It's been a long time since I ran across any news tidbit with the least bit of humor, until I had this encounter at Chick-Fil-A. Yeah, I know. I boycotted them for years about their anti-gay stance. But they seem to have dropped that now that the Colonel died, so I occasionally venture back.
I can over-look the cutesy spelling of their name; after all these years, it's just become a name. At least it doesn't trigger my snobbism like Starbucks weirdness with cup sizes: short, tall, grande, venti, and the soon to be introduced trenta. I never really liked the flavor of Starbucks coffee anyway.
So, having a yen for a chicken sandwich a few days ago, I went through the drive-through at Chick-Fil-A and asked for a sandwich and a chocolate shake. "Small or large?" came back the disembodied voice over the speaker. Accustomed to choosing "medium," I asked how big is the large? Voice: "We put it in a medium cup."
"OK," I said. "I'll have the chicken sandwich and a large shake in a medium cup." We both chuckled, the Disembodied Voice and I. At least they don't use pretentious words like venti and trenta.
Which started me thinking about these two dyed jn the wool American institutions: Starbucks and Chick-Fil-A. I guess maybe they differ primarily in class appeal. Starbucks is definitely West Coast (Seattle), progressive, urban, elite-ish, while Chick-Fil-A has roots in the deep-South, fundamentalist religion of the Bible Belt and their anti-gay stance of years past.
They could hardly be more different, while both still being American icons. Remember that, in that Great American Novel Moby Dick, Starbuck was the first mate on Captain Ahab's ship in mad pursuit of the white whale. You can't get much more nativist than New England whaling ships of the 19th century. Unless it's the white-suited, Southern "Colonel" Sanders who founded Chick-Fil-A.
Anyway, I thought it makes an interesting commentary on the two directions of Americana. Then I looked up the meaning of "venti" and "trenta." Where did those words come from? It turns out that our prototypical American coffee barista went Italian for its new names. Venti means 20 and trenta means 30 in Italian -- the number of ounces in the two larger cups in the Starbucks menu.
Is Chick-Fil-A going to follow and get size-pretentious? I doubt it. My guess is that for them it's a business decision, not an image ploy. By eliminating medium, more people will pay for large, even in a medium size cup. As I did. Because . . . well, who wants "small?" Even if you were to say it in Italian.
Ralph
Tuesday, April 17, 2018
Monday, April 16, 2018
Judge refused to lift temporary stay of Trump's transgender ban
U. S. District Judge Marsha Pechman of the Western District of Washington barred the federal government from implementing President Trump's ban on transgender members of the military. She ruled instead that, because of the history of discrimination against transgender individuals, they are a protected class and therefore the decision will require a higher level of court review.
As a result of this ruling, the injunction against the ban issued by the court in December will remain in place. She further wrote in her decision that there is a "long and well-recognized" history of discrimination and systemic oppression against transgender people "unrelated to their ability to perform and contribute to society."
"The Court also rules that, because transgender people have long been subjected to systemic oppression and forced to live in silence, they are a protected class. Therefore, any attempt to exclude them from military service will be looked at with the highest level of care, and will be subject to the Court's 'strict scrutiny.' This means that before Defendants can implement the Ban, they must show that it was sincerely motivated by compelling interests, rather than by prejudice or stereotype," Judge Pechman wrote.
The judge wasn't through with Mr. Trump. She also wrote that the government had "failed to identify even one General or military expert he consulted, despite having been ordered to do so repeatedly." Noting that Defense Secretary Jim Mattis was informed of the Trump ban only one day beforehand, she said she "is led to conclude that the Ban was devised by the President, and the President alone."
Way to go, Your Honor.
Ralph
As a result of this ruling, the injunction against the ban issued by the court in December will remain in place. She further wrote in her decision that there is a "long and well-recognized" history of discrimination and systemic oppression against transgender people "unrelated to their ability to perform and contribute to society."
"The Court also rules that, because transgender people have long been subjected to systemic oppression and forced to live in silence, they are a protected class. Therefore, any attempt to exclude them from military service will be looked at with the highest level of care, and will be subject to the Court's 'strict scrutiny.' This means that before Defendants can implement the Ban, they must show that it was sincerely motivated by compelling interests, rather than by prejudice or stereotype," Judge Pechman wrote.
The judge wasn't through with Mr. Trump. She also wrote that the government had "failed to identify even one General or military expert he consulted, despite having been ordered to do so repeatedly." Noting that Defense Secretary Jim Mattis was informed of the Trump ban only one day beforehand, she said she "is led to conclude that the Ban was devised by the President, and the President alone."
Way to go, Your Honor.
