By calimary
Let me know what you think. Address included at the top here, in case you want to use it for your own letter.
Phil Griffin
NBCUniversal
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112
Dear Mr. Griffin –
Longtime loyal MSNBC viewer here. Demographically: female, white,
64, college grad, wife/mother, news/politics junkie, retired news
anchor/reporter, lifelong liberal Democrat, and I vote! Honored to be a
member of your loyal viewership that’s lifted MSNBC to #1 in cable news
in prime time, thanks to two true gems - Maddow and O’Donnell!
First: THANK YOU for relieving us of Greta Van Susteren. I wrote you
months ago to point out that such a signature Fox News name DOES NOT
BELONG on a network like MSNBC. Her ratings failure proved my point.
PLEASE understand your audience better. We’re home at MSNBC precisely
BECAUSE it does not feature programming or on-air talent like what you’d
find at Fox News. If we wanted that presentation, we’d already be
watching over there.
2) WHY did you force Megyn Kelly on NBC? The ratings already prove
that’s another fail. She reads ice-cold on camera. She does not, and
will not, appeal at any network whose audience isn’t predominately male,
old, white, conservative, and horny. Move her over to MSNBC at your
peril. There are far better and smarter ways to spend $17+ million/year.
3) WHY is the #1 BEST interviewer in cable news being squandered on
weekend mornings? Joy Reid deserves and has earned massively better
exposure, like a Monday-through-Friday show.
4) WHY do Ali Velshi and Stephanie Ruhle deserve so much
Monday-through-Friday exposure? There are THREE shows between those two
people alone. You really don’t have any other available talent? Are you
planning to change the name of MSNBC into the Velshi/Ruhle network?
5) WHY is MSNBC being turned into a whites-only club? You gave up a
Tamron Hall for the Alpha blonde from Fox News??? While the excellent
Craig Melvin is reduced to a mere fill-in, and the brilliant Joy Reid
languishes on the weekends?
6) WHY would you even consider the smug, arrogant, and obnoxious
Hugh Hewitt for ANY exposure on MSNBC??? WHY does ANY conservative merit
a show on MSNBC in the first place??? Do you just have a thing for a
bad fit? Do you buy your suits that way?
I represent your largest and most loyal constituency. WHY do you
make programming choices like you have? Unless you’re a mole for CNN (or
worse, Fox)?
PLEASE consider the constituency you have, which is THE reason why
MSNBC now reigns in cable news. If you continue to alienate us with your
bad hires and programming decisions, you can count on legions of us
finding new homes for our loyalty.
I was right about Greta. I’m right about this, too.
Signed, and CC'd to Andrew Lack
Thursday, July 6, 2017
Wednesday, July 5, 2017
Chris Christie’s Tutorial In Hubris
By Frank Bruni
We
can scoff and sneer at those images of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie
on his beachfront imperium, or we can learn from them. As he took in the
sun, he doled out a lesson, the same one that Donald Trump is
delivering on a daily basis and in a grander fashion:
Beware
the politician who doesn’t give a damn for decorum. What he markets as
irreverence can be something coarser and more perverse.
It can lead to ruin. Christie’s approval rating from New Jersey voters was just 15 percent — the lowest for any current governor in the country and the worst in his state’s history
— before his weekend repose on what turned out to be quicksand. He
could sink into single digits after this. Negative integers aren’t
entirely out of the question.
I
hope Trump is watching, but I have my doubts. The Christie family’s
swimwear pageant isn’t the kind that he’s known to ogle. Plus, he surely
turns the channel when the visage on the screen isn’t his own.
The
stories of the disgraced New Jersey governor and the disgraceful
American president overlap.
Christie was “Trump before Trump,” Michael
Steele, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, told The
Washington Post’s Robert Costa in an article
published late Monday. “He does what he wants to do, and his success
can be traced to that. But there are consequences, of course, when you
work that way.”
Steele
could as easily have been talking about Trump, and when Costa referred
to the “defiance that has both lifted and hobbled Christie’s political
career,” he brought to mind Trump’s temperament and trajectory, whether
he meant to or not.
The
twins of tantrum, Christie and Trump had almost identical political
appeals. They mocked propriety. They broke rules. They assertively
peddled the impression that as happy as they were to make friends, they
were even happier to make enemies, because that meant that they were
fully in the fight.
In
an era of resentment and anger, many voters thrilled to the spectacle.
The problem with other politicians, these voters legitimately reasoned,
was too much indulgence of vested interests and too cowardly an
obeisance to convention. If you didn’t slaughter the sacred cows, you’d
never get to the tastiest filet.
But
Christie and Trump proved to be butchers of a more indiscriminate and
self-serving sort, and both demonstrated that there’s a short leap from
headstrong to hardheaded and from defiant to delusional. Bold
nonconformity can be the self-indulgent egotist’s drag.
Yes,
Christie called out fools in certain circumstances where they deserved
it and steamrolled opponents who stood in the way of some plans that
were wholly defensible. And he was seemingly immune to any of the
subsequent caricatures of him as a bully.
