If history is our guide, a moderator of a presidential
general election debate (if any is held) will ask each candidate to say
something positive about the other. The Democratic nominee should turn to
Donald Trump and remark "you kept Chris Christie from the
presidency." (New Jersey viewers
would cheer.)
It's not primarily because the ex- New Jersey governor is
opening The Christie Institute of Public Policy, described here as "a
non-profit, nonpartisan institute in part with his alma mater, Seton Hall
University School of Law."
Christie promises "we're going to focus on national
issues and on having nonpartisan conversations and research on national issues
and international issues." He stated also "unfortunately, our
politics have gotten so ugly and divisive in the country that people are not
having civilized conversations." Yes, he went there. As a devoted resident
of the greater New York area, Christie know doubts understand
"chutzpah" and realizes how hypocritical he is.
But Trump's value was not in keeping this ghastly individual
from the GOP nomination, hence the presidency. It was in keeping this governor
from national office. Under his leadership, local government budgets were squeezed of funding, leading to property tax increases; slashed aid for women's health;
cancelled the Access to the Region's Core tunnel project, connecting commuters
to New York City, NY; legalized gambling spread; a bridge was partially closed to
pressure a mayor to support the governor's re-election bid; the state's pension shortfall shot upward; growth in the state paled in comparison to that in the
region and the nation; and more.
Chris Christie wanted to be President of the United States
of America. He first had to gain the nomination of an increasingly right-wing
party, and governed accordingly to the extent possible in a relatively liberal,
Democratic state.All he got out of it was a job at a law firm, a gig with
ABC News, and now a non-profit institute. It's at least three things too many.
Well, that's the point, isn't it? For a piece about a Trump rally in Cincinnati, Matt Taibbi garnered a lot of quotes from the Trump faithful. He observes that the President typically
creates controversies so quickly that no one can keep track of them all. When the dust settles, everyone is covered with welts and King Donald is bragging about having done it all on purpose, which he may have. In the end, what everyone remembers is Trump antagonists tying themselves in knots over his whims. Taibbi notes When everyone from the American Academy of Pediatrics to his wife to Lindsey Graham expressed revulsion — dude, kids? — Trump finally signed an executive order reversing the policy. He then characteristically blamed the mess on Democrats. By then, the situation had become a fiasco and, like all things in the Trump era, a media goat rope of monstrous proportions. But the best example of creating disaster to blame others was flagged by St. Louis-based Sara Kendzior, she of "The View from Flyover Country: Dispatches from the Forgotten America." (She even posted this twice on her Twitter feed; not enough.)
Trump interview from 2014 praises Putin, says he spoke to him personally. And says crash, riots will fix US economy. https://t.co/j2xIipPrUU
Beginning at 2:02, Donald Russia comments Now, you know what solves it? When the economy crashes, when the country goes to total hell, and everything is a disaster, then you'll have a, you know, you'll have riots to go back where we used to be, when we were great.
Taibbi quotes one Trump rally goer as remaking "the cool thing about Trump is that it's just about being an American." For the President, the cool thing is attempting to fulfill his ultimate wish, that America "goes to total hell," because he may have unique, intimate knowledge of that special location.
The dramatic images of the massive protests in Hong Kong are a reminder that people yearn for freedom and democracy around the world. The United States should stand with them.
The government of the United States of America should stand
with them, as Dan Rather argues. But it won't. And it won't because, though
possibly the manifestation of Satan on earth, Donald Trump is not stupid.
In autumn of 2017, PBS' Frontline televised an investigation
of "the epic, inside story of (Vladimir) Putin's revenge." The following is a
portion:
NARRATOR: Playing a role in Gaddafi’s downfall, the American
secretary of state Hillary Clinton.
HILLARY CLINTON, Secretary of State: Gaddafi must go, and
the Libyan people deserve to determine their own future.
NARRATOR: And in Russia, as massive protests broke out just
outside the Kremlin walls, Putin believed America had crossed the line, and he
blamed Hillary Clinton.
HILLARY CLINTON: The Russian people deserve the right to
have their voices heard and their votes counted.
YEVGENIA ALBATS: Putin said it was Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton who provided funds and means to the Russian opposition and made
them to get out of the—on the streets.
PETER BAKER: No question he’s looking at revenge at Hillary
Clinton. There’s no question that he sees Hillary Clinton as an adversary. And
he wanted to, like— you know, he wanted to get her back.
