Rigged, Indeed

He's right, you know.

Donald Trump and his lackeys complained throughout the presidential campaign that the election was "rigged,"  This year, on Groundhog Day

“The top Leadership and Investigators of the FBI and the Justice Department have politicized the sacred investigative process in favor of Democrats and against Republicans — something which would have been unthinkable just a short time ago,” Trump wrote on Twitter hours before ordering the release of the formerly classified memo. “Rank & File are great people!”

Obviously, the Devin Nunes memo indicated no such thing. Claiming an election is "rigged" brings to mind for most people the idea that it is fixed. However, the Urban Dictionary maintains "The word rigged is used to describe situations where unfair advantages are given to one side of a conflict."  By that (questionable) definition, the 2016 presidential election clearly was rigged.

The New Yorker's Jane Mayer notes a "top-secret Oval Office meeting" on January 5, 2017, in which "the nation's top intelligence agencies briefed (Obama and Biden and some national security officials for the  first time about the (Steele) dossier's allegation that Trump's campaign team may have colluded with the Russians."  One person who was there later told her

No one understands that at the White House we weren’t briefed about the F.B.I.’s investigations. We had no information on collusion. All we saw was what the Russians were doing. The F.B.I. puts anything about Americans in a lockbox.

It does so with almost any American- but not with Hillary Clinton.  Mayer found that Christopher

Steele was therefore shocked when, on October 28, 2016, Comey sent a letter to congressional leaders: the F.B.I. had come across new e-mails bearing on its previously closed investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server as Secretary of State. He said that these e-mails required immediate review. The announcement plunged Clinton’s campaign into chaos. Two days before the election, Comey made a second announcement, clearing her of wrongdoing, but by that point her campaign’s momentum had stalled.

To Steele, the F.B.I., by making an incriminating statement so close to Election Day, seemed to be breaking a rule that he’d been told was inviolable. And, given what he—and very few others—knew about the F.B.I.’s Trump investigation, it also seemed that the Bureau had one standard for Clinton and another for her opponent. “Chris was concerned that something was happening at the F.B.I.,” Simpson later told the House Intelligence Committee. “We were very concerned that the information that we had about the Russians trying to interfere in the election was going to be covered up.” Simpson and Steele thought that “it would only be fair if the world knew that both candidates were under investigation.”

Shortly after the election, a mentor of Steele gave the dossier to hawkish Armed Services committee chairperson John McCain. But while the dossier was still largely a secret

On December 9th, McCain handed Comey a copy of the dossier. The meeting lasted less than ten minutes, because, to McCain’s surprise, the F.B.I. had possessed a copy since the summer. According to the former national-security official, when (McCain aide) Kramer learned about the meeting his reaction was “Shit, if they’ve had it all this time, why didn’t they do something?” Kramer then heard that the dossier was an open secret among journalists, too. He asked, “Is there anyone in Washington who doesn’t know about this?” 

As of then- a month after the election- plenty of people in Washington still didn't know about it.  That group included the President of the USA, the Vice President of the USA, and Hillary Clinton (and her campaign).

In a startling departure from Justice Department policy, FBI director Comey in July had announced that an American who would not be referred to prosecution was probably "extremely careless" in "handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

But that was unacceptable to some FBI agents.  A year ago, Vanity Fair's Bethany McClean revealed

A former D.O.J. official says that, as early as 2015, a rumor was floating around that the F.B.I. agents in New York were cracking jokes about seeing Hillary Clinton in handcuffs. “It was widely understood that there was a faction in that office that couldn’t stand her and was out to get her,” this person says.

Moreover, Trump surrogate Rudy Giuliani, who as a former US Attorney for New York and mayor of the city was close to James Kallstrom once head of the FBI's field office in New York- evidently had inside information:

On October 26, Giuliani appeared on Fox News and said, “We got a couple things up our sleeve that should turn this around. Even the liberal pollsters will get to see.” When pressed about what these surprises would be, Giuliani broke into a smile and said, “You’ll see. Ha ha ha.”

