Sen. Durbin confirms Trump's "shithole" comments

Although President Trump has vaguely said he did not use the language attributed to him in his "shithole countries" comment, Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL), the second ranking Democratic in the Senate, confirms that he did.   He was in the Oval Office himself and heard it, along with Sens. Lindsey Graham and five other senators.  According to HuffPost, Sen. Durbin contradicted the president, saying that he had in fact 'said these hate-filled things and he said them repeatedly.'

"I cannot believe that in the history of the White House, in that Oval Office, any president has ever spoken the words that I personally heard our president speak yesterday," Durbin said.  "You've seen the comments in the press.   I've not read one of them that's inaccurate."    Sen Graham (R-SC) said that what has been reported in the media "is largely accurate."

This comes within a day of the president's almost scuttling the reauthorization of the FISA warrant requirement for surveillence because of something he heard on Fox News, which advanced a conspiracy theory feeding Trump's belief that his own 'wires were tapped' during the transition.  Trump decided that was the explanation.  It took a phone call with House Majority Leader Paul Ryan to convince him otherwise and to salvage the legislation.

Add to this his tortured explanation for why he's not going to attend the opening of the newly constructed U.S. embassy building in London.  His explanation:  he doesn't like the location or the design;  it cost too much and it was a bad deal made by Obama.  'They want me to come cut the ribbon.   I said No.'

The real reason:   The trip was planned in the early weeks of his administration when Prime Minister Theresa May visited him in Washington and extended a routine invitation.    But now, his behavior -- especially his anti-Muslim antics -- has earned him so much disapproval in England that everyone was anticipating large demonstrations against him if he came.   Parliament at one point took a vote to rescind approval of the invitation.

And a couple of facts:   The embassy building replaces a 1960s design by foremost Modernist architect Eero Saarinen.    But it posed a number of security threat exposures which were impossible to compensate for in that location.   And it had become too small by far for the work force.  As to cost:    with the sale of the building to the Qatari government, which plans to turn it into a luxury hotel, plus the sale of supplemental buildings required for additional work space, the billion dollar financing for the new building was secured.   It essentially paid for itself.

As to blaming it on Obama -- as Trump loves to do about anything -- the decision to relocate and rebuild was made during the George W. Bush administration, even though actual construction didn't begin until 2013.   Although the location is not in the toney Mayfair district it has been in, the new location, on the banks of the Thames, has already sparked development and construction that is transforming the new location.

Admittedly, this is a tough time for Trump -- with Mueller nipping at his heels -- but, if the president can't handle it, he should resign.

Ralph

PS:   The U.S. ambassador to Panama, John Freely, a career diplomat, has resigned after telling the State Department he can no longer honor his oath "to serve faithfully the president and his administration in an apolitical fashion, even when I might not agree with certain policies. . . .  My instructors made clear that if I believed I could not do that, I would be honor bound to resign.  That time has come."

PPS:   As of Friday evening, reported by Rachel Maddow on MSNBC, Georgia's Sen. Johnny Isakson has made the strongest criticism by any Republican member of Congress of the president's racial slur, saying:  "(The president) owes the people of Haiti and all of mankind an apology.  This is not the kind of statement the leader of the free world should make, and he ought to be ashamed of himself."
    Good for you, Johnny.  If I was ever going to vote for a Republican, it would be you.

Donald Trump is a "brain-eating disease"

Towards the end of 2017, the New York Times' roving international columnist Thomas L. Friedman wrote from Mumbai.   He began by saying what I have also felt:  Trying to cover Donald Trump is equivalent to "having a brain-eating disease."

Friedman went on to explain:  "His indecent behavior, and nonstop outrageous tweets and actions, force you as a commentator into a terrible choice:  either ignore it all and risk normalizing Trump's excesses or write about him constantly and risk not having time to learn and report about the big trends now reshaping the world."

Most days, it's worse than that:   not a choice between Trump and the world, but choosing one Trumpism out of the many, each worse than the last.