Ralph
Sunday, April 15, 2018
News briefs
1. Mueller has evidence that Michael Cohen did go to Prague: McClatchy News Service (very reliable) reports that the Mueller investigation now has evidence placing Trump's fixer in Prague during late August or early September 2016. Cohen has vociferously denied this in the past, going so far as to put out a copy of his passport to "prove" he had never been to Prague. The reported evidence says Cohen flew into Germany, then could cross into the Czech Republic without having his passport stamped.
Why is this important? It had been postulated that this was the Russian connection with the Trump campaign, involving either some monetary payoffs or plans for releasing the Clinton emails. And it is one of the most specific and important claims in the Steele dossier that links the Trump campaign with Russia. The dossier reports that a Kremlin insider had highlighted the importance of Trump's lawyer, Michael Cohen, in the secret liaison between Trump and the Russian leadership, especially since the departure of Manafort from the campaign. Quoting from the controversial Steele dossier:
"According to the Kremlin insider, Cohen now was heavily engaged in a cover-up and damage limitation operation in the attempt to prevent the full details of Trump's relationship with Russia being exposed. In pursuit of this aim, Cohen had met secretly with several Russian Presidential Administration (PA) Legal Department officials in an EU country in August 2016. The immediate issues had been to contain further scandals [involving Paul Manafort and Carter Page]."
Additions to the report in days following identify the meeting city as Prague and gave the name of the Russian official, as well as more specifics about the meeting. Later additions added that topics of discussion had included how cash payments were to be made to hackers who had worked on breaking into the Clinton computer files and other issues involving covering up this operation.
Michael Cohen continues to deny that it ever happened, claiming that he was either in New York or in L.A. with his son during the time and has never been to Prague. This is why this is so important. If there is, in fact, evidence of a secret trip to Prague by Cohen, it confirms one more piece of the dossier and blows open the whole Russia collusion thing. And, if he went to Prague on some unrelated or innocent mission, why has he been trying so hard to cover it up? In other words, if the evidence is proven, then his actions point to guilt.
One more thing: since this is being handled, not by Mueller, but by the federal prosecutor's office in New York, firing Mueller can't stop it.
2. The British and French allies joined the U.S. planned attack of missile strikes against Syrian sites associated with its capability to use chemical weapons on its own people. This was in retaliation to proven attacks a week ago in which many civilians died and many more were wounded. A US general briefed reporters later and said that the strikes were "precise, overwhelming, and effective." They hit every target and sent an unmistakable message to the Assad regime that use of chemical weapons will not be tolerated. Efforts were made to avoid civilian casualties, and so far none has been reported. It was in the middle of the night; building targets were work places that had been evacuated in advance. Russia's initial reaction is to call for a UN resolution condemning the US attack, claiming that there was no chemical attack -- or, alternately, that it was staged by the British. Russia's resolution failed to pass in the Security Council.
There is a good argument to be made -- as many in congress have -- against having made this attack. Primarily the question is: what is the overall plan in our Syria policy? We have none. Just before the chemical attack, Trump had told the military he wanted all our troops pulled out of Syria -- within days. Which may have been the signal that let Syria feel they could get away with using chemicals again. They say, correctly, that what we did won't likely accomplish anything. Structures destroyed as easily rebuilt. It will not diminish either Russian or Iranian assistance to the Assad regime. So . . . what was it for?
As the New York Times reported, "even advocates of more aggressive intervention said that the attacks would mean little in the long run without a clear, comprehensive approach."
3. Why did Trump wait almost a week after the Syrian chemical attack before ordering his "punishing" attack? Several reasons, some good, some not. The cynical one is that he wanted to give Russia enough time to get out of the way and to allow Syrian airplanes to be moved in and among Russian planes.
But let's go with the benefit of doubt that there were better reasons. First, Trump was trying to get our allies France and the U.K. on board, which they finally did; so that worked out. Second, there was disagreement within the administration over how massive a strike should be, with Secretary of Defense Mattis wanting less and Trump's new, uber-hawk National Security Adviser John Bolton insisting on a "ruinous" strike. How much did all the rest going on in Trump world affect the decision? -- the Mueller investigation, the exposure of Trump secrets in Michael Cohen's records that are now in the hands of the FBI, as well as the growing number of members of congress demanding that he had to seek a new authorization from congress for any military attack on another country. We are still operating on the authorization to retaliate to the 9/11 attack; and this particular chemical attack on Assad's own people has nothing to do with ISIS or other groups even remotely connected with that. So dealing with any and all of those would take time.
4. The pardoning of Scooter Libby. Libby was Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff who was convicted of lying to cover up an attempt to obstruct justice in the destruction of CIA agent Valerie Plame's covert identify -- for political purposes. Trump had never shown any interest. So suddenly he pardons him. It's impossible not to conclude that this was to send a message to his own aides and associates under scrutiny in the Mueller investigation: stay strong; don't talk, and I'll take care of you with a pardon later. In fact, one of Trump's lawyers had been dangling the possibility of pardons to some of them already -- and that is on the list of areas being looked at for a case of obstruction of justice.