Two days later, on October 28, just 11 days before the election, Comey sent his letter to Congress saying that “in connection with an unrelated case, the F.B.I. has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation” of Clinton. 





That halted Clinton's momentum, which was not in the least resurrected when two days before the election, Comey acknowledged that the allegedly "pertinent" emails actually changed nothing.

So, yes, the vote was "rigged" in the loose definition of the term. And when the full findings of Special Counselor Robert Mueller (assuming he is not dismissed) are released, Donald J. Trumplikely will wish the election never was rigged in his behalf.

Share |

Beware The Teetotaler

If so, then what?

There is something wrong when one can do a Google search on "transcript of Nunberg's interview with Erin Burnett" and of the first nine entries, five include the word "alcohol" or "drunk."

In her defense, Erin Burnett did not  accuse Sam Nunberg of being under the influence but instead stated

We talked earlier about what people in the White House were saying about you, whether you were drinking, or on drugs, or whatever had happened today, Talking to you, I have smelled alcohol on your breath.





Nunberg may have been lying about not having had even one drink.  Burnett's speculation came at approximately 6:40 p.m. (Eastern time) and rumor has it that some people drink beer at night or have a glass of wine at dinner. It happens. Moreover, Burnett may be thinking about getting out of the business of being a millionaire talk show host, preferring to be a drug counselor or evaluator.  Reporting on her 11:30 p.m. phone interview with Nunberg, New York magazine's Olivia Nuzzi referred to Nunberg's "nearly 20-minute on-air talk with MSNBC’s Katy Tur, reiterating those sentiments in interviews with Bloomberg News, CNN, NY1, Vox, and Yahoo News."

That would mean the twice-fired Trump aide made it through at least nine interviews from mid-afternoon on, given that he appeared at 5:00 p.m. with CNN's Jake Tapper and an hour later with MSNB's Ari Berman. If Nunberg was drinking, I want to have some of what he had.

Two months ago, in response to widespread speculation about the mental fitness of Donald J. Trump to be President, a press release began

Today, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) reiterates its continued and unwavering commitment to the ethical principle known as "The Goldwater Rule." We at the APA call for an end to psychiatrists providing professional opinions in the media about public figures whom they have not examined, whether it be on cable news appearances, books, or in social media.

That was prompted by what some would consider "armchair" diagnosis of the President of the United States of America (previously, leader of the free world), who has at his command- and can set about launching- the greatest arsenal of nuclear and conventional weaponry ever accumulated. Still, the preponderance of professional opinion considered expression of opinions about his fitness to be unacceptable.

Burnett appeared to be asking her interviewee only if he had a drink. However, the reaction was fairly predictable. The Daily Beast asked (asterisk theirs) "'What the F*ck?' Former Trump Aide Sam Nunberg's Mueller Meltdown Leaves Friends Petrified?" followed by "those close to Nunberg said they fear he was drunk while going on a cable news blitz." Late Monday night, CNN featured a headline "Bewildered White House staff watch Sam Nunberg's interviews" with the statement "Several (White House officials) say they are stunned by the former Trump campaign aides' freewheeeling interviews, calling them 'bizarre' and 'nuts.'"

Leave aside the notion that there are experts on the "bizarre" and "nuts" from individuals serving the exquisitely sensitive guy who has tweeted "Why would Kim Jong-un insult me by calling me 'old,' when I would NEVER call him 'short and fat?' Oh well, I try so hard to be his friend- and maybe someday that will happen!"  They cover for the misogynist who has tweeted "Lightweight Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a total flunky for Chuck Schumer and someone who would come to my office 'begging' for campaign contributions not so long ago (and would do anything for them), is now in the ring fighting against Trump. Very disloyal to Bill & Crooked- USED!" Before being elected, this conspiratorialist had asked "How amazing the State Health Director who verified copies of Obama's 'birth cerificate' died in plane crash today. All others lived."

Nonetheless, Erin Burnett had no trouble being trolled by those "people in the White House (who) were saying about you, whether you were drinking, or on drugs, or whatever had happened today." Perhaps Sam Nunberg did have an alcoholic beverage sometime among his nine+ interviews Monday. But we should take more seriously his opinions and allegations, good or bad. And also to remember: Donald J. Trump reportedly has never had a drink in his life.