But he was also deaf to inevitable and entirely fair questions about his behavior. As Nick Corasaniti noted
in The Times this week, he was caught “using a state helicopter paid
for by taxpayers to attend his son’s baseball game.” He let King
Abdullah of Jordan treat him and his family to a $30,000 weekend in a posh hotel.
He
was blind to how he would come across when, in his speech at the 2012
Republican National Convention, he took such a gaudy star turn that the
party’s presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, was reduced to a cameo. Christie bucked traditional manners, all right. He bucked them all the way to jaw-dropping megalomania.
Make
no mistake: For all their flamboyant pugnaciousness, the Christies and
Trumps of the political world are chasing adulation every bit as much as
their peers are — maybe more so. They’re just taking a deliberately
muddier route, and if they don’t get there, they’re more likely to wear
their failure as a badge of honor and to dig in with a destructive
arrogance.
When
Christie was asked whether, despite a shutdown of the state government,
he would steal away to the manse on the shore that’s a perk of his
office, he unabashedly answered yes.
“That’s just the way it goes,” he said. “Run for governor, and you can have a residence.”
Translation: I’m governor and you’re not. Where have we heard a formulation like that before?
Trump
and Christie somehow decided that you have to govern by middle finger
if you want to avoid governing by pinkie finger. But there’s a digit in
between: a middle ground. It’s where real leadership and true
effectiveness lie.
Christie’s
disrepute and dashed ambitions confirm as much. So does the ongoing
insult of Trump’s presidency. They show that if you embrace a politician
who talks too frequently and proudly about not caring what anyone
thinks, you’ll wind up in the clutch of a politician whose last refuge
is not caring what anyone thinks. That’s a dangerous place to be.
Thomas L. Friedman is off today.
I invite you to follow me on Twitter (@FrankBruni) and join me on Facebook.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.
A version of this op-ed appears in print on July 5, 2017, on Page A19 of the New York Times edition with the headline: Chris Christie’s Tutorial In Hubris. Today's Paper|Subscribe
Declaration Of Disruption
By Peter Wehner
ONE
of the essential, if often unstated, job requirements of an American
president is to provide stability, order and predictability in a world
that tends toward chaos, disarray and entropy. When our political
leaders ignore this — and certainly when they delight in disruption —
the consequences can be severe. Stability is easy to take for granted,
but impossible to live without.
Projecting
clear convictions is important for preventing adversaries from
misreading America’s intentions and will. Our allies also depend on our
predictability and reassuring steadiness. Their actions in trade and
economics, in alliances with other nations and in the military sphere
are often influenced by how much they believe they can rely on American
support.
Order
and stability in the executive branch are also linked to the health of
our system of government. Chaos in the West Wing can be crippling, as
White House aides — in a constant state of uncertainty, distrustful of
colleagues, fearful that they might be excoriated or fired — find it
nearly impossible to do their jobs. This emanates throughout the entire
federal government. Devoid of steadfast leadership, executive agencies
easily become dysfunctional themselves.
Worse
yet, if key pillars of our system, like our intelligence and law
enforcement agencies, are denigrated by the president, they can be
destabilized, and Americans’ trust in them can be undermined. Without a
reliable chief executive, Congress, an inherently unruly institution,
will also find it difficult to do its job, since our constitutional
system relies on its various branches to constantly engage with one
another in governing.
But
that’s hardly the whole of it. Particularly in this social media era, a
president who thrives on disruption and chaos is impossible to escape.
Every shocking statement and act is given intense coverage. As a result,
the president is omnipresent, the subject of endless coast-to-coast
conversations among family and friends, never far from our thoughts. As
Andrew Sullivan has observed,
“A free society means being free of those who rule over you — to do the
things you care about, your passions, your pastimes, your loves — to
exult in that blessed space where politics doesn’t intervene.”
A
presidency characterized by pandemonium invades and infects that space,
leaving people unsettled and on edge. And this, in turn, leads to
greater polarization, to feelings of alienation and anger, to unrest and
even to violence.
A
spirit of instability in government will cause Americans to lose
confidence in our public institutions. When citizens lose that basic
faith in their government, it leads to corrosive cynicism and the
acceptance of conspiracy theories. Movements and individuals once
considered fringe become mainstream, while previously responsible
figures decamp to the fever swamps. One result is that the informal and
unwritten rules of political and human interaction, which are at the
core of civilization, are undone. There is such a thing as democratic
etiquette; when it is lost, the common assumptions that allow for
compromise and progress erode.
In short, chaotic leadership can inflict real trauma on political and civic culture.
All
of which brings us to Donald Trump, arguably the most disruptive and
transgressive president in American history. He thrives on creating
turbulence in every conceivable sphere. The blast radius of his
tumultuous acts and chaotic temperament is vast.
Mr.
Trump acts as if order is easy to achieve and needs to be overturned
while disruption and disorder are what we need. But the opposite is
true. “Rage and frenzy will pull down more in half an hour,” Edmund
Burke wrote, “than prudence, deliberation and foresight can build up in a
hundred years.”
Mr.
Trump and his supporters don’t seem to agree, or don’t seem to care.