Since I wrote yesterday's blog, Trump held his made-for-TV meeting with congressional leaders -- letting the TV cameras watch a staged, 50 minute "negotiating" session to hammer out the decision about the Dreamers Act (DACA) and the Wall.   It was obviously designed to portray the president as the negotiating "stable genius" he had claimed himself to be, just one day before.

What he showed, however is that he has only the thinnest grasp of policy, even immigration which was his signature issue ever since he came down the golden escalator.   He didn't seem to know what Sen. Diane Feinstein meant by "a clean DACA bill" (he readily agreed to do it, only to be quickly corrected by one of his loyalists).   Nor did he have any grasp of what "comprehensive immigration reform" might entail.

He also showed -- before TV cameras and millions of viewers -- that he has no negotiating skills.   He simply agrees with what the last person says, then changes as soon as someone says something different.   So the obvious lesson is that nothing he says or agrees to has any worth.

He made sweeping statements like:   "Whatever you folks come up with, I'll sign it."   But then a moment later insists that "we have to have the wall."

So there was that on Wednesday.   Then, before writing about that, Thursday happened and obliterated it all.    He met in private with another, smaller group to further discuss immigration issues, this time specifically the debated diversity lottery for would-be immigrants from countries that have a low level of applications to come to the U.S.

"Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here? . . .   Why don't we have more people from places like Norway?" the president asked the group, sources told the Washington Post.   The comment was later confirmed by NBC, Buzzfeed, and CNN.

Last month, the New York Times had also reported that Trump had disparaged immigrants from Haiti (saying they "all have AIDS") and from African countries ("who would never go back to their huts once they've seen the U.S.").   Apparently it was a big deal on Dec. 23rd;  but I missed hearing about it, being out of news range for a few days for the holidays.

In response to Thursday's "shithole countries," a White House spokesman has made a general comment about the president standing up for Americans but did not deny the president's derogatory remarks or profanity.

Oh, yes.   What was the big trend reshaping the world that Tom Friedman wanted to write about?   It seems that China and India are leaping light-years ahead of us in digitizing data for identificatory purposes.  In India, they already have completed registering more than 1 billion of their people into a 12 digit ID system based on fingerprints, iris scans, and information like name, address, date of birth, and sex.

Meanwhile, our president has done absolutely nothing to try prevent Russia from interfering in our next election -- just over 10 months away.   In fact, he has never, ever said one derogatory word about Russia or Putin.    It's past strange, and what Robert Mueller has found out probably has a lot to do with Donald Trump's rattled state of mind.

Ralph

PS:   Comments are beginning to come in from people in Norway, saying they don't want to come live in our shithole country.

More good news

1.  Reported by the New York Times:  "A panel of federal judges struck down North Carolina's congressional map Tuesday, condemning it as unconstitutional because Republicans had drawn the map seeking  political advantage."   An earlier court had also struck down the N.C. map for state legislative districts.   The decision will likely be appealed to a higher court;  but this is very significant because it is the first federal court decision on district line-drawing based on political advantage, as opposed to racial or other discriminatory bases.

Two similar cases (from Wisconsin and Maryland) are pending before the U.S. Supreme Court;  and the North Carolina case might very well be joined with them to give SCOTUS the opportunity "to develop a legal standard for determining when a partisan gerrymander crosses constitutional lines."

2.  The Senate Judiciary Committee is one of three congressional committees investigating Russia's interference in our 2016 presidential election,   Last August, it held 11 hours of testimony from Glenn Simpson, head of the Fusion GPS investigative group that commissioned Christopher Steele to produce the now infamous "dossier" about Donald Trump's connections with Russia.    Bits and pieces of the transcript of Mr., Simpson's testimony have been selectively leaded by Republicans on the committee in such a way that they have produced a distorted narrative of what actually happened.    Mr. Simpson has requested that the entire transcript be released to the public, so as to clear up these distortions.