Share |

Don't Laugh.

South Carolina GOP  senator Lindsey Graham on Sunday noted that the 25% tariff on steel and 10% tariff on aluminum announced by President Trump

could have negative impacts on the U.S. economy and cause a rift with international trade partners. Graham pleaded on CBS News' "Face the Nation" on Sunday for Mr. Trump to "reconsider your solution."

"China is winning and we're losing with this tariff regime. You are letting China off the hook. You're punishing the American consumer and our allies. You're making a huge mistake here. Go after China, not the rest of the world," urged Graham. 

Graham said the steel industry has been "decimated" as a result of China's steel "dumping," saying the country produces more steel than the world consumes.

Notwithstanding his tough guy talk about mainland China during the campaign, Trump is targeting our allies rather than the tyrannical Asian behemoth.   We learn from CNN that in a closed-door meeting with lobbyists Saturday

Trump also praised China's President Xi Jinping for recently consolidating power and extending his potential tenure, musing he wouldn't mind making such a maneuver himself.

"He's now president for life. President for life. No, he's great," Trump said. "And look, he was able to do that. I think it's great. Maybe we'll have to give that a shot some day."





We'd do well to take him at his word, generally.  Last week Trump proved to be the gun-grabber conservatives previously feared and loathed, and ordering law enforcement to confiscate weapons from his political enemies would be a great way for an authoritarian to start off his second- and possibly not his last- term.

Now President Trump is celebrating the nation he once accused of "raping" the United States of America.  As Xing Jinping is establishing one-man rule in Communist China, we shouldn't be surprised that it is Donald J. Trump who is suggesting that the government he leads should follow the lead of someone he believes is a rapist.

Share |

Good Guy With A Gun

NBC's Ali Velshi on March 1:

A key point of the NRA's plans to "make our schools and communities safe" is simple: more guns. Does that actually hold up? For fact's sake, let's take a look.

In 2003, a study on -- building on research from the 1990s showed a 41 percent higher chance of homicide in homes with guns versus homes without guns. Fact. It found a 244 percent spike in suicides when compared to gun-free homes. This data isn't alone, but I want you to always remember this one: many -- most gun deaths in America are suicides. Nobody else in the world has numbers like American suicide deaths because of the number of guns we have. We'll come back to that another time.

A more recent analysis, in 2015, based on more than a dozen different studies -- and there has been a lot of research, while the CDC  [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] doesn't do it, lots of people do. It found that people with access to guns at home were almost twice as likely to be murdered compared to those without guns in their home....

The NRA argues the states with looser concealed carry laws are safer than those without. Again, not true. A new study from the National Bureau of Economic Research looked at states that adopted "Right to Carry" concealed handgun laws, RTC, "Right to Carry." It found violent crime was 13 to 15 percent higher 10 years after the Right to Carry laws were adopted than the projections would have been if the laws had not been passed. And a 1998 survey of shootings in three cities found that for every time a homeowner used a gun for self defense or some other legally-justified shooting, there were four unintentional shootings. All the data shows that more guns do not mean more safety.

One week after Adam Lanza shot and killed 26 children and adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut on December 14, 2012, Wayne LaPierre held a news conference and famously contended "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."  He gave three examples, including "and  when you hear your glass breaking at 3 a.m. and you call 9-1-1, you won't be able to pray hard enough for a gun in the hands of a  good guy to get there fast enough  to protect you."





The good guy in that scenario would be a police officer.  As of March 2, one of  the "good  guys" was a 48-year old Iraq War veteran and member of the Illinois Army National Guard- and police officer.  Mount  Pleasant, Michigan police believe his son, James Eric Davis Jr, a student at Central Michigan University

shot and killed parents James Eric Davis Sr., 48, a police officer, and Diva Jeenen Davis, 47, around 8:30 a.m. Friday in his fourth-floor dorm room as they were packing his belongings for a trip back to their Chicago-area home.