5. Another revelation that caused quite a stir this week -- for a few hours -- was the explosive report that Michael Cohen often taped his telephone conversations, which opens the possibility that he has Trump on tape going back years concerning their financial dealings. What could be worse than to have your fixer's recorded conversations with you in the hands of the prosecutor?
6. We also have the request from Michael Cohen to the judge to let him go through the seized documents first and remove lawyer- client-privileged materials. The reaction from most people was to laugh and dismiss such a request. The fact is that most of what Michael Cohen does is not lawyer-work but fix-it work. That is not privileged. Cohen has a practice with essentially one client: Donald Trump. Plus a few others for whom he does similar kind of fix-it work. He seems to be the go-to guy if you need to get a non-disclosure agreement, or if you need a lawyer to get money for you in exchange for a NDA.
7. Oh, yes, Somewhere in there, Paul Ryan dropped the bombshell that he was not going to run again in November. So not only is another Republican seat open, but more importantly the Speaker of the House position is up for grabs, with the #2 Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and #3 Steve Scalise (R-LA) the assumed front runners. But there's always the Freedom Caucus (Tea Party) to contend with. Interesting reminder: for the Speaker, the entire House membership votes. So it's unlikely an ultra-conservative would get a majority with Democrats also casting nearly 45% of the vote. That's if they vote now. If they wait until the new congress convenes in January, and the Democrats have gained the majority, it will be a different picture. Then the Republicans would only be voting on their minority leader, not the Speaker of the House, who would presumable be a Democrat.
What a week. It began with the raid on Cohen's office and home on Monday and ended on Friday with the missile strikes on Syria. In between . . . well, there's all of this, plus a whole lot more.
Ralph
Why is this important? It had been postulated that this was the Russian connection with the Trump campaign, involving either some monetary payoffs or plans for releasing the Clinton emails. And it is one of the most specific and important claims in the Steele dossier that links the Trump campaign with Russia. The dossier reports that a Kremlin insider had highlighted the importance of Trump's lawyer, Michael Cohen, in the secret liaison between Trump and the Russian leadership, especially since the departure of Manafort from the campaign. Quoting from the controversial Steele dossier:
"According to the Kremlin insider, Cohen now was heavily engaged in a cover-up and damage limitation operation in the attempt to prevent the full details of Trump's relationship with Russia being exposed. In pursuit of this aim, Cohen had met secretly with several Russian Presidential Administration (PA) Legal Department officials in an EU country in August 2016. The immediate issues had been to contain further scandals [involving Paul Manafort and Carter Page]."
Additions to the report in days following identify the meeting city as Prague and gave the name of the Russian official, as well as more specifics about the meeting. Later additions added that topics of discussion had included how cash payments were to be made to hackers who had worked on breaking into the Clinton computer files and other issues involving covering up this operation.
Michael Cohen continues to deny that it ever happened, claiming that he was either in New York or in L.A. with his son during the time and has never been to Prague. This is why this is so important. If there is, in fact, evidence of a secret trip to Prague by Cohen, it confirms one more piece of the dossier and blows open the whole Russia collusion thing. And, if he went to Prague on some unrelated or innocent mission, why has he been trying so hard to cover it up? In other words, if the evidence is proven, then his actions point to guilt.
One more thing: since this is being handled, not by Mueller, but by the federal prosecutor's office in New York, firing Mueller can't stop it.
2. The British and French allies joined the U.S. planned attack of missile strikes against Syrian sites associated with its capability to use chemical weapons on its own people. This was in retaliation to proven attacks a week ago in which many civilians died and many more were wounded. A US general briefed reporters later and said that the strikes were "precise, overwhelming, and effective." They hit every target and sent an unmistakable message to the Assad regime that use of chemical weapons will not be tolerated. Efforts were made to avoid civilian casualties, and so far none has been reported. It was in the middle of the night; building targets were work places that had been evacuated in advance. Russia's initial reaction is to call for a UN resolution condemning the US attack, claiming that there was no chemical attack -- or, alternately, that it was staged by the British. Russia's resolution failed to pass in the Security Council.
There is a good argument to be made -- as many in congress have -- against having made this attack. Primarily the question is: what is the overall plan in our Syria policy? We have none. Just before the chemical attack, Trump had told the military he wanted all our troops pulled out of Syria -- within days. Which may have been the signal that let Syria feel they could get away with using chemicals again. They say, correctly, that what we did won't likely accomplish anything. Structures destroyed as easily rebuilt. It will not diminish either Russian or Iranian assistance to the Assad regime. So . . . what was it for?
As the New York Times reported, "even advocates of more aggressive intervention said that the attacks would mean little in the long run without a clear, comprehensive approach."