Republican chair Chuck Grassley has refused to do so;   instead he and Sen. Lindsey Graham, a member of the committee, had sent a letter to the Justice Department asking for a criminal investigation into Mr. Steele, who compiled the material.     This is outrageous.   Steele is perhaps the most respected, former Russia expert on the British MI-6 spy agency.  He is now working as an independent investigator.   As a British citizen, he took it upon himself to alert our FBI of his discovery that alarmed him about Russian influence on our democratic process.

Leave it to a woman to ride to the rescue.    Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), who is the ranking Democratic member of the Committee, simply took it upon herself yesterday afternoon to release the entire transcript to the press and thus to the public.   Now it's out there -- and all these Republican distortions can be cleared up.   There's also some material that helps explain why the Republicans didn't want to release the transcript.  For one thing, it shoots down their narrative that the whole thing is a witch hunt, a hoax.  Second, it raises lots of questions about Trump and his financial ties to shady figures.

3.  One of the revelations in the Simpson transcript is the fact that the Steele dossier is not what started the FBI's investigation of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.   In fact, when Christopher Steele felt he had to tell the FBI what he was finding that led him to suspect that Trump was either being blackmailed or had been compromised by the Russians, the FBI believed him -- because they already had evidence that someone inside the Trump organization had information that led to this same conclusion.   That is, the Steele tip did not start the FBI's investigation;  it merely confirmed what they already knew.

4.  Steve Bannon is now out at Breitbart.    He is no longer the editorial head nor does he have his radio show -- all made possible by the billionaire father-daughter Mercer family pair who were heavily invested in the Breitbart organization.   But they are siding with Donald Trump in the spat with Bannon over comments in the Wolff book.  Steven Bannan's meteoric rise to White House strategist has been followed by a fall of Humpty-Dumpty proportions.    In the words of his former boss as to what happens to him now:   "We'll see."

5.  Several senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee have told reporters that there is nothing in the Steele dossier, other than some minor mistakes, that has been disproved.   Not everything has been proved, but nothing significant has been disproved.   And that includes statements including Trump's history of financial involvements in the past with Russian mobsters and oligarchs.

6.   One more Republican announces retirement.   Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), who was at one time the chair of the House Government Oversight Committee has said he will not run for re-election.   Two years ago, he won by only 1600 votes in a district that Hillary Clinton won.   Is it the office or the man?   Every one of the Republicans who have chaired that committee during my time of interest -- Issa, Jason Chavitz, and now Trey Gowdy -- have behaved in a way that I have come to hate with a passion for being egregiously mean, totally lacking in empathy, and dedicated to partisan advantage for their party.   Good riddance.   Chafitz is already gone.  Gowdy probably has more integrity than the others, but he can be pretty obnoxious in power.

There's actually some more good news.   But let's not overdo it.   Enough for now.

Ralph

Rejoice. Something worked right in gov't.

photo:   Alex Wong, Getty Images                                                When President Trump appointed Rick ("Oops") Perry as Secretary of Energy, many of us thought this can't be a good thing.   Rick Perry (and probably Donald Trump, too) didn't know what the job entails -- you know, oil and gas and coal, stuff that people drill out of the ground and get rich on.

Perry had been governor of Texas, where they do have a lot of oil drilling.  And Trump had promised the miners in West Virginia that he would bring back their coal mining jobs.   So together they had this energy thing, a done deal.

The truth is a little more complex, which is why President Obama's first and second Energy Secretaries were both brilliant nuclear research physicists, one with a Nobel Prize.

Because, the truth is, the job of Secretary of Energy has much more these days to do with nuclear energy regulation, safe-guarding of our nuclear weapons, mutual defense treaties, and development of clean, renewable energy sources.    Coal is dead, and oil is on the way out.  Fracking for natural gas will last a few decades.   But it's not the wave of the future, and we need an energy czar that knows that.