The shooting capped a series of events that stretched back to the previous night when campus police twice encountered Davis Jr. behaving strangely -- and sent him to a hospital suspecting an adverse reaction to drugs, school police Chief Bill Yeagley said Saturday.

t wasn't immediately clear how Davis Jr. obtained the gun that was registered to his father, Yeagley said.

But investigators believe, citing a witness and video, that the teen brought the gun from a parking lot into Campbell Hall, the dormitory where his parents were, shortly before the shooting, Yeagley said.

"What we know for sure is that the gun was registered to his father, and that we saw ... (Davis Jr.) came from the parking lot into our residence hall with the gun, and the father was upstairs at that time," Yeagley said at a news conference Saturday morning.

If it were a knife available to the assailant, either or both parents almost surely would still be alive. Instead, -as far as is known at this time- there was a gun legally purchased and carried by a good  guy.

Tragically, Ali Velshi is right and Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of  the National Rifle Association, is wrong. Or if the latter chooses: Guns don't kill people; gun lobbies kill people.

Share |



Share |

The Divine Miss W

When 6-7 weeks ago there was a groundswell of support for Oprah Winfrey running for President, Vice's Eve Peyser wrote

Trump isn't wrong about Oprah, but being an "inspiration" doesn't mean someone should run for president. Trump himself was "inspiring" to many Americans who voted for him despite all his obviously disqualifying traits. We don't need any more "inspirational" politicians, we need people who have actual experience governing.

The Los Angeles Times editorialized

Maybe not, but there is more to being president than the ability to deliver a stirring speech. Also, as the first year of the Trump presidency demonstrated, there are colossal risks in electing a political neophyte to the most demanding public office in the world. Just because the Republicans were foolish enough to travel down this dangerous road — in the process sacrificing many of their party's best qualities and most valuable principles in a desperate, craven hunt for votes — doesn't mean the Democrats should follow suit.

Admittedly, the best reason to pass on Oprah Winfrey is that she is another largely inexperienced, largely ignorant (in the case of Trump, thoroughly ignorant) celebrity  Additionally, Ms. Winfrey discovered politics in 2008, endorsed the least (among Edwards, Clinton, and himself) economically progressive Democrat for President, then largely fell silent until she allowed in October, 2016 that electing Hillary Clinton would not be a bad thing.

But there is another similarity between Ms. Winfrey and Mr. Trump.

Evangelicals and Pentecostals, once skeptical of Trump, quickly adhered to him once he secured the GOP nomination for President. He has declared  his devotion to them ever since, and they have clung to him more closely than Barack Obama believes working-class whites cling to their guns or religion.  At an event in July 2017 sponsored in Washington, D.C. by his church, Reverend Robert Jeffress of the First Baptist Church of Dallas proclaimed "millions of Americans believe the  election of President Trump represented God giving us another chance- perhaps our last chance to truly make America great again."

Religion News Service in December quoted three Trumpists who believe God put his hand upon the billionaire businessman. One stated "I do believe that he (God) picked him. Because he puts people in office and he takes them out." Another argued "the odds of him becoming president were so overwhelming the only way he could have made it is with divine intervention." A third contended "I believe that maybe this was in God's divine plan. This is potentially God's way of giving us a chance to repent for all the wrong we have done in the world."

There are many people who believe God puts presidents in the White House, and they have done us no favors. Yet, The Hill reports

Oprah Winfrey said she’s had billionaires offer to fund her presidential campaign if she runs for the White House, but said she’s waiting for a sign from God. 

“I went into prayer,” she said of calls for her to run for president.

“’God, if you think I’m supposed to run, you gotta tell me, and it has to be so clear that not even I can miss it.’ And I haven’t gotten that yet,” Winfrey told People Magazine in an interview published Wednesday.





We've seen this play before, in which a billionaire with a sense of entitlement believes there is no need to serve in any public office, from school board member to US Senator, before running for President. The last guy made it- and we (except his fellow billionaires) all are suffering.

Fortunately, Oprah Winfrey is no Donald Trump.  But her previous foray into electoral politics- appearances for Barack Obama in 2008, after which she vanished from the fray- do not qualify her.