And here’s the truly worrisome thing: The disruption is only going to
increase, both because he’s facing criticism that seems to trigger him
psychologically and because his theory of management involves the
cultivation of chaos. He has shown throughout his life a defiant refusal
to be disciplined. His disordered personality thrives on mayhem and
upheaval, on vicious personal attacks and ceaseless conflict. As we’re
seeing, his malignant character is emboldening some, while it’s causing
others — the Republican leadership comes to mind — to briefly speak out
(at best) before returning to silence and acquiescence. The effect on
the rest of us? We cannot help losing our capacity to be shocked and
alarmed.
We
have as president the closest thing to a nihilist in our history — a
man who believes in little or nothing, who has the impulse to burn down
rather than to build up. When the president eventually faces a genuine
crisis, his ignorance and inflammatory instincts will make everything
worse.
Republican
voters and politicians rallied around Mr. Trump in 2016, believing he
was anti-establishment when in fact he was anti-order. He turns out to
be an institutional arsonist. It is an irony of American history that
the Republican Party, which has historically valued order and
institutions, has become the conduit of chaos.
Peter Wehner, a senior
fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, served in the previous
three Republican administrations and is a contributing opinion writer.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.
A version of this op-ed appears in print on July 4, 2017, on Page A21 of the New York edition with the headline: Our Disrupted Republic. Today's Paper|Subscribe
Monday, July 3, 2017
Jill Stein's latest victory lap demonstrates she was in favor of Trump the entire time.
By DanTex
Apparently there are still some that don't understand what the Green Party's purpose is. So let me explain.
There are two reasons, only two, that people run for federal office under the Green Party. The first is personal ego and enrichment (and free trips to Russia). The second is to help Republicans defeat Democrats. That's it.
It never has anything to do with policy. Or with giving voters another "choice". The Green Party isn't a political choice any more than a lottery ticket is a retirement plan. And the people selling you the Green Party know that, just like the ones selling you lottery tickets do. Actually that's not fair to lottery tickets. Some people have won the lottery. But in 20+ years of trying, no Green has come anywhere close to winning a house or senate seat or a single electoral vote. Blowing your money on lottery tickets is more rational than blowing your vote on the Green Party.
With Jill Stein, if she actually believed any of her own bullshit, she would be utterly devastated by the election. First, she gets about 1% of the vote. Second, the guy who wins proceeds to do the opposite of everything in the Green Platform. The Greens like to bash Dems about how bad the Dems did, but the Dems got 40 times as many votes in November. Also the Dems hold infinitely more congressional seats than the Green party ever has and ever will.
But, facing this epic defeat and humiliating showing, Stein is (still) out bragging about the "critical role" she played. This is a straightforward admission that her objective all along was not President Stein, but President Trump, and that she feels her siphoning away votes from Dems and convincing gullible alt-leftists that Trump was the lesser evil was critical to Trump's victory.
She wanted Trump to win, she helped Trump win, and now she's happy about it. She's a Trump ally, period.
Apparently there are still some that don't understand what the Green Party's purpose is. So let me explain.
There are two reasons, only two, that people run for federal office under the Green Party. The first is personal ego and enrichment (and free trips to Russia). The second is to help Republicans defeat Democrats. That's it.
It never has anything to do with policy. Or with giving voters another "choice". The Green Party isn't a political choice any more than a lottery ticket is a retirement plan. And the people selling you the Green Party know that, just like the ones selling you lottery tickets do. Actually that's not fair to lottery tickets. Some people have won the lottery. But in 20+ years of trying, no Green has come anywhere close to winning a house or senate seat or a single electoral vote. Blowing your money on lottery tickets is more rational than blowing your vote on the Green Party.
With Jill Stein, if she actually believed any of her own bullshit, she would be utterly devastated by the election. First, she gets about 1% of the vote. Second, the guy who wins proceeds to do the opposite of everything in the Green Platform. The Greens like to bash Dems about how bad the Dems did, but the Dems got 40 times as many votes in November. Also the Dems hold infinitely more congressional seats than the Green party ever has and ever will.
But, facing this epic defeat and humiliating showing, Stein is (still) out bragging about the "critical role" she played. This is a straightforward admission that her objective all along was not President Stein, but President Trump, and that she feels her siphoning away votes from Dems and convincing gullible alt-leftists that Trump was the lesser evil was critical to Trump's victory.
She wanted Trump to win, she helped Trump win, and now she's happy about it. She's a Trump ally, period.
Friday, June 30, 2017
Republicans Have Done Nothing For The American People Since Lincoln
Facing growing opposition from members of his own party, Senate Majority
Leader Mitch McConnell has delayed the vote on the Republicans'
healthcare bill until after Congress's 4 July recess.
The schedule change is another setback for Donald Trump's effort to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act – which he has repeatedly referred to as "dead".
Mr Trump told reporters on Wednesday that "healthcare is working along very well...we're gonna have a big surprise. We have a great healthcare package." CBO says Senate bill will cause 22m Americans to lose health insurance.
When asked what that meant, Mr Trump responded "we're going to have a great, great surprise." Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is reportedly trying to revise the healthcare bill by Friday.
