Trump shows his ignorance one more astonishing time

Wow! That was a wild 72 hours in the world of Donald J. “King of Hospitality” Trump.

He announced plans, via Twitter, to play host to the G7 summit of industrialized nations at his Doral Country Club in south Florida, a decision that clearly violates the Emoluments Clause in the U.S. Constitution.

Then he announces, again via Twitter, that he’s changed his mind. He won’t host the summit there. He’ll look for another suitable location.

Does that make it all better now? Is the president clear of impeachable offenses? Uhh, no. He’s not.

The Emoluments Clause bans the president from benefiting from his public office. Hosting the G7 summit at Doral would have lined his pockets considerably, given that he never divested himself of his many business interests after becoming president. There are the other matters still to be considered, though, regarding probable impeachment by the House of Representatives. We’ll get to those another time.

Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney went on Fox News this morning to say Trump was “surprised” at the pushback. No surprise there. Trump’s ignorance of constitutional matters is well-known and well-chronicled.

Mulvaney said Trump still considers himself in the “hospitality business” and wants to put on the best show possible for the foreign dignitaries. But he’s the president of the United States, “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace reminded him. Mulvaney said hospitality is part of Trump’s “background.” Yeah. Let’s move on.

The United States of America is full of resorts that could play host to this event. Here’s a thought: How about Camp David, the official presidential retreat tucked in the Maryland mountains not far from the D.C. hustle and bustle? Sure, Trump has said he considers Camp David to be a dump. However, it has been the site of many important gatherings.

What’s more, it is a publicly owned site reserved for presidents to relax and, yes, to welcome foreign dignitaries. It also has not a single thing to do with Donald Trump’s business empire.

Trump got the pushback he deserved when he made his initial Doral decision. No, it wasn’t, as he said on Twitter, the result of what he described as “Media & Democrat Crazed and Irrational Hostility.”

It was based on Donald Trump’s utter incompetence and his expressed belief that he can do whatever the hell he wants, even if it flouts the U.S. Constitution.

Waiting for the candidate who can wipe out Trump

Critics of this blog — at least some of them — have made some incorrect presumptions about me. They seem to believe I am some sort of far-left socialist who wants to redistribute wealth. That’s the vibe I get from a few of ’em.

I am a patriotic American, a veteran who went to war for my country, someone who’s been married to one woman for 48 years, has reared two sons watched them become two of the finest men on Earth. I pay my taxes without complaining.  I attend church most Sundays. I revere the principles for which our flag flies and I get choked up at military parades.

Accordingly, I do not want to see some far-left socialist nominated by the Democratic Party to run against Donald J. Trump. I favor a more moderate approach to good government. Who is that candidate? Who should carry the torch forward into political battle against a president who has zero business holding the office to which he was elected? I do not yet know.

I merely want to endorse the candidate who embodies moderation but one who can take the fight directly to Trump and his minions.

I had the distinct pleasure this week of attending a Trump rally in downtown Dallas. I went as an observer. I told a couple from Rockwall I meant about my intent in being there. They got it, even as they wore their Trump gear while waiting to get into the arena.

I met a lot of nice people. I had half-expected to see my share of wild-eyed wackos. I didn’t see them. Instead, I saw thousands of committed Trump supporters whose enthusiasm for their candidate was as fervent as any I have seen since, oh, 1972, when I got involved politically for the first time. My guy at that time was progressive U.S. Sen. George McGovern, a Democrat from South Dakota who campaigned on a pledge to end our involvement in the Vietnam War.

I had just returned from Vietnam and I wanted Sen. McGovern to win in the worst way. Instead, he lost in the worst way, losing 49 states to President Nixon. We were committed, too. Our crowds were huge and enthusiastic, too. We lost big.

My point is this: Fringe candidates do not win national elections. Trump is no extremist. He is, as best I can tell, a complete anomaly. He has no ideological base. He doesn’t stand on principle. He brought zero public service credentials, let alone interest, into the office he won in what I consider to be the Mother of All Political Flukes.

He has disgraced his office. He has embarrassed me as an American patriot. I want him banished from the White House. I want the next president to represent the sensible center of American life.

Whoever that person is, I am waiting for him or her to present themselves to Americans and to make the case in the strongest terms possible that they can — and will — restore dignity to the nation’s highest and most exalted office.

POTUS provides impetus to proceed now with impeachment

Donald J. Trump’s profound arrogance has given the House of Representatives all the evidence it now needs to determine that the president of the United States has committed an impeachable act.

He has committed an unconstitutional act. How?

By awarding himself a massive government contract that will bring the leaders of the seven leading industrial nations of the world to his posh resort in south Florida. Yep, Doral National Country Club is going to play host to the G7 summit of nations next spring.

Donald Trump has declared Doral to be the most fitting resort in the United States to host this event. He has violated the Emoluments Clause to the U.S. Constitution, the one that says the president cannot profit from his public office.

Trump will profit bigly by playing host to the G7 summit.

There is no more need, in my mind, for the House to look much further — if at all — for reasons to impeach the president. He has delivered a big reason all by himself.