3. Why did Trump wait almost a week after the Syrian chemical attack before ordering his "punishing" attack? Several reasons, some good, some not. The cynical one is that he wanted to give Russia enough time to get out of the way and to allow Syrian airplanes to be moved in and among Russian planes.
But let's go with the benefit of doubt that there were better reasons. First, Trump was trying to get our allies France and the U.K. on board, which they finally did; so that worked out. Second, there was disagreement within the administration over how massive a strike should be, with Secretary of Defense Mattis wanting less and Trump's new, uber-hawk National Security Adviser John Bolton insisting on a "ruinous" strike. How much did all the rest going on in Trump world affect the decision? -- the Mueller investigation, the exposure of Trump secrets in Michael Cohen's records that are now in the hands of the FBI, as well as the growing number of members of congress demanding that he had to seek a new authorization from congress for any military attack on another country. We are still operating on the authorization to retaliate to the 9/11 attack; and this particular chemical attack on Assad's own people has nothing to do with ISIS or other groups even remotely connected with that. So dealing with any and all of those would take time.
4. The pardoning of Scooter Libby. Libby was Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff who was convicted of lying to cover up an attempt to obstruct justice in the destruction of CIA agent Valerie Plame's covert identify -- for political purposes. Trump had never shown any interest. So suddenly he pardons him. It's impossible not to conclude that this was to send a message to his own aides and associates under scrutiny in the Mueller investigation: stay strong; don't talk, and I'll take care of you with a pardon later. In fact, one of Trump's lawyers had been dangling the possibility of pardons to some of them already -- and that is on the list of areas being looked at for a case of obstruction of justice.
5. Another revelation that caused quite a stir this week -- for a few hours -- was the explosive report that Michael Cohen often taped his telephone conversations, which opens the possibility that he has Trump on tape going back years concerning their financial dealings. What could be worse than to have your fixer's recorded conversations with you in the hands of the prosecutor?
6. We also have the request from Michael Cohen to the judge to let him go through the seized documents first and remove lawyer- client-privileged materials. The reaction from most people was to laugh and dismiss such a request. The fact is that most of what Michael Cohen does is not lawyer-work but fix-it work. That is not privileged. Cohen has a practice with essentially one client: Donald Trump. Plus a few others for whom he does similar kind of fix-it work. He seems to be the go-to guy if you need to get a non-disclosure agreement, or if you need a lawyer to get money for you in exchange for a NDA.
7. Oh, yes, Somewhere in there, Paul Ryan dropped the bombshell that he was not going to run again in November. So not only is another Republican seat open, but more importantly the Speaker of the House position is up for grabs, with the #2 Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and #3 Steve Scalise (R-LA) the assumed front runners. But there's always the Freedom Caucus (Tea Party) to contend with. Interesting reminder: for the Speaker, the entire House membership votes. So it's unlikely an ultra-conservative would get a majority with Democrats also casting nearly 45% of the vote. That's if they vote now. If they wait until the new congress convenes in January, and the Democrats have gained the majority, it will be a different picture. Then the Republicans would only be voting on their minority leader, not the Speaker of the House, who would presumable be a Democrat.
What a week. It began with the raid on Cohen's office and home on Monday and ended on Friday with the missile strikes on Syria. In between . . . well, there's all of this, plus a whole lot more.
Ralph
Saturday, April 14, 2018
RNC sets up "war room" to destroy Comey
James Comey's much anticipated book, A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership, will not be officially published until next Tuesday. But copies have been leaked to the media, and it has been a major topic of discussion already for two days now.
Not only that, the Republican National Committee, apparently designated to take the lead in trying to destroy Comey's credibility as the chief Republican defense, has set up a "war room," and a web site dedicated to slamming Comey through personal attacks.
President Trump jumped into the fray Friday morning with tweets, calling Comey a "weak and untruthful slime ball" and "a proven LEAKER and LIAR." "Time has proven . . . that he was a terrible Director of the FBI. His handling of the Crooked Hillary Clinton case . . . will go down as one of the worst 'botch jobs' of history. It was my great honor to fire James Comey."
In a sense, Comey set the tone with some of his language criticizing President Trump. If you really want to have a book that takes the high road, worthy of your vaunted reputation for probity and integrity, you probably shouldn't say that the president reminds you of a mob boss in the way that he runs his organization. Or comment about the size of his hands and the "realness" of his hair.
Remember that it was Comey who rushed to the hospital where his boss, Attorney General John Ashcroft, lay gravely ill and was about to be pressured by President George W. Bush's chief of staff and White House counsel, to sign off on a reauthorization of surveillance techniques that he and Ashcroft both felt were outside the law. Comey's refusal, as Acting AG, to sign it led to a strong stand by top figures in the Justice Department joining him in threatening to resign -- and ultimately to Bush backing down and bucking Cheney himself.