NARRATOR: Putin would wait for the right moment to strike
back at Clinton and the United States.
We've known for a long time, but were reminded by Robert
Mueller's report, of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election
with the intent of electing Donald Trump President. However, it began with an
effort at smearing Hillary Clinton and preventing her election, irrespective of
Mr. Trump.
President Trump probably does not know all the details
revealed in PBS' investigation of some 22 months ago, including the genesis and development of, and actions arising from, Vladimir Putin's long-held resentment of the
USA. But it's very likely that he knows both that Putin has disliked Hillary
Clinton for a great while, that he was annoyed that Clinton's State Department
approved of the demonstrations against his regime, and that the Russian
President worked to defeat her.
He probably knows also that the USA intelligence community
has identified three threats from Russia and China, comprising
cyber attacks against critical infrastructure, online
influence and misinformation campaigns on social media designed to destabilize
American democratic institutions, and direct interference in U.S. elections
(including the upcoming 2020 presidential election).
Donald Trump knows he already has Putin's approval, and
probably his willingness to assist Trump's re-election. If I were sufficiently well-placed and
conservative to be offered, and unethical enough to accept, a position as a
campaign strategist for President Trump, I would tell him two things.
He needs to be aware of the possibility that Beijing could
thwart the will of the American people in the 2020 presidential election. I
would tell him additionally that he could do the right thing and stand with the
protesters in Hong Kong. Or he can apply to mainland China the lesson that
Hillary Clinton learned of Russia the hard way- anger an authoritarian
superpower at your own political peril.
Asked by Vanity Fairwhether there is a chance President
Trump will drop out of the 2016 race, Anthony Scaramucci replies
Yes. He’s gonna drop out of the race because it’s gonna
become very clear. Okay, it’ll be March of 2020. He’ll likely drop out by March
of 2020. It’s gonna become very clear that it’s impossible for him to win. And
is this the kind of guy that’s gonna want to be that humiliated and lose as a sitting
president? He’s got the self-worth in terms of his self-esteem of a small
pigeon. It’s a very small pigeon. Okay. And so you think this guy’s gonna look
at those poll numbers and say—he’s not gonna be able to handle that
humiliation. And by the way, he is smart enough to know that that entire
Congress hates his guts.
Scaramucci deserves credit for making a bold, unpopular
prediction. It also is inaccurate.
It doesn't matter that the entire Congress hates Donald
Trump. He hates the members of Congress, too, just as he dislikes, or has
contempt for, immigrants, blacks, veterans, evangelicals, and women (unless
they spell their name "I-v-a-n-k-a.")
Donald Russia won't drop out because if he does, he's likely
to be prosecuted. He almost certainly will if he is succeeded by a Democrat, a
likelihood if he doesn't run. A Republican president might pardon him, but can
do so only for federal crimes, and would face the near-certainty that his
political future would die with its issuance.
He won't drop out because if he loses, he will blame the
defeat on a) the Electoral College (whatever the margin of defeat there or in
the popular vote); b) "fake news"; c) voter suppression (irony
notwithstanding); d) voter "fraud"; e) foreign interference (irony
notwithstanding, again); f) Hillary Clinton.
(I know what you're thinking: what would Hillary Clinton have to do with
it? Answer: "Clinton."); g) any combination of the preceding.
He won't drop out because it's never "gonna become very
clear that it's impossible for him to win." The low-hanging fruit
explanation: nearly everyone counted him out in 2016, from announcement of his
candidacy till Election Eve, and he still won.
The politically incorrect explanation: if the economy tanks, pundits
everywhere will maintain that he cannot win and will be wrong.
Approval of Donald Trump's performance would be enhanced by
a strong economy in the fall of 2016. However, his popularity depends less on
the state of the economy than would the approval of any other President. He was
elected even though the economy- at least by traditional and conventional
standards- was fairly strong in November 2016.
His ceiling always low, his cellar remains unusually high.
There were many reasons Donald Russia captured the nation's
zeitgeist three years ago. It was
primarily the veneer of authenticity as he expressed the hostility, bitterness,and rage of whites- especially but not exclusively male- toward any one of a
number of groups of Americans. (Look
angry, bluster, yell loudly, swear a little for extra points, and you must be
sincere.)
We haven't yet hit the bottom of that well of resentment,
and might not until and unless voters believe their financial situation is so
endangered that they are even more vulnerable than at present to targeting of
scapegoats. And there is no one who can fill that need better than Donald J.
