Imposter-in-chief -- out in plain sight

Roger Cohen is an opinion writer I have long-admired.  

Here, Cohen writes about the Donald Trump who has been on display this week in his state visit to England, his brief stop-over to meet the Irish Prime Minister at the Shannon Airport VIP lounge, and then in France at the D-Day 75 year commemoration.   Here's some of what he wrote, published in the New York Times:

*     *     *     *     *

"How small he is!   Small in spirit, in valor, in dignity, in statecraft, this American president who knows nothing of history and cares still less and now bestrides Europe with his family in tow like some tin-pot dictator with a terrified entourage.

"To have Donald Trump -- the bone-spur evader of the Vietnam draft . . . commemorate the boys from Kansas City and St. Paul who gave their lives for freedom is to understand the word impostor.   You can't make a sculpture from rotten wood.

"It's worth saying again.   If Europe is whole and free and at peace, it's because of NATO and the European Union;  it's because the United States became a European power after World War II;  it's because America's word was a solemn pledge;  it's because that word cemented alliances that were not zero-sum games but the foundation for stability and prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic.

"Of this, Trump understands nothing.   Therefore he cannot comprehend the sacrifice at Omaha Beach 75 years ago.  He cannot see that the postwar trans-Atlantic achievement -- undergirded by the institutions and alliances he tramples upon with such crass truculence -- was in fact the vindication of those young men who gave everything.

"As Eisenhower, speaking at the Normandy American Cemetery, last resting place of 9,387 Americans, told Walter Cronkite for the 20th anniversary of the D-Day landings:  'These people gave us a chance, and they bought time for us, so that we can do better than we have before.'

"That was a solemn responsibility.   For decades it was met, culminating with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.   Doing better, however, is not using nativism, xenophobia, nationalism and authoritarianism given a nod and a wink by the president of the United States.   It's not Brexit, Britain turning its back on the Europe it helped free.

"The American moral collapse personified by Trump is not 'beautiful' or 'phenomenal' or 'incredible' or any of the president's other clunky two-a-penny superlatives.  It's sickening and dangerous. . . . [The petty fight he picked with London's Muslim mayor on the eve of his arrival for a state visit in the United Kingdom is but one example cited by Cohen.] . . . 

"America is much better than this, much better than an American president who, as the cartoonist Dave Granlund suggested, probably thinks the D in D-Day stands for Donald . . . . [in contrast to]

"Eisenhower, who in that same 20th anniversary interview said that America and its allies stormed the Normandy beaches 'for one purpose only.'   It was not to 'fulfill any ambitions that America had for conquest.'  No, it was 'just to preserve freedom, [and] systems of self-government in the world.'  It was an act, in other words, consistent with the highest ideals of the America idea that Trump and his Republican enablers seem so intent on eviscerating."

*     *     *     *     *

To show just how total is his narcissism, we need look no further than the interview he gave to Laura Ingraham for FoxNews while in Normandy.   It was the day of the D-Day commemoration, and as a backdrop for the interview they used a photo shot of the rows of white grave-markers in the American cemetery -- which made it even more inappropriate for Trump to use his interview to trash his enemies, including "Nervous Nancy" Pelosi, who he said is "a nasty, vindictive, horrible person," and Robert Mueller, who he said "made a complete fool of himself."

Near the end of the interview, when it was obvious they were running late, Trump even proudly "took credit" for holding up the beginning of the ceremony, telling Ingraham that he was "proud" of doing that "because it's you," and then heaped praise of the FoxNews interviewer for her good ratings.

To the network's credit, they issued a disclaimer, saying that it was not their interview that held up the opening ceremony, because President and Mrs. Trump were there to greet President Macron when he arrived even later,  having been held up by a ceremony concerned with PM Theresa May's last day in office.

OK.   Nevertheless, the transcripted dialogue reveals that Trump was quite willing -- he even said "proud" -- to hold up the beginning of the most solemn occasion likely to occur this year in an internationally televised program that was about the sacrifice of allied soldiers who gave their lives for our freedom.

And even if he knew from the beginning that the opening would be delayed by Macron's late arrival, he was willing to let the world think that his mind was, as always, on himself, not on the sacrificed soldiers lying in those graves, not on the dwindling number of elderly veterans who were there for the occasion honoring them.

Fake bone spurs fade in comparison to this little act of venality and narcissism.

Ralph

D-Day: 75 years ago today, European democracy was saved

There is a nostalgic poignancy pervading the 75th anniversary today of the Western Allies' massive D-Day invasion of Omaha Beach in Normandy, France, which signaled the new push to free Europe from Nazi Germany's fascistic hold.

The poignancy comes from the fact that it is likely that this is the last major D-Day commemoration that any of the men who fought in that invasion will be able to attend,  The small group of veterans of the invasion there today are in their 90s.   And, although an 80th anniversary commemoration is planned, even the youngest will be approaching 100 by then.