When President Obama later (2013) appointed Comey to be FBI Director, I thought it was a great choice, based on the above proven principles of integrity and willingness to speak truth to power.
But in the whole episode involving Comey's handling the public statements about the Hillary Clinton email investigation -- while refraining from saying that Donald Trump was also under investigation -- showed another side to the man that is less attractive.
I do not think Comey is a bad guy. I think his reputation for integrity is deserved. But there is a streak of having his 'saintliness go to his head' that leads him to do things like the different handling of the Clinton and Trump investigations.
In his mind, he saw it that the Clinton investigation was already closed and had so told the congressional committee. So when he reopened it on finding Anthony Wiener's computer with some of his wife's correspondence with Clinton (whom she worked for), he felt he had to "correct the record" of what he himself had told congress. Otherwise, he might later be accused of covering up something.
It's that certainty that his integrity must remain so unblemished that it becomes more important than anything else, even if it means -- as Hillary Clinton put it --"changing the course of history."
That's the complex moral conundrum that is James Comey. Of course that's much too subtle and complex for the Trump base, as well as not nearly damning enough. So they're setting out to destroy his credibility and his integrity.
The James Comey that the RNC and the Trump White House have gone into full war to destroy is something else. When asked about it this afternoon, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was well prepared. She usually has notes she glances at from time to time in her press briefings. But, when asked this, she read from a long written statement that had obviously been prepared with talking points -- the same that are coming from this RNC War Room. It's obviously a coordinated, carefully crafted narrative.
Sanders accused Comey of leaking classified information [not true] and of lying to congress under oath [not sure what that is a reference to, but congress doesn't seem to think so.] . . . "Instead of being remembered as a dedicated servant in the pursuit of justice . . . Comey will be forever known as a disgraced partisan hack that broke the sacred trust with the President of the United States . . . "
She also said: "One of the few areas of true bipartisan consensus in Washington is Comey has no credibility" [not true]. Kellyanne Conway added her talking point: "We find Mr. Comey has a revisionist view of history and seems like a disgruntled ex-employee." She followed this canned statement with that fake smile that says 'we both know I'm lying through my teeth; just grin and bear it because I've got the upper hand here.'
Of course a lot of Democrats are angry at Comey for what they feel was his role in robbing Clinton of the election; but their anger and the Republicans' anger are not exactly a consensus. They're for entirely different reasons.
As reported by CNN, the RNC War Room has a "battle plan:" They will brand him as "Lyin' Comey" using their website, digital advertising and talking points, which were to have been sent out to Republicans before the book's publication date. Maybe the publisher got wind of it and leaked the book to get the jump on them.
No doubt they'll stoke up the base and maybe even cast doubts in many more about the veracity of Comey's book. But their concerted, pre-planned efforts are pretty good evidence of how scared they are of the effect of this tell-all by the man at the center of obstruction of justice charges against the sitting president.
And well they should be scared. It's a strong case. But even that may be overshadowed by the jeopardy for the president of Michael Cohen's records that the federal prosecutors in New York now have.
Ralph
Not only that, the Republican National Committee, apparently designated to take the lead in trying to destroy Comey's credibility as the chief Republican defense, has set up a "war room," and a web site dedicated to slamming Comey through personal attacks.
President Trump jumped into the fray Friday morning with tweets, calling Comey a "weak and untruthful slime ball" and "a proven LEAKER and LIAR." "Time has proven . . . that he was a terrible Director of the FBI. His handling of the Crooked Hillary Clinton case . . . will go down as one of the worst 'botch jobs' of history. It was my great honor to fire James Comey."
In a sense, Comey set the tone with some of his language criticizing President Trump. If you really want to have a book that takes the high road, worthy of your vaunted reputation for probity and integrity, you probably shouldn't say that the president reminds you of a mob boss in the way that he runs his organization. Or comment about the size of his hands and the "realness" of his hair.
Remember that it was Comey who rushed to the hospital where his boss, Attorney General John Ashcroft, lay gravely ill and was about to be pressured by President George W. Bush's chief of staff and White House counsel, to sign off on a reauthorization of surveillance techniques that he and Ashcroft both felt were outside the law. Comey's refusal, as Acting AG, to sign it led to a strong stand by top figures in the Justice Department joining him in threatening to resign -- and ultimately to Bush backing down and bucking Cheney himself.
When President Obama later (2013) appointed Comey to be FBI Director, I thought it was a great choice, based on the above proven principles of integrity and willingness to speak truth to power.
But in the whole episode involving Comey's handling the public statements about the Hillary Clinton email investigation -- while refraining from saying that Donald Trump was also under investigation -- showed another side to the man that is less attractive.