Full story: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/republicans-mitch-mcconnell-healthcare-suspend-vote-senate-obamacare-a7811121.html
The schedule change is another setback for Donald Trump's effort to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act – which he has repeatedly referred to as "dead".
Mr Trump told reporters on Wednesday that "healthcare is working along very well...we're gonna have a big surprise. We have a great healthcare package." CBO says Senate bill will cause 22m Americans to lose health insurance.
When asked what that meant, Mr Trump responded "we're going to have a great, great surprise." Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is reportedly trying to revise the healthcare bill by Friday.
Full story: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/republicans-mitch-mcconnell-healthcare-suspend-vote-senate-obamacare-a7811121.html
Thursday, June 29, 2017
Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams pleads guilty in his federal corruption trial
By Jeremy Roebuck, Staff Writer
Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams abruptly pleaded guilty Thursday, nearly two weeks into a federal bribery trial that dragged embarrassing details about his messy personal life and financial struggles out into open court.
Williams will resign as the city’s top prosecutor as part of a deal under which he pleaded guilty to one count related to accepting a bribe from Bucks County businessman Mohammad Ali.
Asked by U.S. District Judge Paul S. Diamond whether he intended to follow through with his resignation, Williams choked up and answered, “humbly, sincerely and effective immediately.”
Diamond said he wanted Williams’ resignation letter couriered to Mayor Kenny’s office as soon as the hearing was over.
Williams remained somber looking throughout the guilty plea hearing.
“I’m just very sorry for all of this, your honor,” he said.
“He has no means as the court can see to go anywhere. He has no support. He’s deeply in debt and he doesn’t even have a car,” Burke said.
Taking the witness stand to plead with a judge not to send him directly to prison before sentencing, tears welled up in Williams’ eyes while discussing his daughters.
He acknowledged he was broke, saying he had “probably about $150 to $200” in his bank account.
In addition to accepting that he could face a maximum 5 year term when he is sentenced Oct. 24, Williams agreed to forfeit $64,878.22
While the 28 remaining counts against Williams were dismissed, he “admits that he committed all of the conduct in those 29 counts,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Zauzmer said.
Williams notified prosecutors he wanted to take the plea deal at 1 a.m.Thursday, said Zauzmer.
Sources close to the case say the deal is similar to one Williams was offered – and turned down – one day before his indictment earlier this year on 29 corruption-related counts including bribery, extortion and honest services fraud.
Prior to his admission, prosecutors and Williams’ defense lawyers – Thomas F. Burke and Trevan Borum – spent more than an hour huddled in quiet conversation in the courtroom, while the district attorney was nowhere to be seen.
His decision came after weeks of damaging testimony in which government witnesses characterized him a shameless beggar who repeatedly turned to the money of others to fund a lifestyle he couldn’t afford.
Two wealthy businessmen testified that they had showered the district attorney with gifts of all-expenses-paid travel, luxury goods and even cash in anticipation of the legal favors they might need from him.
Additionally, Williams was accused of misspending thousands of dollars from his campaign fund on memberships to exclusive Philadelphia social clubs, misusing city vehicles as if they were his own and misappropriating money intended to fund his mother’s nursing home care.
Read a recap of Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams’ trial with our day-by-day updates and learn more with our explainer on everything you need to know about the case.
Read more by Jeremy Roebuck
Labels:
Common Sense,
Dirty Tricks,
Hypocrisy,
Irony,
Karma,
Politics,
Stupidity,
The Truth,
WTF
Wednesday, June 28, 2017
Donald Trump: The Art Of The Fight
By John Dean
John Dean
When
Donald Trump fired FBI Director James Comey he made the worst mistake
of his young presidency, because the ham-fisted manner in which he
handled it resulted in Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein—who is
filling in for the recused Attorney General—having no choice but to
select a special counsel to continue the Justice Department’s
investigation into the hacking of the 2016 presidential election by the
Russians. Rosenstein, of course, selected an unusually well-qualified
investigator/prosecutor, Robert Mueller, the former head of the FBI and
former U.S. Attorney for San Francisco. This, in turn, has annoyed Trump
to no end. He clearly feels the pressure of being under investigation
by someone with both the resources and skills to uncover any wrongdoing
by him or his family. Trump’s reaction suggests Mueller may find that
the president is not an honest businessman, even if he does not find
direct collusion by Trump himself with the Russians.
Much of Donald Trump’s life has involved being in fights—with wives, business partners, vendors, tenants, the news media, and countless others. Trump the politician expanded his fights to include political opponents, and now as president, he is in a fight with the federal intelligence community, the Washington press corps, the “deep state” (otherwise known as career government bureaucrats) and Democrats, along with a few Republicans and even some of his staff. But what is shaping up as the biggest fight of his life, because it could end his presidency and send his family to jail (if he is unable to pardon them), is the investigation (and potential prosecutions emanating from it) being undertaken by Special Counsel Mueller.
For anyone who has observed Trump in a fight—which was once to be limited to those living in New York City who read the tabloids where they were regularly front-page features but he is now on the world stage so we are all his audience, like it or not—the pattern of these brawls is very consistent. While Trump has done many deals, it seems he has done more fights, and rather than writing about deals he should have done a book titled The Art of the Fight.