But there will always be those 10,000 graves of American soldiers buried in the cemetery nearby where the ceremony was held.   President Trump read some appropriate words that had been written for him -- about sacrifice and about heroism -- and, yes, about nations coming together to save freedom and democracy.   So we needn't use this occasion to dwell on the contrast of his having avoided military service himself and his opposition to joint treaties and multinational defense alliances.

Yet, it does not escape notice that it was the young French President Emmanuel Macron who gave the full-throated endorsement of alliance and cooperation among like-minded nations.

At one point in his remarks, Macron seemed to speak directly to Trump and his "Make America Great Again" slogan when he said:

“We know what we owe to the United States of America. The United States of America, dear Donald Trump, dear president, which is never greater than when it is fighting for the freedom of others. . .  The United States of America, that is never greater than when it shows its loyalty to the universal values that the Founding Fathers defended when, nearly two and a half centuries ago, France came to support its independence. . .    We shall never cease to perpetuate the alliance of free people.”

Macron then went on to expand on the fact that global institutions such as the United Nations, NATO and the European Union were created for that purpose.

If one looks only at our president's behavior at formal events during this trip, we might feel that he passed the test with a C-.    But, of course, in his Twitter remarks and in a televised interview with Piers Morgan, it was the same old Trump.   Picking enemies to attack and insult -- let's see, they were of course London's Muslim mayor, the American born, mixed race wife of Prince Harry, and the actress Bette Midler -- what is it about women and dark-skinned minorities that gets under his skin so?

When we add in the venality he showed in the televised interview with Piers Morgan and the utter ignorance and insensitivity he showed in the meeting with the Irish Prime Minister, I'd have to give him a failing grade.

This matter with the Irish PM concerned the difficult Brexit issue presented by the fact that part of Ireland is under United Kingdom control and would therefore leave the European Union if the U.K. leaves, while the Irish Republic itself is not part of the U.K. and thus would remain in the EU.   So then there's the problem of having to establish an enforced, international border between Northern Ireland/United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.   Trump treated this as a minor problem that could be solved with a wall (ugh) and ran rough-shod over his host's sensibilities about the whole thing.

Yes, it was probably his ignorance (not knowing the history of the problem this division has been for Ireland for decades, having for decades a virtual civil war) and his arrogance (that he can blithely offer another country simplistic solutions to their problems about which he knows nothing).

It's embarrassing.   It's humiliating.  And a dereliction of duty when he is so ignorant about the countries he's visiting on an official state visit.   So, yes, Donald Trump was a failure in this official state visit.

Ralph

PS:   Sorry, can't resist this.   In the interview with Piers Morgan on British tv, Trump was sounding off about transgender troops in the military and how much they cost the government for their medical care.   He claims that all the drugs they take (hormones, "so expensive").    Co-host Morgan pointed out that the government spends 10 times as much on Viagra for service members as it does on transgender health care ($84.2 million vs $8 million).

Mueller's restricted options as: "special counsel" rather than "independent counsel"

Many of us have wondered why Robert Mueller did not make his report directly to Congress.    Isn't that what Kenneth Starr did when he led the Bill Clinton impeachment investigation?

Yes, but Starr's appointment was as "independent counsel," operating under different guidelines and restrictions than Mueller, who was a "special counsel."  It not only mandated that the independent counsel report directly to Congress but that he also "advise the House of Representatives of any substantial and credible evidence that may constitute grounds for impeachment," in the words of Michael Zeldin and Julian Zelizer reporting for CNN.

After what many felt was Starr's unnecessarily salacious open report, Congress let the independent counsel law expire and left the Justice Department to rely on its own newly written regulation for a "special counsel," reporting only to the Attorney General.

So, legally, Mueller did not have that option to report directly to Congress.   The special counsel regulation gives power to the Attorney General to release the report . . . or not.   Which might be just fine when you have an independent AG who is not beholden to the president.

But, as has become obvious, that is not what we have in AG William Barr.   It is equally obvious that Congress needs to pass a new law that gives the power of impeachment fully back to Congress as part of its legitimate, constitutional role of oversight over the Executive Branch and the president.

Zeldin and Zelizer suggest that given the time and difficulty of passing new legislation (especially with Republicans controlling the Senate) that the House could voluntarily analyze Mueller's findings under the same standard as that which existed in the independent counsel.     They could ask Mueller whether he "would have been obligated to advise the House of substantial and credible evidence constituting grounds for impeachment."   In other words, ask Mueller to advise them as though he were operating under the old independent counsel regulations.

They explain that this would give the House, in its oversight capacity, "a workable framework for analyzing whether they believe that an impeachment inquiry is warranted."

Perhaps this is exactly what Mueller was trying to do when he gave his 9 minute press briefing.    As Zeldin and Zelizer point out, Congress will need to make its own determination, "as impeachment is a political judgment informed by, but not dependent on, violations of statutory law."

I agree.   I think this would be a good idea and a useful move.   I also think I know what Mueller's response will be:    "Read my report."    He's already told Congress what to do.   Just read the damn report.   It's all there.

Ralph

Conservatives shocked by Mueller's summary of his own report

The bewildering thing about this whole Mueller/Barr controversy about the meaning of the Mueller report -- now that Mueller has spoken and said what he meant -- is that so many conservatives still believe Barr's version.