Which is all the more reason to rejoice that something worked right in our government structure this week.   Vox.com's David Roberts explained it this way:

Late last year, Rick Perry's Department of Energy asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to bail out struggling power plants that run on coal or nuclear energy.   The plan was to require that the government ensure the full recovery cost for their maintaining a 90 day supply of those fuels on hand.

In effect, as I understand it, it's a selective give-away to coal and nuclear industries -- but not newer renewable energies sources.   It's sort of the anti-subsidy for renewable energy.

Here's where it gets good and we can start rejoicing.   The FERC gave its answer yesterday, and they said: No. 

Roberts wrote:   "There's no spinning this news.  It is a serious setback for the Trump administration, a rebuke to Perry, and an assertion of FERC's ongoing independence and integrity.

"It also marks the emergence of a serious national discussion about the performance of the electricity grid . . .  Despite Perry's efforts . . . big piles of coal will not play a prominent role in that discussion. . . .

"Perry was asking FERC to intervene in energy markets in the crudest possible way, distorting their results based on justifications that were not even facially plausible.

"[Perry's] argument was twofold:  a) subsidies for renewable energy are driving coal and nuclear plants out of business;  and b) the loss of those plants is hurting the reliability and resilience of the electric grid."

The problem, according to Roberts, is that neither argument is true.  Several technical reports showed that the Perry proposal would "substantially raise costs on consumers, for no benefit. . . . "   The commission's decision was unanimous, which is even more promising, given that four of the five members are now Trump appointees.

This decision suggests that FERC will make rational decisions, not just the politically expedient ones.  FERC's core legal justification is simple:  "To justify a change in energy market rules, petitioners to FERC must show two things:"  a) that existing rules are unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory or preferential;  and b) proposed rules are just, reasonable, and not discriminatory or preferential.

The commissioners ruled that the Energy Department proposal failed on both counts.    Now isn't that the way things are supposed to work?    Isn't this a cause for rejoicing -- not just for this one decision -- but for the fact that such a decision can still happen?

I'll let Roberts and Vox.com have the last word:
"For now, it's enough to say that a blow was struck this week for evidence-based policy-making.   In pursuit of crony capitalism, Perry blundered into a nest of wonks.   He did not fare well."

Oops !

Ralph

PS:   Maybe the real lesson here is that in Trumplandia it's better to put an "oops" guy in charge, if the professionals know what they're doing, rather than a Scott Pruitt who knows enough to destroy the EPA.

Oprah for Conscience-in-Chief?

[Reprinted from Variety magazine, 01-08-18]

Oprah Winfrey received the Cecil B. DeMille award at the 75th Golden Globes, Oprah delivered a powerhouse speech to an almost silent room. Landing line after line Oprah schooled the audience in history, referencing Recy Taylor and expressing deep gratitude “to all the women who have endured years of abuse and assault because they, like my mother, had children to feed and bills to pay and dreams to pursue.”

But perhaps the biggest cheer in the room was heard after Oprah addressed the men who use their power to silence women with a warning, “their time is up.”

Here is the transcript of her speech here:

*     *     *

"In 1964 I was a little girl sitting on the linoleum floor of my mother’s house in Milwaukee watching Anne Bancroft present the Oscar for best actor at the 36th academy awards. She opened the envelope and said five words that literally made history, ‘the winner is Sidney Poitier.’

"Up to the stage came the most elegant man I had ever seen. I remember his tie was white and, of course, his skin was black. I had never seen a black man being celebrated like that. And I have tried many, many, many times to explain what a moment like that means to a little girl, a kid watching from the cheap seats, as my mom came through the door, bone-tired from cleaning other people’s houses. But all I can do is quote and say that the explanation in Sidney’s performance in “Lilies of the Field,” “Amen, Amen…. Amen, Amen.”

