No matter the result, blowback will be ugly

Donald J. Trump’s current political troubles are likely to end one of two ways.

The special counsel and two congressional committees will find criminal conduct involving the president, his campaign and the Russian government — and he’ll be impeached and possibly convicted.

Or …

The special counsel and those committees will come up empty and will decide there’s no “there” there. The president will be absolved of wrongdoing and he’ll complete his term in office.

Either outcome bodes ugly for those of who have an interest in government, in politics and in public policy. The ugliness will be the result of the president’s reaction to either outcome.

History already has shown that Trump cannot — or will not — let go of the past. Witness his continual recitation of his stunning, shocking victory in the 2016 presidential election.

Consider the potential outcomes:

Trump gets impeached and then convicted. The president will not go quietly. He will not leave office as President Nixon did in August 1974 and then disappear for years. We won’t see Trump fly away aboard Marine One from the White House lawn, grinning broadly, waving to his friends, White House staff and political supporters.

Oh, no. He’ll be angry. He’ll be lashing out continually against the media, Democrats, turncoat Republicans, Congress in general. He might even call for the abolition of the U.S. Constitution for all I know.

Once in some form of retirement, he’ll be tweeting his fingers to the bone. He’ll be dishing out insults by the minute, let alone the hour. He’ll threaten to sue anyone for any reason that comes to mind.

And the media he hates — allegedly — will lap it up, report it dutifully and give him all the platform he needs to seek some form of revenge against the system that “betrayed” him.

If the president is impeached and then acquitted by the Senate, well, ratchet all of the previous up by a factor of, oh, several thousand.

The president is clean. This outcome could be just as ugly as the other one.

Think of how the president is going to play this one out. He’ll stage campaign-style rallies. He’ll savage the media and his political enemies. He likely could re-tell the story of his “historic” electoral victory over Hillary Rodham Clinton. The president is not likely to accept victory like a gentleman, praise the system for doing its job, thank the special counsel, Robert Mueller, for his service to the country and wish him well as he returns to private law practice.

The president will seethe and stew over the very idea that he would be the subject of an FBI probe, of an investigation by the legislative branch of government.

Moreover, he’ll do all of it in public. He likely would seize the limelight at every opportunity. He’ll create opportunities when they don’t present themselves.

All of this is my way of telling you that no matter the outcome of these investigations, we — the American public — are going to be disserved by the president of the United States.

Just as he showed during the 2016 GOP primary campaign, he exhibited a clearly defined “sore loser” trait. When he won the whole thing, he has shown as well that he is a “sore winner.”

Thus, I am not looking forward to the end of this investigation, no matter how it turns out.

Melania goes scarf-less? Heaven forbid!

Melania Trump has arrived with her husband, the president of the United States, in Saudi Arabia.

She and her husband, Donald Trump, strode down the stairway from Air Force One and greeted the Saudi king.

Oh, but wait! Her head was uncovered. She wasn’t wearing a scarf, per Muslim custom. Where’s the outrage? The recrimination? The howls of disrespect?

There wasn’t any. Nor should there be.

Hey, let’s hold on! Michelle Obama did the same thing when she and her husband, also the president of the United States, went to the Middle East a couple of years ago. Her head was uncovered, too. Oh, but the conservative media went semi-nuts.

So did at least one notable Republican politician. His name? Donald John Trump! That, truth be told, is what makes this an issue worthy of a brief blog post.

Being of a more tolerant strain as it regards religion, I am not bothered in the least that non-Muslim female dignitaries don’t cover their heads when they travel to Muslim-majority nations. They aren’t “dishonoring” their hosts.

Let’s stay focused on the aim of these visits, which has nothing to do with making fashion statements.

Jeb Bush says ‘I told you so’

Dear Jeb,

OK. You win. Sort of.

You’re saying you warned us about Donald J. Trump becoming a “chaos president.” Now you’re crowing a little bit too loudly about the prediction that has come true.