I do not think Comey is a bad guy. I think his reputation for integrity is deserved. But there is a streak of having his 'saintliness go to his head' that leads him to do things like the different handling of the Clinton and Trump investigations.
In his mind, he saw it that the Clinton investigation was already closed and had so told the congressional committee. So when he reopened it on finding Anthony Wiener's computer with some of his wife's correspondence with Clinton (whom she worked for), he felt he had to "correct the record" of what he himself had told congress. Otherwise, he might later be accused of covering up something.
It's that certainty that his integrity must remain so unblemished that it becomes more important than anything else, even if it means -- as Hillary Clinton put it --"changing the course of history."
That's the complex moral conundrum that is James Comey. Of course that's much too subtle and complex for the Trump base, as well as not nearly damning enough. So they're setting out to destroy his credibility and his integrity.
The James Comey that the RNC and the Trump White House have gone into full war to destroy is something else. When asked about it this afternoon, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was well prepared. She usually has notes she glances at from time to time in her press briefings. But, when asked this, she read from a long written statement that had obviously been prepared with talking points -- the same that are coming from this RNC War Room. It's obviously a coordinated, carefully crafted narrative.
Sanders accused Comey of leaking classified information [not true] and of lying to congress under oath [not sure what that is a reference to, but congress doesn't seem to think so.] . . . "Instead of being remembered as a dedicated servant in the pursuit of justice . . . Comey will be forever known as a disgraced partisan hack that broke the sacred trust with the President of the United States . . . "
She also said: "One of the few areas of true bipartisan consensus in Washington is Comey has no credibility" [not true]. Kellyanne Conway added her talking point: "We find Mr. Comey has a revisionist view of history and seems like a disgruntled ex-employee." She followed this canned statement with that fake smile that says 'we both know I'm lying through my teeth; just grin and bear it because I've got the upper hand here.'
Of course a lot of Democrats are angry at Comey for what they feel was his role in robbing Clinton of the election; but their anger and the Republicans' anger are not exactly a consensus. They're for entirely different reasons.
As reported by CNN, the RNC War Room has a "battle plan:" They will brand him as "Lyin' Comey" using their website, digital advertising and talking points, which were to have been sent out to Republicans before the book's publication date. Maybe the publisher got wind of it and leaked the book to get the jump on them.
No doubt they'll stoke up the base and maybe even cast doubts in many more about the veracity of Comey's book. But their concerted, pre-planned efforts are pretty good evidence of how scared they are of the effect of this tell-all by the man at the center of obstruction of justice charges against the sitting president.
And well they should be scared. It's a strong case. But even that may be overshadowed by the jeopardy for the president of Michael Cohen's records that the federal prosecutors in New York now have.
Ralph
Friday, April 13, 2018
Max Boot:'What on Earth is Trump saying?'
Veteran Republican journalist, anti-Trump scourge, Max Boot, wrote in yesterday's Washington Post about the bewildering, contradictory messages coming out of Donald Trump's White House. We can start with the late headline about Trump considering rejoining the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement. Now there's a real U-turn.
But let's listen to Max Boot:
"Both headline writers were trying in good faith to decipher the undecipherable -- the intentions of our mercurial president, which can change as rapidly as the weather in Rapid City, S.D. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad may have believed that President Trump was really pulling out and thus felt free to apparently use chemical weapons against the city of Douma this past Saturday. But after years spent criticizing President Barack Obama for sacrificing surprise in military strikes, Trump announced that U.S. missiles -- 'nice and new and smart!' -- would soon be striking Syria.
"If [Assad] can't figure out Trump, he is hardly alone. It is not just that Trump changes his mind often, although he does. It is also that, when he speaks his mind, it is often impossible to figure out what he's saying. Here is Trump speaking last week: 'Nobody's been tougher on Russia than I have . . . And with that being said, I think I could have a very good relationship with President Putin . . . Getting along with Russia is a good thing. . . And if I did that would be a great thing. And there's also a possibility that that won't happen. Who knows? Okay?' Who knows, indeed.
"Trump's ramblings about Vladimir Putin were positively pellucid in their clarity compared with his March 29 comments on the U.S.-South Korea trade deal: 'So we've redone it, and that's going to level the playing field on steel and cars and trucks coming into this country. And I may hold it up till after a deal is made with North Korea. Does everybody understand that? You know why, right? You know why? Because it's a very strong card.'
"I have asked numerous Korea experts what this is supposed to mean, and no one has any idea. Why would Trump want to hold up a trade deal with South Korea to gain leverage over North Korea? Maybe he is planning to make such massive concessions to Kim Jong Un that he will need to bludgeon Seoul into acquiescing. Or maybe he was simply confusing North and South Korea -- a mistake he has made before. Who can keep all those Koreas straight?