According to legend, Trump and Cohn met shortly after Cohn had published an op-ed in the form of a letter to Spiro Agnew in The New York Times on October 15, 1973 castigating the former vice president for pleading guilty to tax evasion, a charge Cohn had beaten on three occasions. “How could a man who made courage a household word lose his? How could one of this decade’s shrewdest leaders make a dumb mistake such as you did in quitting and accepting a criminal conviction?” Cohn asked. No more had Cohn’s letter been published than Trump encountered him at a New York night spot of the time, and Trump explained that he and his father were being sued by the Department of Justice for discrimination in one of their housing projects. Cohn encouraged the young businessman to fight the charges, and a friendship was born.
Watching Cohn, Donald Trump soon embraced his never surrender, always counterattack, philosophy, not to mention tactics not sanctioned by the Queensberry rules. Never was there a more vicious and dirty a fighter than Roy Cohn. Never was there a worse role model for anyone, not to mention a President of the United States.
Someone will undoubtedly fill a book with Trump’s business tactics, for they are found in the 3,500 lawsuits in which he has engaged. Regularly, he filed actions knowing he could not win, thus simply to intimidate his opponent. This was a favored tactic when he thought someone had defamed him by saying something he did not want said. As a public figure, who has had case after case dismissed, he knows that public people have a high standard to meet. He also understood that even answering a complaint and getting the case dismissed by the targeted defendant was expensive, so he could inflict pain even if he could not win the case. Undoubtedly some of his current frustration as president is that he cannot threaten such lawsuits at a time he is probably getting more negative press coverage than at any time in his career.
We watched Trump’s fight tactics during both the Republican primary, and the general election, campaigns. The most dominant memory most people have of his campaigning was the lying, and efforts to belittle his opponents: “Low energy Jeb,” “Little Marko,” “Lyin’ Ted,” and “Crooked Hillary.” Because Trump creates constant conflict, he is a train wreck happening, the news media has great difficulty turning away from him. He is the very definition of modern entertainment. As was true during the campaigns, it is with his presidency. Because the man cannot be shamed, and he has the largest ego ever to enter the Oval Office, all this plays in his favor—so far. But how will Trump’s fight tactics play as his campaign is being investigated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller?
The investigation that Special Counsel Mueller has taken charge of is the FBI inquiry that commenced in July 2016, not activities President Trump undertook in May 2017 in firing former FBI Director Comey, although that too is expressly included in the charter issued by the Deputy Attorney General in establishing the inquiry. Because it was issued notwithstanding the fact that it is the policy of the Department to not indict a sitting president, there is no policy not to investigate a sitting president. So, Trump is clearly subject to the special counsel inquiry—a fact of which he appears acutely aware, and has commenced fighting.
Trump is employing his standard fight tactics: lying, cheating, and seeking to intimidate. For example: He has lied about his dealing with former director Comey, not to mention tried to intimidate this potential witness against him by employing standard Trump name-calling is accusing Comey of “showboating,” concocting a false narrative via Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein about Comey’s Hillary Clinton email investigation as the reason for dismissal when later admitting to newsman Lester Holt that he fired Comey because he refused to back off the investigation of the campaign and Michael Flynn; and most recently admitting that, contrary to claiming he had tapes of conversations with Comey, he had no such tapes. One could fill pages with examples. But the point has been made and the issue is how these tactics will play with Mueller.
In business and politics, and now in government, Trump is operating at about the level of a precocious eight grader. The games he has played in the past are not going to work in the league he now finds himself. Mueller and Company are sophisticated and experienced federal prosecutors who have dealt with miscreants far more sophisticated and clever than Donald Trump. In fact, in the end Trump’s tactics, which are obvious and recorded, will be used against him. His lawyers seem unable to stop him, but they have surely told him.
Today, we are watching a very frightened Donald Trump. He knows he is in a fight way above his league, but he does not know how to play above that league. Nor does he understand Washington and the presidency sufficiently well to know how to use it—and keeping his disapproval rating at 60 percent is not effectively using the high office he holds.
Undoubtedly, Trump has never written the art of the fight, because he does not know how to fight fairly, nor well. With Special Counsel Mueller on his case there is more chance he will lose in 2020 than win reelection, unless Trump discovers that the way these fights are won is with the truth, for with the truth he might have a chance to survive. Without it, he will be a one term president, if he is lucky.
Much of Donald Trump’s life has involved being in fights—with wives, business partners, vendors, tenants, the news media, and countless others. Trump the politician expanded his fights to include political opponents, and now as president, he is in a fight with the federal intelligence community, the Washington press corps, the “deep state” (otherwise known as career government bureaucrats) and Democrats, along with a few Republicans and even some of his staff. But what is shaping up as the biggest fight of his life, because it could end his presidency and send his family to jail (if he is unable to pardon them), is the investigation (and potential prosecutions emanating from it) being undertaken by Special Counsel Mueller.