Let me admonish you, though, on a key point: You were far from being the only observer to make such an observation.

Granted, many of us didn’t precisely use the term “chaos president,” as you claim to have done. A lot of pols around the country — especially some Republicans just like yourself — used some quite harsh language to describe the fellow who won the election this past year.

Mitt Romney warned of electing a “phony” and a “fraud”; Rick Perry called Trump a “cancer on conservatism”; Ted Cruz, another Texan, described Trump as “amoral.” There were others, but you get the point.

A lot of us out here in Flyover Country referred to Trump’s unfitness for the office. The implication, although not stated explicitly, was that his absolute ignorance about public policy, politics, public service and government would lead to the kind of chaos that has erupted in just the first 100-some days of his presidency.

It’s all coming to pass.

Will it doom this guy? Will it result in impeachment and conviction in the Senate? Will it force him to quit before the House impeaches him?

I am not going to bet the farm on any of it. He should have been toast while running for office when he said Sen. John McCain wasn’t a real “war hero,” or when he mocked that New York Times reporter’s disability, or when he acknowledged grabbing women by their private parts, or when he disparaged the Gold Star couple who spoke against him at the Democratic National Convention.

Jeb, he not only withstood all of that tempest, he parlayed it in some perverse fashion to shore up his standing among your party’s “base.”

Yep, he’s the “chaos president,” just as you said it would be.

Make no mistake, Jeb. I detest the guy as much as you do. Maybe more. It is appalling in the extreme that he managed to win the election.

I now plan to wait for the special counsel to do his job. We’ll get to hear from James Comey shortly when the former FBI director tells the Senate Intelligence Committee what it needs to hear.

And we’ll all get to watch as the chaos continues — and you’ll get to gloat some more.

POTUS’s self-interest knows no limits

“No politician in history, and I say this with great surety, has been treated worse or more unfairly.”

That bit of self-pity came from the mouth of Donald J. Trump, the 45th president of the United States.

What’s more interesting to me, though, is the venue in which he uttered it.

The president spoke those words this week to a group of students graduating from the U.S. Coast Guard Academy. These are young men and women who have just received their officers’ commissions and are going to serve their country.

Many of them are going to put their lives on the line. They are going to thrust themselves into harm’s way. They will protect the nation against those who seek to harm Americans. They will patrol our coasts. The Coast Guard has sent service personnel into combat overseas, such as those who served with valor and gallantry during the Vietnam War.

These young Americans didn’t need to hear whining from the president about “unfair” treatment by the media. They didn’t deserve to be treated to yet another griping session from Donald Trump about the trouble he has brought on all by himself.

Sure, the president offered words of encouragement and congratulations to these young people. He wished them well as they commit their lives to public service.

However, he soiled commencement speech with that fit of petulance that was inappropriate, given the audience that heard it.

President continues his insult tirade

One of the many promises Donald J. Trump made when he became president was that he would “act like a president.” He would talk like one, too.

He was elected to the highest office in America after burying his Republican primary foes in a mudslide of insults. Then he turned his insult machine loose on Democratic nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Lyin’ Ted Cruz, Low Energy Jeb Bush, Little Marco Rubio all ran against Trump in the GOP primary. Trump also told an interviewer that Sen. John McCain was a Vietnam War hero “only because he was captured; I like people who aren’t captured, OK?”

Then he turned his guns loose on Crooked Hillary Clinton. He urged on campaign rally crowds to yell “Lock her up!”

His core of supporters didn’t mind. Trump merely was “telling it like it is,” they said. He’s not a politician, they insisted. He talks like the rest of us, they added.

Has he stopped hurling insults now that he’s president?

Nope. Not a chance. Now we hear — from the “fake news” mainstream media outlets such as the New York Times — that he fired FBI Director James Comey because he’s a “nut job,” that he’s “crazy.”

