Tag Archives: Washington Post

Chaos, confusion still reign in White House

Amid the chaos and confusion that continues to swirl through the White House, Americans are being “treated” — if you don’t mind my use of that verb — with an example of ignorance of how our federal government is supposed to work.

The rhetoric of a young firebrand working inside the Trump administration offers a classic case in point.

Stephen Miller — a senior policy adviser — was trotted out this past weekend on the news talk shows in which he declared that “unelected judges” have no business deciding matters that come before them. He said that U.S. District Judge James Robart must not “make laws” in determining that Donald Trump’s ban on refugees coming to this country needs further review; he said the same thing about the federal appellate court judges, the 9th U.S. Circuit, who upheld Judge Robart’s decision.

Hold on, young man!

The founders created a government that entitles those judges to do precisely what they did. The president’s ruling bars refugees coming here from Muslim-majority countries. It, in effect, discriminates against people on the basis of their religion. Trump says he wants to protect Americans against “radical Islamic terrorists.” Of course, the ban doesn’t necessarily cover blond, blue-eyed Europeans who well might have been recruited by terrorist organizations to do the very thing we all want to prevent.

Miller, it should be noted, helped write Trump’s Republican presidential nomination acceptance speech this past summer in which the nominee said “I alone can fix” what ails the nation.

Actually, this isn’t a one-man game.

The Washington Post published a fascinating profile of Miller.

Here it is.

But my essential point is that Trump — who is facing a mountainous pile of potential crises so early in his administration — needs to grasp the notion that governance is a complicated process. It involves a complex set of machinery that is intended to limit the power of one man, or one branch of government. They are “co-equal branches of government” for precisely that reason.

Add to all of that the pandemonium that has erupted over the resignation of the national security adviser and questions about whether he and others in the administration covered up improper contacts with Russian intelligence officials, and you have a prescription for unmitigated disaster.

“Unelected judges” are part of the process, young Mr. Miller. If the boss is going to continue to shoot first and aim later with executive orders and tweets, then all of them had better get used to more of what the courts have delivered.

***

I have to share with you a column I saw this morning from Leonard Pitts Jr., a Pulitzer Prize-winning essayist, who takes the president down hard.

Pitts is angry with the what he calls Trump’s “so-called presidency.”

Pitts can turn a phrase … or two.

He has done so with great precision here.

Here comes another ‘gate’ scandal

The “gate” suffix no doubt is going to be attached to the brewing controversy boiling up out of the Trump administration.

Russiagate? Flynngate? Hackinggate?

I grew annoyed long ago at this media concoction to put the “gate” suffix at the end of every scandal that comes down the pike.

The Watergate scandal that brought down a president in August 1974 stands alone. It began with a “third-rate burglary” at the Democratic National Committee offices in the Watergate office complex. It morphed into something, well, much bigger than the metro desk crime story that the Washington Post considered it initially.

However, the controversy involving Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, and his alleged contacts with Russian government officials smells like a story that could rival Watergate in its gravity.

Some veteran journalists who covered the Watergate scandal are beginning to pick up the scent of something quite serious. Flynn’s contacts with Russian officials during the 2016 presidential campaign could involve collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin to, um, influence the election.

We’re a long way from drawing such conclusions. There needs to be a thorough, aggressive and independent investigation into what Flynn did and what he told those Russians. Congressional Republicans have joined their Democratic colleagues in calling for such a probe.

Let it commence, but please — no “gate” references.

North Carolinians take political defeat quite seriously

aalejhe

There are sore losers.

And then there is North Carolina, where Republicans apparently are so upset at losing the governor’s office to a Democrat that they’re punishing the winner — by stripping him of much of his gubernatorial power.

Get a load of this: Gov.-elect Roy Cooper is taking office without much of the appointment power that the man he defeated, Gov. Pat McCrory had.

Moreover, the Republican-controlled North Carolina Legislature — meeting in special session — enacted a law that reduces drastically the number of appointments the governor can make. McCrory, also a Republican, signed the bill into law this week. Another bill requires the governor to gain Senate approval of appointments made to the University of North Carolina System.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/amid-outcry-nc-gop-passes-law-to-curb-democratic-governor%e2%80%99s-power/ar-AAlEekE?li=BBnbcA1

McCrory only recently conceded defeat to Cooper. It was an intensely fought campaign. Cooper won by a whisker. McCrory conceded and did not seek a recount of the ballots cast in the contest. I was proud of McCrory for conceding the contest.

Then he signs these ridiculous, petulant pieces of crap into law.

The reaction to these bills, quite naturally, have broken along partisan lines. Democrats are incensed. Republicans are not. But then a neutral group weighed in. According to the Washington Post: “Nonpartisan watchdogs, like Bob Hall with Democracy North Carolina, said the changes go ‘far beyond the normal partisan wrangling and change of power.'”

So much for a collegial transition in North Carolina.

Can the president go over Congress’s head on Garland pick?

aptopix_supreme_court_senate-0e1dc-1233

This would require some serious stones on the part of the president of the United States.