For anyone who has observed Trump in a fight—which was once to be limited to those living in New York City who read the tabloids where they were regularly front-page features but he is now on the world stage so we are all his audience, like it or not—the pattern of these brawls is very consistent. While Trump has done many deals, it seems he has done more fights, and rather than writing about deals he should have done a book titled The Art of the Fight.
Background as a Fighter
Trump’s biographers have most all noted that he displayed a pugnacious nature from an early age, but his adult mentor (and role model) in all conflicts, from squabbles to domestic disputes to business survival battles, was the infamous New York City attorney Roy Cohn. Before becoming the New York City fixer of choice, Cohn, the son of a prominent New York judge, displayed his legal acumen by graduating from law school at twenty years of age, quickly rising in the ranks of the U.S. Attorney’s office, and developing close ties to New York’s most important crime families. He became a national figure as chief counsel to Senator Joseph McCarthy’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigation of the U.S. Senate employing smear tactics that gave the world “McCarthyism.”According to legend, Trump and Cohn met shortly after Cohn had published an op-ed in the form of a letter to Spiro Agnew in The New York Times on October 15, 1973 castigating the former vice president for pleading guilty to tax evasion, a charge Cohn had beaten on three occasions. “How could a man who made courage a household word lose his? How could one of this decade’s shrewdest leaders make a dumb mistake such as you did in quitting and accepting a criminal conviction?” Cohn asked. No more had Cohn’s letter been published than Trump encountered him at a New York night spot of the time, and Trump explained that he and his father were being sued by the Department of Justice for discrimination in one of their housing projects. Cohn encouraged the young businessman to fight the charges, and a friendship was born.
Watching Cohn, Donald Trump soon embraced his never surrender, always counterattack, philosophy, not to mention tactics not sanctioned by the Queensberry rules. Never was there a more vicious and dirty a fighter than Roy Cohn. Never was there a worse role model for anyone, not to mention a President of the United States.
Trump Tactics
Donald Trump’s tactics are conspicuous to anyone who follows his actions, and can be reduced to two overriding activities: (1) He lies consistently and persistently; (2) he cheats whenever the opportunity presents itself to do so, and (3) he tries to intimidate everyone with whom he deals. The lawsuits filed by the former students of Trump University revealed these tactics at work, where he lured them into taking courses, often beyond their means, with false statements and promises, then gave them hokum taught by people with no credentials whatsoever, constantly pushing them to take more expensive courses. All one need to do is read a few of the depositions of the students who joined in the action. Trump hires lawyers who act more like thugs than litigators to abuse those who filed against him, and forced several out of the case for they were not up for the expense of the endless fight, not to mention the nasty press leaks spread by team Trump. When Trump was elected this litigation was ready to go to trial. It was a class action RICO case accusing Trump of criminal fraud, albeit in a civil action. President-elect Trump broke his golden rule of fighting when he surrendered—settling the cases for $25 million.Someone will undoubtedly fill a book with Trump’s business tactics, for they are found in the 3,500 lawsuits in which he has engaged. Regularly, he filed actions knowing he could not win, thus simply to intimidate his opponent. This was a favored tactic when he thought someone had defamed him by saying something he did not want said. As a public figure, who has had case after case dismissed, he knows that public people have a high standard to meet. He also understood that even answering a complaint and getting the case dismissed by the targeted defendant was expensive, so he could inflict pain even if he could not win the case. Undoubtedly some of his current frustration as president is that he cannot threaten such lawsuits at a time he is probably getting more negative press coverage than at any time in his career.
We watched Trump’s fight tactics during both the Republican primary, and the general election, campaigns. The most dominant memory most people have of his campaigning was the lying, and efforts to belittle his opponents: “Low energy Jeb,” “Little Marko,” “Lyin’ Ted,” and “Crooked Hillary.” Because Trump creates constant conflict, he is a train wreck happening, the news media has great difficulty turning away from him. He is the very definition of modern entertainment. As was true during the campaigns, it is with his presidency. Because the man cannot be shamed, and he has the largest ego ever to enter the Oval Office, all this plays in his favor—so far. But how will Trump’s fight tactics play as his campaign is being investigated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller?
Trump in the Crosshairs of a Federal Investigation
As President of the United States, under current Department of Justice policy, Donald Trump cannot be indicted so long as he holds the office, or unless the U.S. Supreme Court rules otherwise. But make no mistake, he and his campaign to win the office are under investigation which started in July 2016, when the FBI learned the Russia government was hacking the presidential election to hurt Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump. Presidential immunity is not retroactive, thus making his campaign and his personal activities susceptible to investigation and prosecution.The investigation that Special Counsel Mueller has taken charge of is the FBI inquiry that commenced in July 2016, not activities President Trump undertook in May 2017 in firing former FBI Director Comey, although that too is expressly included in the charter issued by the Deputy Attorney General in establishing the inquiry. Because it was issued notwithstanding the fact that it is the policy of the Department to not indict a sitting president, there is no policy not to investigate a sitting president. So, Trump is clearly subject to the special counsel inquiry—a fact of which he appears acutely aware, and has commenced fighting.
