweight to the Wolff tome. He was the perfect choice to send out on a retaliatory mission since he had been Steve Bannon's protégé; and Bannon, the main source of the most damaging reporting about Trump--how he is like a nine-year-old child and that Donald Jr. committed "treason" when he agreed to talk with the Russians about the "dirt" they claimed to have about Hillary Clinton--needed to be put down.

As my friend surmised, I did love it. To me Trump and everyone he touches are compromised. Very much including Miller. But what I didn't love was how Tapper, in his pose as a journalist, treated Miller who was his guest.  

Here are some selections from what turned out to be a brief interview--

Miller: "The president is a political genius . . . who took down the Bush dynasty, who took down the Clinton dynasty, who took down the entire media complex."

He went on to reup Trump's claim that he is "like, really smart," a veritable "very stable genius." He called Wolff the "garbage author of a garbage book" but Miller's real transgression, was accusing Tapper of being "condescending," and claiming that CNN promulgates "very fake news."

Tapper: Miller's calling him "condescending" clearly got under Tapper's skin--"I get it. There's one viewer that you care about right now, and you're being obsequious [servile, ingratiating], and you're being a factotum [lackey] in order to please him."

With that, he cut Miller off, saying he had nothing worthwhile to say and while Miller continued to rant, Tapper looked into the camera and introduced the next guest. It appears that Miller (off camera now) refused to leave and had to be physically removed by CNN security.

Miller's audience of one tweeted--

Jake Tapper of Fake News CNN just got destroyed in his interview with Stephen Miller of the Trump Administration. Watch the hatred and unfairness of this CNN flunky!

Tapper feigned surprise. But what was he expecting? Rational discourse about the strengths and weaknesses of the Wolff book? He knew in advance what Miller was sent out to do and rather than booking him, saying I don't allow shills and factotums on my show, he signed him up as he knew it would turn out to be a dogfight and go viral in less than a couple of hours. All turned out to be true.

This is not journalism to me but rather talkshow mud wrestling designed to increase ratings, which the struggling Tapper and State of the Union could use.

Monday morning, again on CNN's New Day, cohosts Alisyn Camerota and Chris Cuomo had New York Times White House correspondent Maggie Haberman as a guest. Camerotta pressed her about an interesting subject--

Unlike Michael Wolff who does not have to maintain good relations with the Trump administration--his book is out and he is already making millions in royalties--because she has "to go back to the White House" every day after writing articles that frequently are critical of Trump and his people, does this place her in a compromised position as she needs to remain in the White House's good graces to do her job? Does she have to pull her punches, so to speak, in order to retain access?

Not at all, she in effect said, I report it as I see it. Let the chips fall where they may.

Do you believe that? I'm skeptical.

And then there are my Morning Joe friends, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski who a year and a half ago were cozied up to candidate Donald Trump. When he appeared on their show--it seemed almost daily--their ratings went off the charts. They were even eager to have a close social relationship to their friend "Donald." Wolff reports about their visits, as a closeted couple, to Mar-a-Lago. Apparently during one visit last January, a week after Trump was inaugurated, Jared Kushner and The Donald playfully spatted about who would marry them once they fessed up publicly to their on-going romance.

But things have gone south in their off-camera relationship. Cut off from access, they have been merciless in their attacks on Trump and his inner circle. So much so that Monday morning when Michael Wolff was on their show hustling Fire and Fury, they brought up some of the inaccuracies in his reporting, including those about them! 

But then, rather, than pressing to hold Wolff responsible for his inaccuracies and carelessness, they made excuses for him, saying, the book is less about the accuracy of incidents but about the overall impression that it offers of Trump and his presidency.

In these three examples it is clear why so many Americans are fed up with the media. They see the leading opinion writers and reporters to lack integrity and objectivity. Those who have personal agendas (Joe and Mika) or ideological interests (Tapper and Cuomo) or who are just trying to promote a book (Wolff) or publicize their reporting (Haberman) are most prone to professional self-righteousness and loss of objectivity.  

We progressives, especially, need to clean up our acts since we should not want to give media-bashers additional reasons and evidence with which to attack our credibility. 

February 22, 2017--Milo Yiannopoulos

More evidence of implosion--

General Michael Flynn is gone, fired as National Security Council Advisor, replaced by an adult, and with him goes some of the paranoia and conspiratorial thinking that pervades the West Wing.