The Democratic Party can do better.  It especially can do better than a candidate who is ready to pronounce her candidacy as one straight from God. Though stated more subtly, the message would be clear,: support me or oppose God.

"Nobody reads the Bible more than me," Trump told GOP voters in February of 2016 and now many evangelicals believe that his candidacy was heaven-sent. Beware: the Democratic Party may get its own version of Donald Trump coming to a primary near you.









Share |

Spineless

It was (in a metaphor President Trump surely would understand) par for the course when

In a meeting with steel industry executives, Trump announced plans for a 25 percent tariff on steel imports and a 10 percent tariff on aluminum imports.

The decision came after a frantic 24 hours in which Cohn and others tried to talk Trump off the ledge. At one point, aides were sure Trump would make the announcement. Then they said he wouldn’t. Finally, sitting alongside steel executives, he did.





They thought they had won him over. But of course, the decision was subject to change and would depend on who Trump would speak to last on the subject.

That is conventional, and largely accurate, wisdom about how Donald Trump operates. The other day, he advocated confiscation of weapons (from the allegedly mentally ill) without due process. then meets with the NRA and its chief lobbyist is convinced Trump (and Pence) "support the Second Amendment, support strong due process and don’t want gun control."

They're the last people to talk to the President on the issue. Still, it's significant that in a meeting with members of Congress, a few of  them Democrats committed to gun safety legislation, he had struck a far different tone. He may be overly susceptible to persuasion, yet also loathe to disagree with or contradict whomever he's talking to. In additional drama

Privately, some aides have expressed frustration that Mr. Kushner and his wife, the president’s daughter Ivanka Trump, have remained at the White House, despite Mr. Trump at times saying they never should have come to the White House and should leave. Yet aides also noted that Mr. Trump has told the couple that they should keep serving in their roles, even as he has privately asked Mr. Kelly for his help in moving them out.

No doubt he wants them out. He simply wants someone else to tell them.

Donald Trump rarely has the courage to face anyone one-on-one and criticize him or her, except on the make-believe "Apprentice." There, he was all about creating a fake persona, the guy willing and able to confront anyone at any time and deliver the hard truth.

In real life, that's the last thing Trump wants, or is willing, to do.  You will remember from May Keith Schiller, who was

the President's longtime bodyguard who has risen from part-time hired muscle to director of Oval Office operations.

That status was cemented on Tuesday when the former New York Police Department officer hand-delivered a letter from the President firing FBI director James Comey, entering the FBI headquarters with a manila folder and leaving without it.

Most people would think that firing the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation warranted a more personal touch, or at least dismissal by the President himself. However, Trump has hardly changed his procedure and

President Donald Trump, frustrated by his staff's handling of the abuse allegations against Rob Porter, is increasingly venting about Chief of Staff John Kelly and speculating about potential replacements, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.

Kelly said Friday evening that he had not offered to resign, although a source acknowledged that he is always willing to leave if that's what the president wants.

That was an NBC News report from over three weeks ago. Chaos in the Administration has only increased, Kelly joke (sort of) that his job is "punishment from God" and as of Friday morning,he is still Chief of Staff to Donald J. Trump

That may change soon.  If he leaves, Kelly can almost write his own ticket (as long as he doesn't have to deal with blacks or immigrants) and may resign. But an order to dismiss the Chief of Staff can come only from the office of the Presidency- and the guy currently occuping that office would have to grow a backbone first.




Share |

Believe Him.

I know, I know: President Trump's meeting Wednesday with approximately 11 Democratic and Repub legislators about gun control probably will will mean little if anything, similarly to his "send me a bill and  I'll sign it meeting on DACA. We know how that turned out.

Meetings with so many participants rarely accomplish anything, anyway, so it is relatively insignificant that he excluded black members of Congress.  Whatever buy-in Grump could have achieved in the grand photo-op would have had virtually no impact, given that the House Speaker and Senate Majority Leader were conspicuously absent, uninvited.