Trump is employing his standard fight tactics: lying, cheating, and seeking to intimidate. For example: He has lied about his dealing with former director Comey, not to mention tried to intimidate this potential witness against him by employing standard Trump name-calling is accusing Comey of “showboating,” concocting a false narrative via Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein about Comey’s Hillary Clinton email investigation as the reason for dismissal when later admitting to newsman Lester Holt that he fired Comey because he refused to back off the investigation of the campaign and Michael Flynn; and most recently admitting that, contrary to claiming he had tapes of conversations with Comey, he had no such tapes. One could fill pages with examples. But the point has been made and the issue is how these tactics will play with Mueller.
In business and politics, and now in government, Trump is operating at about the level of a precocious eight grader. The games he has played in the past are not going to work in the league he now finds himself. Mueller and Company are sophisticated and experienced federal prosecutors who have dealt with miscreants far more sophisticated and clever than Donald Trump. In fact, in the end Trump’s tactics, which are obvious and recorded, will be used against him. His lawyers seem unable to stop him, but they have surely told him.
Today, we are watching a very frightened Donald Trump. He knows he is in a fight way above his league, but he does not know how to play above that league. Nor does he understand Washington and the presidency sufficiently well to know how to use it—and keeping his disapproval rating at 60 percent is not effectively using the high office he holds.
Undoubtedly, Trump has never written the art of the fight, because he does not know how to fight fairly, nor well. With Special Counsel Mueller on his case there is more chance he will lose in 2020 than win reelection, unless Trump discovers that the way these fights are won is with the truth, for with the truth he might have a chance to survive. Without it, he will be a one term president, if he is lucky.
John W. Dean, a Justia columnist, is a former counsel to the president.
Tuesday, June 27, 2017
T r u m p ’ s L i e s
Many Americans have become accustomed to
Trump’s lies. But as regular as they have become, the country
should not allow itself to become numb to them. So we have catalogued
nearly every outright lie he has told publicly since taking the oath of
office.
Source: Quinnipiac
David Leonhardt is a New York Times columnist. Stuart A. Thompson is the graphics director for the Opinion section.
Sources: Politifact; Factcheck.org; The Washington Post Fact Checker; The Toronto Star
Monday, June 26, 2017
TRUMP FAMILY EMPIRE BEGAN WITH A WHORE HOUSE
By Jason Markusoff
October 13, 2016
OK, this sort of language wasn’t in recorded Klondike Gold Rush texts from 1898, at least not from the proprietor of the New Arctic Restaurant and Hotel. But his grandson, Donald Trump, might not have been positioned to dazzle and sometimes terrify America with his boastful sales pitches were it not for Fred Trump and his plucky immigrant’s story, his tasty meals and other delicacies of the flesh, and the small fortune he made in the northern wilds of this country that now has a health care system the Republican presidential candidate says is ruinous, a country that eagerly welcomes the Syrian refugees he calls terror’s Trojan Horse.
Whether Donald Trump wins or loses with his presidential bid, a monument of sorts to his paternal grandfather’s three lucrative years in Yukon and the Canadian North will open along Lake Bennett next year—although that fabled surname won’t appear anywhere near it, in five meter high letters or otherwise.
Before explaining that, let’s go back to a time long before Trump Winery’s bottles were chilled at finer Trump Hotels the world over, to a place where Trumps themselves were in the messy business of cultivating, picking and crushing grapes. Friedrich Trump was born in 1869 in Kallstadt, Germany, in the heart of a western wine making region. Friedrich was no standout among his five siblings—he was too frail to work the family vineyard, says Gwenda Blair, the chief biographer of Trump and these boughs of his family tree. Friedrich’s father died when he was eight. His mother sent Friedrich, at 14, to become a barber’s apprentice. A couple of years later, as the military draft loomed and there wasn’t much hair to cut in his village, the 16 year old Friedrich cobbled together enough Deutschmarks to buy passage on a steamship to New York City.
The land of opportunity seized him quickly; Friedrich got hired by a barbershop within hours of arriving in Manhattan. Six years on, he grew weary of the living wage work. In 1891, Donald Trump’s grandfather would be first in the chain to dream and reach for something bigger.
Friedrich left his New York enclave of fellow Germans and took his savings across the land to Seattle, a booming resource and port city. He hung his shingle as Fred Trump at the Dairy Restaurant he’d opened in Seattle’s red-light district. In keeping with the local custom, the Dairy’s predecessor eatery advertised “private rooms for ladies”—1891-speak for prostitution—and it’s likely Trump didn’t end the practice, Blair writes in Trumps: Three Generations that Built an Empire. Shortly, his interest turned to gold; namely, the town of Monte Cristo, which was showing promise for gold and silver deposits, some 110 km east of Seattle. He invested in some land there, but also stuck with plying his hospitality trade for the men doing all the digging.