"Most presidents enter office knowing relatively little about foreign policy and learn a lot on the job. Trump knew less than any of his predecessors and has learned less than any of them. The perpetual fog that clouds [Trump's] thinking has not lifted an inch; if anything, it is becoming ever more impenetrable.
"This is what happens when you are functionally illiterate: Trump can read in theory but chooses not to, and therefore he is incapable of sustained learning. As The Post reported, 'He rarely if ever reads the President's Daily Brief, a document that lays out the most pressing information collected by U.S. intelligence agencies from hot spots around the world.'
"Instead of relying on the written word, Trump relies on the nitwits who opine on the Fox News channel. I've previously suggested that Fox News is Trump's RT [the Russian government's propaganda tv station], but that's not quite right: Putin is too smart to believe what his own propagandists say. Not Trump. If 'Fox and Friends' tells him that a 'caravan' of Central American refugees is about to invade the United States, Trump will faithfully echo their hysteria. He even seeks out Sean Hannity and Lou Dobbs off air for their fortune-cookie insights.
"Trump is proud of his lack of 'book learnin'.' During the 2016 campaign, he bragged . . . 'that he does not need to read extensively because he reaches the right decisions 'with very little knowledge other than the knowledge I [already] had, plus the words 'common sense.' In practice Trump's policies defy any kind of sense, common or otherwise.
"He is trying to negotiate a nuclear deal with North Korea -- but at the same time he is threatening to tear up the one with Iran. He has threatened a trade war against China -- but at the same time he needs China's help to coerce North Korea into making a deal. He is intent on withdrawing from the Iran nuclear accord because he is so worried about Iran -- but at the same time he is handing Syria over to Iran on a silver platter. Or at least he was before the latest apparent chemical attack. Now he's preparing to bomb Syria as a prelude to either greater engagement or disengagement. With the 'very stable genius' in charge, who knows what's going to happen next?
"Trump prides himself on unpredictability; but, as the attack in Syria showed, there is a price to be paid for leaving allies and enemies alike guessing about your intentions."
But let's listen to Max Boot:
* * * * *
"There are few better examples of the terminal confusion gripping the Trtmp administration than the competing headlines published by The Post and The New York Times last Wednesday. The Post: 'Trump instructs military to begin planning for withdrawal from Syria.' The Times: 'Trump Drops Push for Immediate Withdrawal of Troops From Syria.'"Both headline writers were trying in good faith to decipher the undecipherable -- the intentions of our mercurial president, which can change as rapidly as the weather in Rapid City, S.D. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad may have believed that President Trump was really pulling out and thus felt free to apparently use chemical weapons against the city of Douma this past Saturday. But after years spent criticizing President Barack Obama for sacrificing surprise in military strikes, Trump announced that U.S. missiles -- 'nice and new and smart!' -- would soon be striking Syria.
"If [Assad] can't figure out Trump, he is hardly alone. It is not just that Trump changes his mind often, although he does. It is also that, when he speaks his mind, it is often impossible to figure out what he's saying. Here is Trump speaking last week: 'Nobody's been tougher on Russia than I have . . . And with that being said, I think I could have a very good relationship with President Putin . . . Getting along with Russia is a good thing. . . And if I did that would be a great thing. And there's also a possibility that that won't happen. Who knows? Okay?' Who knows, indeed.
"Trump's ramblings about Vladimir Putin were positively pellucid in their clarity compared with his March 29 comments on the U.S.-South Korea trade deal: 'So we've redone it, and that's going to level the playing field on steel and cars and trucks coming into this country. And I may hold it up till after a deal is made with North Korea. Does everybody understand that? You know why, right? You know why? Because it's a very strong card.'
"I have asked numerous Korea experts what this is supposed to mean, and no one has any idea. Why would Trump want to hold up a trade deal with South Korea to gain leverage over North Korea? Maybe he is planning to make such massive concessions to Kim Jong Un that he will need to bludgeon Seoul into acquiescing. Or maybe he was simply confusing North and South Korea -- a mistake he has made before. Who can keep all those Koreas straight?
"Most presidents enter office knowing relatively little about foreign policy and learn a lot on the job. Trump knew less than any of his predecessors and has learned less than any of them. The perpetual fog that clouds [Trump's] thinking has not lifted an inch; if anything, it is becoming ever more impenetrable.
"This is what happens when you are functionally illiterate: Trump can read in theory but chooses not to, and therefore he is incapable of sustained learning. As The Post reported, 'He rarely if ever reads the President's Daily Brief, a document that lays out the most pressing information collected by U.S. intelligence agencies from hot spots around the world.'
"Instead of relying on the written word, Trump relies on the nitwits who opine on the Fox News channel. I've previously suggested that Fox News is Trump's RT [the Russian government's propaganda tv station], but that's not quite right: Putin is too smart to believe what his own propagandists say. Not Trump. If 'Fox and Friends' tells him that a 'caravan' of Central American refugees is about to invade the United States, Trump will faithfully echo their hysteria. He even seeks out Sean Hannity and Lou Dobbs off air for their fortune-cookie insights.