In 1982 Sidney received the Cecil B. Demille award right here at the Golden Globes. And it is not lost on me that at this moment there are some little girls watching as I become the first black woman to be given this same award. It is an honor and it is a privilege to share the evening with all of them, and also with the incredible men and women who’ve inspired, who challenge me, who sustain me and who made my journey to this stage possible. Dennis Swanson who took a chance on me for ‘AM Chicago,’ Quincy Jones who saw me on that show and said to Steven Spielberg, ‘Yes she is Sophia from The Color Purple,’ Gayle who is the definition of what a friend is and Stedman who is my rock. Just a few to name.

"I want to thank the Hollywood Foreign Press…you all now the press is under siege these days.You also know it is the insatiable dedication to uncovering the absolute truth that keeps us from turning a blind eye from corporation and to injustice. To tyrants and victims and secrets and lies. I want to say I value the press more than ever before as we try to navigate these complicated times. Which brings me to this…

"What I know for sure is that speaking your truth is the most powerful tool we all have. I’m especially proud and inspired by all the women who have felt strong enough, and empowered enough to speak up and share their personal stories. Each of us in this room are celebrated because of the stories that we tell. And this year we became the stories. But it’s not just the story affecting the entertainment industry. It’s one that transcends and culture, geography, race, religion, politics or workplace.

"So I want tonight to express gratitude to all the women who have endured years of abuse and assault because they, like my mother, had children to feed and bills to pay and dreams to pursue. They’re the women whose names we’ll never know. They are domestic workers and farm workers. They are working in factories and they work in restaurants and in academia, and engineering, medicine and science. They are part of the world of tech and politics and in business. They are athletes in the Olympics and they are soldiers in the military.

"And there’s someone else, Recy Taylor. A name I know I think you should know too.

"In 1944 Recy Taylor was a young wife and a mother. She was just walking home from a church service when she was abducted by six armed white men raped, and left by the side of the road. They threatened to kill her if she ever told anyone. But her story was reported to the NAACP where a young woman named Rosa Parks became became a lead investigator on her case. And together they sought justice. 

"But justice wasn’t justice in the era of Jim Crow, the men who tried to destroy her were never persecuted. Recy Taylor died ten days ago, just shy of her 98th birthday. She lived, as we have lived, too many years in a culture broken by brutally powerful men. For too long women have not been heard or believed if they dared to speak their truth to the power of those men. 

"But their time is up… Their time is up.

"I just hope that Recy Taylor died knowing that her truth, like the truth of so many other women who who were tormented in those years, and even now who are tormented, goes marching on. It was somewhere in Rosa Parks’ heart, almost 11 years later. when she decided to stay seated on that bus in Montgomery. 

"And it’s here in every woman who chooses to say “me too” and every man who chooses to listen.

"In my career what I’ve always tried my best to do, whether on television or through film, is to say something about how men and women really behave. To say how we experience shame, how we love, and how we rage, how we fail, how we retreat, persevere, and how we overcome. I’ve interviewed and portrayed people who have withstood some of the ugliest things life can throw at you, but the one quality all of them seem to share is an ability to maintain hope for a brighter morning. Even during our darkest nights.

"So I want all the girls watching here and now to know that a new day is on the horizon!

"And when that new day finally dawns, it will be because of a lot of magnificent women, many of whom are right here in this room tonight, and some pretty phenomenal men fighting hard to make sure that they become the leaders who take us to the time when nobody ever has to say ‘Me Too’ again."

*     *     *

Jake Tapper takes down Stephen Miller

Next to former chief White House strategist, Steve Bannon, the younger and even meaner Stephen Miller is perhaps the White House's meanest attack dog.   So they sent this senior policy adviser out  to spar on CNN's "Meet the Press" and spin the Trump response to Michael Wolff's book.

Let me start with a quote that succinctly sums up the book's point of view.  From Michael Wolff's Fire and Fury:  Insitde the Trump White House:

"Here, arguably, was the central issue of the Trump presidency, informing every aspect of Trumpian policy and leadership: He didn’t process information in any conventional sense. He didn’t read. He didn’t really even skim. Some believed that for all practical purposes he was no more than semi-­literate. He trusted his own expertise­—no matter how paltry or irrelevant—more than anyone else’s. He was often confident, but he was just as often paralyzed, less a savant than a figure of sputtering and dangerous insecurities, whose instinctive response was to lash out and behave as if his gut, however confused, was in fact in some clear and forceful way telling him what to do. It was, said Walsh, “like trying to figure out what a child wants.”