Many on both sides of the aisle are hoping that chief strategist, Stephen Bannon and his protégée Stephen Miller will soon follow. Kallyanne Conway has already been marginalized. Have you seen her recently? Is she still being "counseled" and reeducated for hawking Ivanka Trump's schematas? Is she the next one to be jettisoned?

If so it could be that there is some low-wattage light flickering at the end of the very long Trump tunnel.

More good news--

The ever-hypocritical Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) has just withdrawn its invitation to senior Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos to address their upcoming convention.

Greatly "admired" by Bannon, according to the New York Times, for his alt-right orthodoxy which includes dollops of racism and anti-Semitism, Milo has been in the headlines recently for having been driven away from speaking at Berkeley where protesting students proclaimed with some violence, forgetting the free-speech history of their institution, that there is "no free speech for hate speech."

CPAC made a big deal of this, totally enjoying the irony at Berkeley and, mounting their high libertarian horse, invited Milo to address them as evidence that conservatives are less politically correct and more constitution-minded than liberals.

They were OK with the hate speech part of Milo's repertoire but when it leaked out that he also has spoken positively about man-boy pedophilia, including among Catholic priests, that was too much even for CPACers. They pulled the plug on him and made frantic rounds of the morning talk shows to try to explain away their hypocrisy.

They are for free speech but not when it "crosses certain lines." Clearly one of those lines doesn't include forbidding a CPAC speaker to hint with winks and nods that it's all right to be a white supremacist or anti-Semite.

Does this foretell Stephen Bannon's fate? With Yiannopoulos on the loose and CPAC at a boil, Bannon's presence, whispering in Trump's ear, may embolden Bannon's White House enemies (Reince Priebus and Jared Kushner among others) to put pressure on Trump to do a little more house cleaning.

January 31, 2017--Trump's Band of Amateurs

Much of Donald Trump's appeal has been his swaggering claim that because of his experience as a successful businessman he is not some over-experienced, incompetent government type.

The latter, by definition, are incompetent. Look at the mess professional politicians have made. It's time to turn government, whatever small part of it we will leave intact, over to people who know how to get things done. Like build a casino. We'll take our business acumen and apply it to the simple matter of running the government.

Thus, all the generals and CEO types Trump has selected to join him in running USA, Inc.

But so far, just 10 days into his presidency, Trump has already demonstrated that his boys don't in fact know how to get the job done.

Case in point this past weekend is the roll out of the new ban on Muslims from seven Middle Eastern countries. Including Iraq where people who risked their lives to help us fight ISIS are being turned back as they try to come to America.

The Trump immigration roll out was as bungled as the mocked Obama launch of Obamacare.

In Trump's case the immigration-ban mess is a result of intentional choices--rather than recruit and hire a few key staffers who know how things work at the senior executive level he selected the under-experienced Steven Bannon (now frighteningly a member of the National Security Council) and Stephen Miller to be in charge of White House policy.

Together they hatched this plan, opted not to consult with anyone in the Pentagon or Department of Homeland Security, so that Trump could sign the executive order with a ceremonial flourish, believing that all that was required to successfully implement this xenophobic and likely illegal policy was a stroke of the presidential pen.

Trump ran against elites of all kinds but primarily those in the media and government. There is a lot to find fault with in both places, but a certain amount of experience and, more important, competency counts when you want to get big things done in a complex and contested political environment. The Oval Office is not the set for The Apprentice or the Trump Organization.

Even incoming presidents such as Ronald Reagan who famously proclaimed government not the solution to problems but rather the cause of them, stocked his cabinet and the White House with solid citizens who knew how things work when dealing with Congress and the press.

This time around we have Bannon and Miller, neither one of whom has a clue about how things are accomplished in Washington. They clearly do not know that Reagan needed Tip O'Neill as a partner. Or that Bill Clinton had Newt Gingrich.

And, so it appears, neither does Trump who is now bumbling his way through the mess he and his amateur staff devised, including late last night firing his acting attorney general, evocative of Richard Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre

In fact, Trump's response has been so inept that he managed to make things worse. Now at least half the world hates us. All the product of a week's work.

As a result, he is quickly losing control of the agenda and has fewer and fewer Washington friends who he will need if he is to have a successful legislative agenda.

Which, in the end, may be a good things. The less of his agenda the better.

Stephen Miller (left) and Steven Bannon