Ah, yes. That’s how the president refers to the nation’s top federal cop, America’s top law enforcement officer. A nut job. He’s crazy.

Who heard the president offer this bit of presidential dignity? The Russian foreign minister and Russia’s ambassador to the United States. They were invited into the Oval Office on a suggestion from Russian President/dictator/killer Vladimir  Putin, who asked Trump to have these fellows stop by for a visit.

Oh, and then there’s this: Trump banned American journalists from the meeting. The Russian news agency, Tass, was present. Tass photographers took pictures of the meeting.

If you’ll forgive me for borrowing a term that Trump himself used in one of his endless string of tweets: This man’s behavior is so “unpresidented.”

‘Carlos Danger’ pleads guilty; now, goodbye

A part of me wants to feel a bit of compassion for former U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner.

Another part of me, though, resists that temptation.

Weiner, aka “Carlos Danger,” today pleaded guilty to sending sexually explicit text messages to a 15-year-old girl.

“Danger” fell off the wagon after he got caught sending messages and obscene videos to women. That earlier scandal forced him to resign from Congress. He went into hiding and then re-emerged in the “sexting” escapade.

The one-time Democratic hot-shot loudmouth — who used the Carlos Danger moniker while sending obscene texts and videos as some sort of disguise — has been disgraced. I hope it’s for the final time. I no longer want to read about this guy, or get lured into commenting in blog posts about him.

He once was married happily to Huma Abedin, one of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s most trusted advisers. Abedin filed for divorce — imagine that! — after the sexting matter became known.

Weiner could have faced a 10-year prison term. His guilty plea likely will result in a lesser sentence. He might not even serve any time behind bars.

I don’t really care if he spends time in the slammer. All I do care about is that he disappears from public view … for good!

What has happened to Trump’s ‘fine-tuned machine’?

We’re at about Day 120 of the Donald J. Trump administration.

The nation passed the 100-day benchmark period with the president proclaiming that he had accomplished more than anyone in the history of his office during that time.

In less than one month since that boastful time, it’s fair to suggest that the wheels have flown off the Trump wagon. His “fine-tuned machine” is on fire. Words like “impeachment” and “criminal investigation,” which once were whispered between friends are now being blurted out in the open.

Dear readers, we are on the verge of a full-blown crisis in our government.

We aren’t yet in full crisis mode. I am beginning to believe that the moment well could be at hand.

The U.S. Justice Department has appointed a special counsel to examine the president’s relationship with Russian government officials who — according to 17 U.S. intelligence agencies — tried to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.

Trump has fired the FBI director, James Comey, because he was spending too much time on “the Russia thing.” He reportedly has labeled Comey a “nut case” and “crazy” while meeting in the Oval Office with the Russian foreign minister and that country’s ambassador to the United States.

What’s likely far worse is that the president said that firing Comey relieved him of “pressure” from the FBI probe into that very “Russia thing.”

Does this sound like an obstruction of justice? Does it sound like an impeachable offense? Does it sound like an administration running like a “fine-tuned machine”?

I also believe we are witnessing what many of us said would be a nightmarish political experience with the election of Donald Trump as president.

Many Americans said he is unfit, ill-prepared, unqualified and temperamentally unsuited to become our head of state and government and our commander in chief. To be honest, the speed and the drama associated with what looks like a presidential death spiral is shocking even to the most ardent critics of Donald J. Trump.

You may count me as one of those critics who is astounded at what we appear to be witnessing.

We’re just past the 100-day mark of a brand new presidency and it’s coming apart right before our eyes.

The ‘bombs’ keep exploding inside the White House

James Comey is a “nut job,” he is “crazy” and firing him relieved Donald J. Trump from the “pressure” of an investigation involving the president’s relationship with the Russian government.

That, dear reader, is a summary of what the New York Times is reporting about the president of the United States. It gets even more, um, interesting. The White House is not disputing what the Times has reported.