But consider what a legal scholar, Gregory L. Diskant, is offering: Barack Obama can appoint U.S. Chief District Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court without Congress providing its “advice and consent.”

The question for me: Does the president have the guts to do it?

Diskant, writing for the Washington Post, asserts that the Constitution has a provision that allows a presidential appointment if the Senate “waives” its responsibility to provide its consent. Thus, the notion goes, the president is within his right as the nation’s chief executive to simply seat someone on the highest court because the Senate has refused for an unreasonable length of time to fulfill its constitutional responsibility.

Diskant cites President Ford’s appointment of John Paul Stevens to the court in 1975. Nineteen days after the president nominated Stevens, the Senate voted 98-0 to confirm Justice Stevens.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obama-can-appoint-merrick-garland-to-the-supreme-court-if-the-senate-does-nothing/2016/04/08/4a696700-fcf1-11e5-886f-a037dba38301_story.html?postshare=6971479245651399&tid=ss_fb

President Obama nominated Garland months ago after the tragic death of longtime conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. The Senate refused to give his nominee a hearing, let alone a vote, saying that a “lame duck” president shouldn’t have the right to fill a vacancy on the court; that job should belong to the next president, according to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

“No Drama Obama” could go out — if he so chose — with a serious boom if he follows Milbank’s suggestion.

Given the obstruction that Senate Republicans have thrown in front of the president for nearly his entire two terms in office, it would serve them right if Barack Obama took the dare being offered.

‘Scandals’ won’t end? Of course they won’t!

imrs

The headline from the Washington Post was funny when I saw it.

Then I noticed who wrote the essay over which the headline was posted. Then I chuckled out loud.

“The Clinton scandals will never stop,” the headline blared. The byline belongs to Ed Rogers, a noted Republican operative.

If you add two plus two, you come up with four. So, if you believe what Rogers theorizes, then it all adds up. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton’s “scandals” won’t die because Republicans like Rogers won’t allow it … ever!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2016/11/03/the-clinton-scandals-will-never-stop/

Clinton has been in the public eye since before her husband, Bill Clinton, was elected president in 1992. The foes of the two politicians have been digging for dirt for longer than most of us can remember.

Whitewater, Vince Foster, sexual misbehavior, the Clinton Foundation, the Clinton Global Initiative, e-mails, “pay for play.”

I am sure I have missed something, but you get the idea.

The late Rev. Jerry Falwell once produced a video called “The Clinton Chronicles” that alleged that the Clintons were responsible for the murders of their political foes. How in the world he got away without being sued for defamation is beyond me.

If Clinton wins the election in three days, you can bet some serious American money that the “scandals” will stay in the news.

Republicans will make damn sure of it.

Trump’s ‘record’ demands his defeat

botsford161102trumporlando76341478120891

Donald J. Trump’s reported rally in the closing days of this desultory presidential campaign is relying on the ignorance of those who seem to have forgotten what he’s said throughout his astonishing quest for the nation’s highest office.

He has lied … repeatedly. He has praised dictators. He has declared himself to be above the law. Trump has ignored due process as it relates to his political opponent, Hillary Rodham Clinton. He has mocked disabled Americans, a notable prisoner of war, women, immigrants, a Gold Star family.

Check this out from the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-only-way-trump-can-win/2016/11/02/1512d15c-a07c-11e6-a44d-cc2898cfab06_story.html

From the Post: “Most politicians are caught in falsehoods from time to time. Mr. Trump revels in them, and when caught simply repeats the lie, more loudly. Similarly, he trades in conspiracy theories that he must know to be false, the more lurid the better: that President Obama was born in Kenya, that Vincent Foster and Antonin Scalia were murdered, that Ted Cruz’s father was involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.”

In recent days, FBI Director James Comey has said he has uncovered more e-mails involving Clinton. He has presented zero hard evidence of anything untoward. Trump has convicted Clinton of corruption and of committing crimes.

The Trumpkins have bought into it … all of it.

As the Post notes, Americans who have been so critical of President Obama for an alleged lack of love of country have become infatuated with the notion that Trump vows to “make America great again.” More from the Post:

“It is mystifying that so many Republicans, after criticizing Mr. Obama for eight years for showing insufficient pride in the United States, would attach themselves to someone who has such contempt for the country, its institutions and its values. U.S. generals have been ‘reduced to rubble,’ the U.S. Army cannot fight, U.S. cities are ‘hell,”’U.S. wealth has been ‘stripped‘ away by global interests, the electoral system is ‘one big, ugly lie.’ To each of these disasters, Mr. Trump offers phony solutions (Mexico will pay to build a wall) or none at all. He has neither the interest nor the capacity to suggest actual policies.”

I hope Americans haven’t forgotten completely how this clown has behaved, the insults he has hurled in every direction and at everyone who opposes him. Is this the kind of individual we want representing the greatest nation on Earth?

It’s come to this: sexual conduct will decide this election?

trump-rampage-continues-republic

It’s down to the wire between Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump.