Well, perhaps it shouldn't be bewildering, given what we know about strongly  held beliefs that do not give way to facts or more logical explanations.

But my favorite commentary on this came from Jonathan Chait, writing for the Daily Intelligencer.   He wrote, with dripping irony:

"What so vexed the right about Mueller's curt affirmation of his previous conclusions? , , ,  [T]hey believed their own propaganda. . .  Presented even briefly with reality, their minds have reeled in shock. . . ."

Chait then presented reactions from noted pundits who refused to believe Mueller's own presentation, including a writer for the  National Review , Charles C.W. Cooke, as well as famed attorneys Alan Dershowitz and John Podhoretz.   But then Chait concludes with what I find amusing:

"Ironically, it was Fox News meathead Dan Bongino, ranting to his radio audience, who came closest to grasping reality.  Bongino notices that Mueller heavily signaled that he did find behavior that, if the perpetrator was not the president, would be crimes. . . .

"Bongino realizes this comes down to either Barr or Mueller misleading the country about what Mueller's report concluded.  And yet, perched one step away from the correct answer, he insists it must be Mueller who is lying about the Mueller report.  Ignore all the evidence of obvious crimes in the Mueller report.  Ignore Mueller telling us that department policy prevents him from labeling those actions as crimes.   The one reliable truth Borgino returns to is the sacred value of Bill Barr's word.

"If you can't trust the slavishly loyal attorney general, handpicked by a president whose sole criterion for the job is to ignore its ethical guidelines and protect him at all costs,
who can you trust?"


Indeed !

Former Fed Officials Sound Alarm on Trump's Obstruction of Justice

Mary Papenfuss, writing on HuffPost, presents the video that has been narrated by several former federal officials about the Mueller report.   For example, a former Reagan Administration official warns that the president's behavior "ought to concern anyone that cares about the honest workings of government."   Another former official says:  "There is a damning case of obstruction by the president in the Mueller report."

The video has been delivered "from within the GOP" by a group called Republicans for the Rule of Law.   A tweet announcing the video says that former Republican federal officials Donald Ayer and Jeffrey Harris discuss the findings of the Mueller report and the episodes of obstruction that it found."

On the same day this video was released, a second, similar one was released by the non-partisan group Protect Democracy.    The two groups had actually cooperated in the production of the videos.

This is what we need, of course.   Politicians facing re-election in 2020 have too  much at stake -- or too little courage or commitment to doing what is right.   So it falls to former federal officials, such as those nearly 1,000 former federal prosecutors and other former law enforcement officials who signed that original letter.

And these former federal government officials must explain to the public what Mueller's report reveals -- those acts that Attorney General William Barr has been busy trying to spin and cover up in defense of the president.

In fact, this approach might be even better than having Mueller come back to Congress to testify, at least right now when that will be such a partisan circus with the likes of Republicans Jim Jordan and Mike Meadows of the Justice Committee putting on their obfuscating show.    The task right now is to educate the public, who will then put pressure on congress -- so that politics is not the primary and almost sole deciding factor.

So let's look at what Mary Papenfuss wrote about the video:

"Jeffrey Harris, deputy associate attorney general in the Reagan administration, pointed to the damning findings against Trump. . . .  Harris said that, as a former federal lawman, 'I didn't think it was even a close prosecutorial call as to whether the president obstructed justice.'

"The Mueller report 'revealed a picture of the president and his presidency in a way which ought to concern anyone that cares about he honest workings of government,' he added.   'If the rule of law stands for nothing, then we have anarchy.  It's as simple as that.'

"Paul Rosenzweig, deputy assistant secretary of homeland security under President George W. Bush, called 'obstruction of justice and perjury . . . far more important than most normal crimes' because they 'go to the absolute core of how the rule of law functions in this society.'

"Donald Ayer, who served as George H.W. Bush's deputy attorney general, said what particularly disturbed him was the silence of Republicans on Capitol Hill who know that 'there is a damning case in the Mueller report of obstruction of justice by the president.'

"The group plans to hand-deliver a copy of the video, as well as Robert Mueller's report with key sections highlighted to each Republican lawmaker on Monday."

*     *     *     *     *

I hope that, in the video, they have spelled out more about the actual examples of obstruction.    What we need more than anything is education to counter the spin, distortions, and lies propagated by the president himself, the attorney general, and TrumpTV.    They have sold a false picture of what the report shows.

One woman interviewed on MSNBC in, I think, Michigan who was attending a town hall meeting, was dumbfounded at what she heard.    She said she only listens to "conservative" media, and she thought the Mueller report found no wrongdoing by Trump.  In other words, all she had heard was that Trump had been exonerated.

It's proper to start with the Republicans on Capitol Hill who would actually have to do the impeaching.    But this education effort needs to be expanded by the media.  Get a copy of these videos, play them for the public more than once.   Get pundits talking about it.   Have public debates.

That's what it will take to move congress.   Educate the people.

Ralph