It's unsurprising that reactions to such  an event varied substantially.  Crooks and Liars' Karoli Kuns took a conventional leftist approach, snarking "Yes, the man who took tens of millions from the NRA to get elected wants to pretend he's not owned by them (and) his sudden embrace of age limits for purchase is precious, given that after Wayne LaPierre told Trump to stand down on them, he stopped talking about them. "

Noting Trump's favorable remarks about gun control measures, the provocative and insightful Steve M. had an intriguing take, arguing

You have to remember where Trump comes from. Here in New York City, even tough law-and-order guys are pro-gun control. Rudy Giuliani was when he was mayor in the 1990s. So were all Giuliani's police commissioners....

In New York during the Giuliani years, gun control at the local and state levels and support for nationwide gun control were seen as components of a law-and-order approach to governing, in a Trumpian way. Giuliani and his police commissioners talked about "getting guns off the streets." A big part of that was stop-and-frisk, until its decline started (under court order) late in the mayoralty of Mike Bloomberg. Bill de Blasio, a stop-and-frisk opponent, is mayor now, but I'm sure Trump looks back most fondly on the Giuliani years. The mayor was a hard-ass and a racist, but he was anti-gun. That's what Trump is remembering when he advocates gun control. 

SM is one of the best but this view is contrary to the Politico report on Wednesday that

Trump received a concealed-carry permit from New York City and owns handguns, according to a 2012 interview with the Washington Times, but he hasn’t emphasized it since taking office.

Trump told reporter Emily Miller in the 2012 interview that he owned a .45 caliber Heckler & Koch sidearm and a .38 caliber Smith and Wesson revolver. “The way I view it, if nobody has guns, then only the bad guys have them. And they aren’t giving up their guns,” he said at the time.

Trump told a French magazine in 2016 that he “always” carries a gun, adding that he would have tried to stop the shooters who attacked the Bataclan nightclub in Paris in 2015.

Some gun owners are sympathetic to gun safety measures, but a reading more consistent with the Law of Parsimony would suggest that the President was not sincere in the remarks he made Wednesday supporting expanded background checks, keeping guns from mentally ill individuals, restricting sales of some firearms to young adults, and slamming lawmakers "petrified of the NRA."

But the parallel drawn between the "law-and-order" approach of former New York mayor Giuliani (to a lesser extent, ex-mayors Koch and Bloomberg) and Trump's own perspective rings true.

As SM notes, "the disregard for due process on gun seizures should be a tell. Trump appreciates gun control, but not in a liberal way."

He appreciates it in an authoritarian way.  Two days after the 2016 election, Russian-born journalist Masha Gessen wrote

Most important, Trump is the first candidate in memory who ran not for president but for autocrat—and won.

I have lived in autocracies most of my life, and have spent much of my career writing about Vladimir Putin’s Russia. I have learned a few rules for surviving in an autocracy and salvaging your sanity and self-respect. It might be worth considering them now:

Rule #1: Believe the autocrat. He means what he says. Whenever you find yourself thinking, or hear others claiming, that he is exaggerating, that is our innate tendency to reach for a rationalization. This will happen often: humans seem to have evolved to practice denial when confronted publicly with the unacceptable.

The President didn't mean all of what he said to the assembled members of Congress. And he will quickly pivot from his statement "I like taking the guns early.... But take the guns first, go through due process second."   But the statement is beyond controversial.  It's advocacy for extra-judicial confiscation of weapons and, were it made by a President Obama, would be met with prompt, vociferous calls for impeachment.

Of course, Barack Obama never said such a thing- and neither has any liberal/progressive President or member of Congress, however much they were attacked for being "gun-grabbers."  Yet, it now has been advocated by a guy who has proclaimed "I'm a Second Amendment person." Intimidated as usual, he'll retract or amend his statement. Still....

Despite his seeming ignorance, incompetence, and mental or psychiatric deficiencies, Donald Trump has plans. These are not plans for his first term. However, in the remote event he survives a first term politically and wins four more years, Americans probably will be sorry we didn't heed Gessen's warning:  Believe the autocrat. He means what he says.









Share |