With all the issues that separate the parties’ presidential nominees — trade, climate change, jobs, war and peace, terrorism — we’re left now to decide this election on … sexual misconduct.

The allegations are pouring in now.

The New York Times has published more stories about women alleging that Trump groped them. Trump is vowing to sue the newspaper. The Washington Post released that hideous video recording of Trump talking to “Access Hollywood” about his attempts to seduce a married woman and what he can get away with because of his “star” status.

Trump is now threatening to stay away next week from the final debate with Clinton because, he says, the debate format is “rigged.”

The GOP nominee’s poll numbers are plummeting. Meanwhile, Clinton’s team is airing feel-good TV ads extolling her work with children and women’s issues.

Trump’s own words — heard on the video recording — have caused many of his congressional supporters to revoke their endorsements, resulting in a virtual declaration of war against the Republican Party by its own presidential nominee!

Who in this world ever would have thought that could happen? Even in this utterly nonsensical election year?

I don’t know about you, but I am looking forward to watching this circus act come to an end on the Eighth of November.

Two essays illustrate GOP civil war

aptopix-gop-2016-deba_horo

A once-great political party is at war with itself.

It is engaging in rhetorical combat over the fate of its presidential  nominee, Donald J. Trump.

I found two essays that illustrate the point. They come from longtime Republican-friendly columnists.

One of them is Michael Gerson, a former George W. Bush speechwriter who now writes essays for the Washington Post.

Gerson calls Trump a contemptible politician who is leading a party toward destruction.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/10/10/a_politician_–_and_a_party_–_deserving_of_contempt_132023.html

The other of them is Byron York, who writes for the Washington Examiner, one of two conservative alternative newspapers serving the nation’s capital.

York takes a far different view of Trump and his possible future as a political candidate.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2604117

The party is tearing itself into tiny pieces over Trump’s candidacy. It’s been a long time coming, starting about the time Trump began winning primary contests at the start of the year.

The Republican establishment — to which Gerson once belonged — began wringing its hands over the prospect of a Trump nomination. Trump began targeting another Bush, the former president’s brother, Jeb, who once ran for president in the GOP primary.

York sees it differently. He said Trump “weathered the sex portion” of the second debate with Hillary Clinton and may have righted his listing campaign ship.

I happen to agree with Gerson. Trump’s contemptible campaign reflects directly on a contemptible candidate.

I’m seeing the polling data that’s come out since the release of that nasty video recording of Trump talking about how he treats women and since the second debate with the Democratic nominee. It looks bad for Trump.

What’s more, with the speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, saying he no longer can “defend” Trump or campaign with him — and dozens of other GOP lawmakers deserting him — the party finally has turned its back on its presidential nominee. It has surrendered the election to the Democrats, to Hillary Clinton and, yes, to President Barack Obama.

The polls? Trump bellowed loudly about them when they were trending toward him. He’s now dissing them. He’s dredging up the nutty idea that he’s going to lose a “rigged” election.

The civil war within this once-great political party rages on.

Trump apologizes for ‘distraction’

150401135040-donald-trump-gallery-8-super-169

Well, there it is.

Donald J. Trump has issued — seemingly — the first full-blown, unqualified apology of his life.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/facing-backlash-trump-apologizes-for-lewd-comments-in-%e2%80%9905-video/ar-BBx95Fw?li=BBnb7Kz

“I apologize” for saying and doing “foolish things,” he said.

I’ve watched the video — it’s only about 90 seconds long — three times already. I do not perceive a sense of actual shame for the things he said in 2005 about women, about his attempt to have sex with a married woman, the access his star power had in allowing him to start kissing women whenever he felt like it, his desire to grab them in their private areas.

No, he called it a “distraction” from other issues. Those ghastly comments don’t reflect his true character, Trump said.

Whatever.

I … don’t think it’s quite that easy to dismiss.

Maybe that’s just me. My gut tells me I’m not alone.

The video was obtained by a major newspaper and aired in the past 24 hours. It reveals to me the character of an individual who’s said some pretty hideous things about women over a number of years.

It’s part of a pattern that the Republican presidential nominee has exhibited.

I do not think this issue is going away.

Hits just keep coming for Trump

bbx9hr9

This link is worth your time. It’s from the Washington Post. It contains a video of Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump talking about — what else? — women.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-recorded-having-extremely-lewd-conversation-about-women-in-2005/ar-BBx95Fw?li=BBnb7Kz

It’s extremely disgusting. It’s lewd. It’s vulgar. It’s contains language that includes what my late father used to call the “functional four-letter word.”

It was recorded in 2005, just 11 years ago, when the future presidential nominee was not quite 60 years of age. He was a grown man, on the cusp of senior citizenship when he was heard saying some remarkably vulgar things about women.

I just do not know how many more of these examples of hideous conduct many voters in American can tolerate from a major-party candidate for president of the United States.

Someone will have to explain to me how this does not disqualify someone serving as head of state of the greatest nation on Earth.