"Trump is proud of his lack of 'book learnin'.' During the 2016 campaign, he bragged . . . 'that he does not need to read extensively because he reaches the right decisions 'with very little knowledge other than the knowledge I [already] had, plus the words 'common sense.' In practice Trump's policies defy any kind of sense, common or otherwise.
"He is trying to negotiate a nuclear deal with North Korea -- but at the same time he is threatening to tear up the one with Iran. He has threatened a trade war against China -- but at the same time he needs China's help to coerce North Korea into making a deal. He is intent on withdrawing from the Iran nuclear accord because he is so worried about Iran -- but at the same time he is handing Syria over to Iran on a silver platter. Or at least he was before the latest apparent chemical attack. Now he's preparing to bomb Syria as a prelude to either greater engagement or disengagement. With the 'very stable genius' in charge, who knows what's going to happen next?
"Trump prides himself on unpredictability; but, as the attack in Syria showed, there is a price to be paid for leaving allies and enemies alike guessing about your intentions."
* * * * *
Well . . . where does this leave us? Being tossed about in a storm at sea, with no one manning the helm. And that's the foreign policy arena. At home? Not much better.
And overshadowing it all, at home and abroad, there's all the corruption, the incompetence, the absence of advisers in key positions. And Mueller closing in.
And James Comey's book about to be released.
Ralph
Thursday, April 12, 2018
Trump-world in a heap of trouble
Jane Coaston of Vox.com pointed out a single paragraph in a New York Times story by Matt Apuzzo that -- thoughtfully read -- is a shockingly revealing distillation of the breadth and depth of trouble the Trump World is in.
Here's that paragraph, which is from an article about the news of the FBI raid into the offices and home of Trump's personal lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen.
"The searches open a new front for the Justice Department in its scrutiny of Mr. Trump and his associates. His longtime lawyer is being investigated in Manhattan; his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, is facing scrutiny by prosecutors in Brooklyn; his campaign chairman is under indictment; his former national security adviser has pleaded guilty to lying; and a pair of former campaign aides are cooperating with Mr. Mueller. Mr. Mueller, meanwhile, wants to interview Mr. Trump about possible obstruction of justice."
Wow.
Ralph
Here's that paragraph, which is from an article about the news of the FBI raid into the offices and home of Trump's personal lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen.
"The searches open a new front for the Justice Department in its scrutiny of Mr. Trump and his associates. His longtime lawyer is being investigated in Manhattan; his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, is facing scrutiny by prosecutors in Brooklyn; his campaign chairman is under indictment; his former national security adviser has pleaded guilty to lying; and a pair of former campaign aides are cooperating with Mr. Mueller. Mr. Mueller, meanwhile, wants to interview Mr. Trump about possible obstruction of justice."
Wow.
Ralph
News stomping out news
We had Scott Pruitt right in the crosshairs, where public opinion was beginning to shift from not caring to insisting that he must be fired. And then . . .
We had the FBI raid of Michael Cohen's office and home.
We had the Trump meltdown over that and his increased threat to fire Mueller or Rosenstein . . . or maybe Sessions . . . or maybe all three.
We had the Syria crisis and the crisis in our confidence in the commander-in-chief.
We had the Mark Zuckerberg testimony before congressional committees.
And, finally, on Wednesday, we had the announcement from Paul Ryan that he will not seek re-election -- which has prompted tons of news time assessing his accomplishments and lack thereof.
Meanwhile, where is Scott Pruitt?
We MUST NOT LET HIM SLIP AWAY under the cover of this avalanche of new news. Trump doesn't care about the corruption, unless it makes headlines that either embarrass him or overshadow him. Neither of which is happening right now with all this other news. We can't let it end there. Let's make Pruitt the poster boy for corruption.
Ralph
We had the FBI raid of Michael Cohen's office and home.
We had the Trump meltdown over that and his increased threat to fire Mueller or Rosenstein . . . or maybe Sessions . . . or maybe all three.
We had the Syria crisis and the crisis in our confidence in the commander-in-chief.
We had the Mark Zuckerberg testimony before congressional committees.
And, finally, on Wednesday, we had the announcement from Paul Ryan that he will not seek re-election -- which has prompted tons of news time assessing his accomplishments and lack thereof.
Meanwhile, where is Scott Pruitt?
We MUST NOT LET HIM SLIP AWAY under the cover of this avalanche of new news. Trump doesn't care about the corruption, unless it makes headlines that either embarrass him or overshadow him. Neither of which is happening right now with all this other news. We can't let it end there. Let's make Pruitt the poster boy for corruption.
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