[That reference is to Katie Walsh, Gen. Kelly's deputy chief of staff, one of the first to leave her White House job.]

So Jake Tapper and Stephen Miller went at it.   Miller spouted talking points and dodged any questions posed by Tapper.    Despite saying that he "had no knowledge" of the meeting in Trump Tower, Miller insisted that Wolff's account of allegations others have made of that meeting were "a pure work of fiction" and that the book is "nothing but a pile of trash through and through."

Calling Trump "a political genius" and demanding to be given three minutes to proclaim all of Trump's accomplishments -- Miller refused to address any questions Tapper raised, repeatedly talking over him.

Tapper finally said, "I think I have wasted enough of my viewers' time" and abruptly ended the interview.   This is not going well for Team Trump.

Ralph
[based on the HuffPost reporting by S. V. Date]

Is the president mentally fit for the job?

Rick Wilson, a political journalist, said this about Donald Trump, whom he has known for a long time:   "You would not put this person in charge of a Waffle House, let alone the White House."

This was said in discussing the Michael Wolff book and its candid comments about the president's mental state from people who work closely with him every day.   Many of them are quoted as calling Trump, "an idiot," "a moron," "essentially illiterate."   Wolff summed up all his 200 interviews, saying that everyone agreed on one thing:   that he is incapable of functioning in the job as president.

But, folks, this cannot be !!!!    We have it on the highest authority from the person who is the president's closest and most ardent admirer, who sent out this tweet:

@realDonald Trump
"Actually, throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart.   I went from VERY successful businessman, to top T.V. Star . . . to President of the United States (on my first try).  I think that would qualify as not smart, but genius . . . and a very stable genius at that!"

*     *     *

I'm torn between wanting to continue the mocking scorn and the reality of the abyss we're staring into.   Walter Schaub, until his recent resignation, was the chief ethics officer of the U.S. government.  His response to Trump's tweet:   "Forget the [Wolff] book.  This might be enough to lead the board of any corporation to call an emergency meeting on its CEO's mental status."

Ralph

Containing Trump is the business for 2018

Washington Post's progressive political opinion writer, E, J. Dionne, Jr., has declared that it is difficult to set priorities for 2018 because of "the provocations and outrages that emanate daily from President Trump and his White House."  Here are some excerpts from his year-end column, which was written before the sensational Michael Wolff book was available.

*     *     *

"In 2018,  Trump's abuses of power, his indifference to truth, and his autocratic habits will be the central issues in our politics.   Nothing else comes close.   This means there is no more vital business than containing Trump and, if circumstances demand it, removing him from office. . . . 

"With special counsel Robert S. Mueller III's investigation under constant threat from Trump's apologists, solidarity among his opponents is imperative.   This is all the more pressing in the face of the Republican leadership's shameful cowering before a president who is perpetually in search of loyalty and sycophantic praise. . . .

[In the 2018 midterm elections] "Trump, not some ingenious new policy, will be the issue on voters' minds, and opposition to him will be the most powerful force pushing voters to the polls. . . .

"Let's not shilly-shally about this.   To truly check Trump, Democrats will need to win elections in usually unfriendly territory. . . .  A campaign in defense of democracy that transcends immediate policy goals will make it easier for moderately conservative voters to do something a lot of them won't relish:  vote for a party they usually shun. . .

"The fact that revulsion over Trump has shaken loose many normally Republican voters can be embraced as an opportunity for dialogue and persuasion.  What deserves rebuke is the obsequiousness of the current Republican political leadership toward Trump as well as the indifference of the president's protectors to the rule of law. .

"The priority of 2018 is for our nation to rise up and say:  Enough."

Ralph