Trump.
He may be a scoundrel, but when even a former member of the
Irgun doesn't like your attack on perceived enemies of Israel, you don't really
have a case:
First-class friends don’t treat U.S. representatives like second-class citizens. Trump and Bibi are both wrong. While I disagree with Reps. Tlaib and Omar about their views on Israel, they should be allowed to visit. https://t.co/GeOaBmn9Po
It was not a total loss for the Likud government running
Israel, however. It at least made one of the congresswomen, Rashida Tlaib, cry
uncle. NPR reports that Israel has (barely) partially relented after the Michigan Representative sent Israel's
Interior Minister a letter whose contents read in full
I would like to request admittance to Israel in order to
visit my relatives and specifically my grandmother, who is in her 90s and lives
in Beir Ur el-Fouqa. This could be my last opportunity to see her. I will
respect any restrictions and will not promote boycotts against Israel during my
visit.
Nor was the concession extracted probably an empty gesture,
given that the visit by Tlaib and Omar to the West Bank and (presumably East)
Jerusalem was "under the auspices of" a nongovermental organization
staunchly committed to an independent Palestinian state. Now, however, Tel Aviv
has gotten one of the congresswomen (Tlaib) to make a
concession she probably did not want to make- that she would "not promote
boycotts against Israel during" her visit.
Nonetheless, Israel has suffered a net loss, having bought
itself some distrust within both the American Jewish community and the
Democratic Party for its refusal to concede that all members of the US Congress
can travel freely to Israel.
Not so President Trump, however. Tel Aviv initially extended permission to the
two Democrats, only to reverse itself when
It would show great weakness if Israel allowed Rep. Omar and Rep.Tlaib to visit. They hate Israel & all Jewish people, & there is nothing that can be said or done to change their minds. Minnesota and Michigan will have a hard time putting them back in office. They are a disgrace!
This is what Donald Trump calls "winning." He
blocked two political foes from performing an official duty, also bending an
entire nation to his will. Obviously,
his action was reprehensible, and not only because an American president
(successfully) recommended that a foreign government deny admission of duly elected members of a branch of government (constitutionally)
equal to the presidency.
It might not have worked had this saga remained in the news
for several days. However, it did not, with the Administration cleverly
floating the idea of buying Greenland, thus diverting attention from an act of bigotry and hostility toward Americans, sentiments shared by
many Trump disciples.
The President of the USA challenged a foreign government to say "no" to American citizens, yet another instance in which Trump has demonstrated his contempt for Americans. And he prevailed. He again demonstrated what passes for "strength" in his eyes and those of his supporters by hitting back at the people they hate.
Maryland Public Television, as reported by Media Matters,
has announced
on August 12 that it will relaunch The McLaughlin Group in
the Maryland and Washington, D.C., area in September. MPT also plans to expand
the program nationally in January 2020 “through an agreement with American
Public Television.” The program was briefly relaunched last year on WJLA,
Sinclair Broadcasting Group’s D.C. station. The weekly program will feature
host Tom Rogan and panelists Buchanan, Eleanor Clift, and Clarence Page, as
well as guest panelists. Clift, Page, and Buchanan were panelists on the
original McLaughlin Group, which was hosted by the late John McLaughlin.
This displeases Media Matters considerably, as it doesCharlie Pierce, who remarks
At a time in which white-supremacy and outright racism is
pouring out of the White House, and a time in which these forces are literally
getting people killed, a public television station has decided to roll back the
stone and bring back Pat Buchanan, who is responsible more than most people for
injecting this poison into the body politic generally and into the Republican
Party in particular.
As MM notes, Buchanan is a "white supremacist" though more accurately a Christian supremacist, with a Catholic emphasis. Buchanan was the forerunner to
Donald Trump, as Pierce explains
You can trace many of the horrors of our current moment—from
new-wave protectionism to un-camouflaged racism—all the way back to Buchanan's
campaign against George H.W. Bush. (Bill Clinton once told me and Mark Warren
of this magazine that he thought the Buchanan campaign was the moment in which
the GOP decided to lose its mind.)
Unfortunately, Pierce then gleans the wrong lesson when he
concludes
Now, with all of these issues at a serious flashpoint, these
public-television dopes decide to give Buchanan, who is somewhere between 80
and 400 years old, and who's never been sure that the right side won World War
II, another crack at spreading aged-in-the-wood venom on TV. Clift and Page
should not be a part of this fiasco, either. The conservative Undead never will
leave us.