What does this mean as the president takes wing en route to Saudi Arabia on his first overseas trip as our head of state?

I think it means that the president is digging himself into a deeper hole as Robert Mueller, the newly appointed special counsel, begins his work to uncover the truth about the burgeoning problems that are looking more and more like a full-blown constitutional crisis.

Trump fired the former FBI director, who was in the midst of a probe into whether the president’s campaign colluded with Russian government hackers seeking to influence the 2016 election. Comey wrote a memo that reportedly states that Trump asked him to drop the FBI investigation; Trump denies making that request.

Trump has fired a former acting attorney general, Sally Yates, who warned the White House about former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s exposure to potential blackmail from the Russians; the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, recused himself from anything to do with the Russia probe; then the AG recommends to Trump — in a memo — to fire Comey, which may have violated the terms of his recusal.

Now, what about the vice president, Mike Pence? He said Comey’s dismissal had nothing to do with the Russia probe. The president then contradicts the vice president. Who’s the bigger liar?

I believe this story is getting hotter by the hour.

Special counsel Mueller’s plate is overflowing. The piling on is coming — if you can believe it — from the principal subject of his growing investigation: the president of the United States.

See ya later, Bob Beckel

Bob Beckel’s dismissal from the Fox News Channel isn’t as big a deal as, say, Bill O’Reilly’s firing or that of the late Roger Ailes.

It’s still a big deal, however.

Fox canned Beckel today in connection with racially insensitive remarks he made to a fellow network employee. Beckel was one of the co-hosts of “The Five,” a network news talk show that airs weekday afternoons. He leans to the left politically and usually found himself on the short end of a gang fight with his co-hosts, most of whom lean to the right.

I always found it fascinating that Beckel was seen as a political “expert.” Why the fascination? Well, he shepherded Democratic nominee Walter Mondale’s 1984 presidential campaign to a 49-state landslide loss to President Ronald Reagan.

Fox’s quick dismissal of Beckel does suggest to many observers that the network has been sensitized to misbehavior by its on-air personalities. O’Reilly was canned after revelations came out about the sexual harassment settlements to which he agreed; several women accused O’Reilly of harassing them. And then there is Ailes, the network founder who was let go also for sexual harassment claims leveled against him; Ailes died this week at the age of 77.

I won’t miss Beckel. For starters, I don’t generally watch Fox News. When I have tuned in, I have found Beckel’s analysis to be seriously underwhelming.

Kudos go to Fox for its quick action. Heaven knows the network has taken a beating over the way it (mis)handled the sexual harassment matters.

May this firing signal a change in the corporate culture at the “fair and balanced” network.

Get ready for Trump speech on (gulp!) — Islam!

Donald J. Trump is getting ready to climb headfirst into the belly of the beast.

He is planning a speech on Islam. The venue? Saudi Arabia, where two of Islam’s holiest cites are located.

Politico offers a list of do’s and don’ts for the president to follow.

Here it is: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/05/18/donald-trump-islam-speech-215150

As we know, the president isn’t known for his nuanced approach to foreign policy. He doesn’t seem to have a foreign policy. He doesn’t think strategically. He doesn’t look at the big picture. He speaks in the moment and seems to react to the last person who has his undivided attention.

I feel compelled, though, to remind everyone that he will be speaking to an audience full of people with lengthy memories. I’m quite certain they’re going to remember what candidates Donald Trump said about Muslims way back when, how he intended to impose a blanket ban on “all Muslims” entering the United States “until we figure out what the hell we’re doing.”

He’s backed off of that. He’s tried to impose executive orders banning Muslims from certain countries, only to have the federal judiciary strike them down. Why? They discriminate against people of certain religions, which the U.S. Constitution forbids.

As Politico reports: According to the president’s national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, “The speech is intended to unite the broader Muslim world against common enemies of all civilization and to demonstrate America’s commitment to our Muslim partners.”

Be very careful, Mr. President.