I haven’t mentioned — until right now — what White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney declared, that the president withheld arms to Ukraine for political purposes. He then scolded the media to “Get over it.”

That, too, is an impeachable offense. It also violates the Constitution.

However, this awarding of the government contract to his own business simply crosses the biggest red line possible.

Donald Trump needs to be impeached. He needs to be thrown out of office after a Senate trial.

My question remains: How in the name of no man being above the law can Republicans in Congress and across the land ignore what is occurring in real time before all our eyes?

How does a rookie congresswoman’s endorsement matter so much?

For the life of me I cannot come to grips with the notion that a presidential endorsement from a freshman member of Congress is somehow seen by many on the left as a “game changer” in the 2020 race for president of the United States.

Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York has endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders, the independent from Vermont who’s running in the Democratic primary.

Sigh …

Why does this matter at all?

The young woman known as AOC became a media star the moment she took office at the beginning of the year. She beat a longtime Democratic congressional heavyweight, Joseph Crowley, in the 2018 primary and then cruised to election in the heavily Democratic congressional district. She took office and immediately could be seen on damn near every media outlet in the country; even on Fox News, which has covered her every utterance, using it as fodder for its on-air critics of the self-proclaimed socialist.

I don’t have any particular animosity toward AOC, other than she has embraced a celebrity status that she hasn’t yet earned. Nor do I particularly care that she endorsed Sanders, the one-note samba candidate who peppers every response to every question with some reference to “income inequality.”

I actually want AOC to become a consequential public official. She has potential, but she hasn’t realized any of it just yet. The fact is that AOC needs a lot more congressional seasoning before I start to take anything she says with any sort of seriousness.

Maybe she’ll acquire the wisdom and seasoning she needs. Maybe she’ll emerge as a legislative champion, someone who puts her name on landmark bills that become the law of the land. Just maybe she will be able to present herself as one of the wise women of the U.S. House of Representatives.

At this moment, she is just another loudmouth rookie legislator who has managed to elbow her way to the center of the political stage. Trust me on this, too: She is far from being the only grandstander among the current crop of freshman congressmen and women, which is why I don’t take any of the others as seriously as I might when they obtain the wisdom I believe they will have earned.

So, she endorses Bernie Sanders for president? Pfftt.

Syria bloodshed is like a ‘schoolyard fight’?

By golly, the president of the United States said yet another idiotic utterance.

This time Donald Trump equated the bloodshed in Syria to a “schoolyard fight” between, I guess, middle schoolers settling an argument over something that need not come to blows.

His comments came in the wake of the Turkish invasion of northern Syria and the attacks the Turks were launching against our Kurdish allies, the folks who have died by the thousands fighting the Islamic State alongside our forces and those in Syria trying to eliminate the monstrous terrorist group.

So, that’s it, correct, Mr. President? It’s all like a dust-up at school.

Good grief, dude. This ain’t anything to trivialize with such moronic comparisons.

People are dying. They are fleeing for their lives. They live in abject terror every moment of every day they are awake.

How in the world does the president of the United States get away with such shameful, reprehensible rhetoric about an unfolding human tragedy?

Oh, wait! He’s telling it “like it is.” 

State law silences mayor’s vote on issues

I have an answer to a question I posed in an earlier blog regarding the Princeton, Texas, mayor’s inability to vote on routine issues that come before the City Council.

It’s the law that prevents him from casting votes.

Princeton does not have a home-rule charter. Texas “general law” dictates how the city can govern itself.

It’s not as if the city hasn’t sought to approve a charter. It has gone through four municipal elections to adopt a home-rule document, but voters have rejected it. The issues are complex and, to my mind, misguided. Opponents hold up annexation as a major impediment to home rule, neglecting of course to recognize that the Texas Legislature made it impossible for cities to annex land without property owners’ approval.

The Princeton mayor can vote only to break a tie on the council. For that to happen one of the five council members would have to be absent from a meeting, leaving the council with just four members … excluding the mayor.

All that is left for the mayor to do is, well, just run the meeting. The mayor recognizes council members who choose to speak and calls for the vote.

If I were king of the world — or in charge of matters in the city where my wife and I live — I would recruit a new home rule charter commission and charge them with the task of drafting a new charter.

Then the city should put it up for a vote and then, with the help of residents who can see through the demagoguery that shot down previous efforts, it would be able to have full autonomy to run the city as it sees fit.

Princeton’s mayor needs the ability to cast votes along with his City Council colleagues.

How about some more chaos and confusion at White House?

Do you want some more chaos and confusion emanating from the Donald Trump administration? Let’s try this out.

The president asserts repeatedly that he did nothing wrong when he talked with the president of Ukraine about “corruption” in Ukraine, even when he asked for a “favor, though” regarding the shipment of military hardware for Ukrainian forces fighting Russia-backed rebels. The “favor” involved some dirt that Trump wanted on Joe Biden, who might be a 2020 opponent in the presidential election. Ukraine would get the equipment if it delivered the goods to Trump’s re-election team.

Then we hear from the acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, who declares that, yes, the president withheld the arms for political purposes. Then he tells the nation, while standing in the White House press room, to “Get over it.”