Who else is somewhere between 80 and 400 years old (aside
from Joe Biden)? That would be the President of the United States of America,
one Donald J. Trump, who also would not be sure the right side won WWII, if in
fact he knew who had won World War II.
Although Buchanan has much in common with Trump, that does
not include ignorance of history (or general ignorance), a preference for
profanity, nor the attraction to a kind of secular and empty (and non-Catholic) Christianity. But if not for Buchanan, there probably would
not be a President (or nominee) Donald Trump, and for that alone Buchanan should
rank as an important historical figure.
Maryland Public Television wants a reprise of The
McLaughlin Group, impossible without at least one conservative. It has hired, Media Matters complains, a
"white supremacist who has pushed virulently racist rhetoric."
Presumably, it could have gone a different direction in
selecting someone from the right. We could have gotten Charlie Sykes or someone
else from the Never Trump vault. With a few exceptions here and there, though more reasonable than other conservatives, they are
of a certain type.
They hate the vulgar, divisive Trump. They are tolerant of
immigration, even illegal immigration, skeptical of a border wall, and can
compete with every liberal and progressive in their sadness at the treatment of
migrants at the border. Same-sex
marriage is perfectly acceptable, and the President's contempt for foreign
allies is not.
Yet, they will not criticize the forced-birth movement,
deregulation or privatization, or tax cuts for the wealthy, and the free trade
which has hollowed out the core of the middle class in America's heartland
remains one of their gods.
They deserve a voice, as does everyone, and are welcome to
ride- but not drive- the anti-Trump bus. However, the
Trump revolution (as Pierce has well expressed previously) began not with the
likes of Pat Buchanan but with Ronald(6) Wilson(6) Reagan (6), hostile to civil rights while quite
congenial to the forced-birth movement and everyone and everything with economic clout. President Donald Trump has learned well as he banishes the US Department of Agriculture to Kansas
City, Mo., recognizing that most of its employees will quit, and agribusiness
will have its way.
Pat Buchanan was not responsible for the devolution and
destruction of government. Erosion of the belief that we owe something to us,
that the mighty should use its power for the benefit of those left behind
tracks back to Reagan, not to Buchanan. Still, Trump owes much to Buchanan.
Most Never Trumpers (common on not-Trump cable television)
question little of the core values of modern conservatism, opposition to
reproductive freedom and support of economic policies which favor the wealthy
over the remainder of society. If Trump is upended in November, 2020, they will return to,
or remain in, their home base- the
Republican Party- and promote the myth that the core ideals of the GOP were
sound, that the Party merely had a case of pneumonia brought on by a venomous
phony from New York City.
We can't bring back the late Ronald Reagan. But public
television can bring back Pat Buchanan, more coherent and literate than
the current President, yet also resentful and belligerent, and a reminder that
Donald J. Trump didn't just come out of the blue.
Whether for ethnic or professional reasons (or both), Sean
Hannity, Corey Lewandowski, Geraldo Rivera, and Anthony Scaramucci stoutly
defended the CNN host when Chris
Cuomo, the host of the eponymously named "Cuomo Prime
Time," went viral Monday night when a conservative provocateur posted a
video of him online. In the video, which is shot from a low angle, Cuomo erupts
after being called “Fredo” by a heckler who claims not to know the anchor’s
name. Cuomo says that the term, a reference to the mafia movie "The
Godfather," is “an Italian aspersion,” comparing it to the racial slur
used against African Americans. “It it’s like the n-word for us,” Cuomo said.
The conversation captured in the video deteriorates quickly,
with Cuomo threatening the heckler, at one point warning him, “I’ll f---ing
throw you down these stairs.”
If it is, it's news to Wikipedia, and also to myself, though
not Italian-American but reared in quasi-northern New Jersey.
But of course, that's not the issue. Cuomo's well-known heavyweight (scoundrels
they are, but heavyweight) defenders are
not keen on the possibility that publicly confronting celebrities of the
political world become a thing.
Appreciate all the support but - truth is I should be better than the guys baiting me. This happens all the time these days. Often in front of my family. But there is a lesson: no need to add to the ugliness; I should be better than what I oppose.
I should be better than what I oppose. Cuomo was condemned by President Trump who, if he had 10% of the class the anchorman displayed, would be- well, would not be Donald J. Trump.