What? You mean the chief of staff of the White House has admitted that Donald Trump broke the law? That he violated his presidential oath? That he has committed an offense for which he can be impeached by the House of Representatives?

Reporters gave Mulvaney several chances to take it back. He didn’t. He insisted that was the essence of the phone call Trump had with the Ukrainian president, Volodormyr Zellenskiy.

Oops!

Now he has sought to walk it back. He said his remarks were “misconstrued.” Mulvaney has actually sought to take back what the entire nation heard him say. It’s as if he is saying we all need hearing aids. You didn’t really hear him say what he said.

The White House team is scrambling. They were stunned, bumfuzzled by what the chief of staff said. They couldn’t believe it either in real time, which makes Mulvaney’s effort to erase the record as ridiculous as it looks.

He said it. As it is declared on occasion: You cannot unhonk the horn.

Doesn’t the Emoluments Clause mean anything?

What in the name of conflict of interest am I missing here?

The Emoluments Clause in the U.S. Constitution says the president cannot profit from his office. He cannot accept gifts from foreign governments.

And yet …

Here we have Donald J. Trump bringing the 2020 G7 conference of industrialized nations to — get set for it! — his very own Doral National Country Club in Florida.

Trump says he won’t profit from the G7 meeting. To which I scratch my head and wonder: What in the world is he talking about? Of course he’ll benefit financially! He owns the damn resort!

What is mind-blowing to the max is that Trump would do such a thing, given the probable impeachment he is facing over similar violations of his oath of office, that he sought foreign government assistance for political gain.

Here he is, however, proclaiming that Doral is the most fitting place in the United States to stage such an event. That is utter nonsense. You know it. I damn sure know it. The nation is full of perfectly capable resorts that could play host to this event.

Trump, though, decided to bring it to Doral, which on its face presents an entire host of problems. They deal with security, its proximity to residential dwellings, and its location near an international airport (in Miami).

Trump never divested himself of his myriad business interests when he became president. He merely turned over daily operations of them to his sons, Don Jr. and Eric. The president, though, remains a financial partner in all his operations — and that includes Doral, which reportedly has been struggling terribly in recent years.

To think that the president wouldn’t profit from taxpayer money being spent at his private resort, not to mention the money that would pour in from foreign governments is to suspend one’s disbelief to an unprecedented degree.

I smell yet another impeachable offense in the making.

These officers need to be heard

It’s not every day that a general-grade officer takes the commander in chief to task for decisions he makes that put the nation’s security in peril.

Yet, that is what has happened with two superb military officers. They both have combat experience. They both have commanded many thousands of men and women. They both are true-blue American heroes.

Retired Admiral William McRaven, the former special operations commanding officer, has penned a New York Times essay in which he declares that Donald Trump is putting our democracy “in jeopardy.” He cannot fathom that the president sidles up to dictators and trashes our allies and our alliances that have been vital to keeping the world safe from tyrants. McRaven, under whose command our military was able to kill Osama bin Laden, has laid it on the line with regard to Donald Trump.

Retired Marine Gen. James Mattis, who served as defense secretary in the Trump administration, resigned because the president doesn’t know what he is doing with regard to the military and his handling of foreign policy. Trump selected Mattis to lead the Pentagon, calling him at the time of his hiring a first-rate commanding officer; now he refers to Mattis as an “overrated general.”

They aren’t alone in expressing their dismay and disgust at the way the president conducts foreign and military policy. Retired Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey, the former head of Central Command who led troops during the Persian Gulf War — and served with valor and heroism during the Vietnam War — has been a fervent critic of the president.

These are serious men with serious views about the commander in chief. They are patriots. They served heroically. They faced our enemies on the battlefield. These men deserve to be heard. 

‘Impeach This’ projects false narrative

This emblem could be seen throughout the crowd of Donald Trump supporters milling about the American Airlines Center prior to the president’s “Keep America Great” rally inside the downtown Dallas arena.

Oh, it makes for a somewhat humorous response to efforts in the House of Representatives to impeach Trump on allegations that he has broken laws and violated his oath of office by soliciting foreign governments for political help.

The symbol it displays, though, misrepresents the 2016 presidential election result. I might not need to explain what it shows, but I’ll do so anyway.

The blue sections represent the counties that Hillary Rodham Clinton carried in 2016; the vast expanse of red on the map shows those counties that Donald Trump carried.

Impressive, yes? Well … not so fast!

You see, land mass doesn’t count in elections. What matters are the individuals who live on that land mass and how they cast their ballots.

My meaning is quite obvious. Clinton collected nearly 3 million more votes than Trump in 2016. Trump, though, was able to cobble together a narrow Electoral College victory — 304-227 — to win the presidency. He did so with a deft campaign strategy that focused on three Rust Belt states near the end of the campaign: Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, all three of which voted twice for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012. Clinton squandered those states’ electoral votes by essentially taking them for granted. Trump’s victory margin in all three states totaled roughly 77,000 votes; thus, he won their electoral votes and got himself elected president.

Trump didn’t win by a “landslide,” which he keeps saying while campaigning for re-election. It’s just another presidential lie that his followers have accepted as some form of truth.