In the summer of 1897, a ship of grubby and suddenly wealthy prospectors arrived with news of a big gold strike in Canada’s remote northern reaches, near Dawson in the Yukon territory. By then, Trump was already on the hunt for those riches, showing some flashes of his family’s later business savvy—and at the same time his grandson’s blundering streak. Fred Trump had sent two miners north to lay claims, and before the gold-rush headlines hit Seattle’s newspapers, they’d already staked a $15 claim in the Trump name on Hunker Creek, not far from the first strike at Bonanza Creek. A day later, Trump’s associates profited by flipping the land for $400, Blair writes. Flipping was common in the gold rush days.
“It was uncertain whether they were two cents’ worth, let alone two million,” Yukon historian Michael Gates says. Had they held it, these Washington-state miners and Trump could have made vastly more than they did. Hunker Creek claims panned out—yep, that’s where the phrase comes from—as one of the most productive creeks in the gold rush.
It’s unclear whether word of that blown opportunity reached Trump the restaurateur. He was already saving money from his restaurant till to trek north himself. In early 1898, he sailed up the Pacific Coast with gear for the long hike through Yukon, though he “had no plans to mine himself,” Blair writes.
Before the train, the gold rush routes were through the Alaska and Canadian mountains. White Pass, which Trump is believed to have taken, was dubbed Dead Horse Trail, the ground a “vile slush” of animal parts, the pass walls “stained dark red from the blood,” Blair writes. Pairing up with a fellow traveler named Ernest Levin, Trump set up a tent restaurant along the route, likely serving up flash-frozen horse meat, according to The Trumps. Then in May 1898, the German-American and his partner escaped the pass and reached the new town of Bennett, a collection of tents and men building Dawson-bound boats and awaiting the ice breakup. Trump and Levin bought lumber to erect a two-story building on Main Street. The New Arctic would feed the thousands of travelers and stranded folks alike, boasting an array of fine and non-equine meats, “Every delicacy in the market,” “Fresh oysters in every style,” and yes, private rooms for ladies.
“Mining the miners was the smart thing to do,” Blair tells Maclean’s. “Where was the money to be made? It was to be made out of the guys doing the hard work, not out of the ground.” Prospectors were lucky to strike any gold, and luckier to escape the Arctic with any wealth; one of the other famed names to rise from the Klondike rush was Alexander Pantages, who started with a theater in Dawson and would later launch a network that included Pantages theaters in Toronto and Winnipeg.
The Guggenheims would find post-rush bounty with a company that dredged Klondike rivers, but already had family riches that the Trumps had yet to amass.
In Bennett came a warning about Trump and women, more than a century before Donald’s brags about groping women would echo through a presidential campaign. A letter-writer in the Yukon Sun said single men would find at the New Arctic the best food in Bennett, but he warned “respectable women” away from staying there, “as they are liable to hear that which would be repugnant to their feelings and uttered, too, by the depraved of their own sex,” Blair’s book records. Donald Trump, for his part, told the New York Times that reports of prostitution at his granddad’s restaurant are “totally false,” though he was born 28 years after the Yukon entrepreneur’s death.
The Klondike rush had begun its decline by the time New Arctic began in Bennett, but a train close to completion all the way from the port at Skagway, Alaska, to Whitehorse would outright kill Bennett and its businesses. Trump and Levin set their restaurant’s frame on a raft toward Whitehorse so it could open in time for the White Pass & Yukon Route’s opening in summer 1900. With a wood-framed tent and a false facade, the Arctic Restaurant opened up across Front Street from the terminal. In this fledgling city, there was competition: the Hotel Grand and White Horse Hotel on the same block dwarfed the Trump eatery. Rivals advertised fine hotels and cigars, or stabling for dogs and horses; the Arctic was more vague and braggadocious, offering itself as the “newest, neatest and best-equipped north of Vancouver,” states Trump’s ad in the Whitehorse Star.
Prospectors were struggling up north, but business remained brisk, even if winter was dreadful and dreadfully slow. “We have come to stay,” a February 1901 restaurant ad proclaimed. (Wrong!) That spring, Trump left town just as a new crackdown came on liquor and other vices. He sailed home to Germany with a nest egg of roughly $500,000 in current value, found a wife and then returned to New York, where his son would launch his family into land development.
Back in Whitehorse, Levin got into landlord troubles (with someone who didn’t actually own the land anyway) and lost control of the Arctic in 1902, when jailed after a hotel orgy and jewelry theft—a running mate who would have embarrassed a Trump, not the other way around.
This was a Trump who knew when to quit. The 1901 Canadian census counted 27,000 Yukon residents, more than Vancouver had at the time. A decade later, the territorial population plunged by two-thirds. In new hands, the restaurant burned down in the great Whitehorse fire of 1905; it was rebuilt but didn’t last long. On its site now is the low-slung Horwood Mall, full of Bernie Sanders-friendly local boutiques like Baked Café, Cultured Cheese and Climate Clothing. Trump history has little to no imprint on Whitehorse, save southerners’ mainly recent interest. “There are a lot of people who gain a piece of the action in the Yukon, make money and either never live there or only come very briefly and go on to make lives elsewhere,” says Whitehorse historian Linda Johnson.
It’s a different story down in Bennett. All that remains from the gold rush town is the vacant church.
But that’s changing, as the nearby Carcross-Tagish First Nation and Parks Canada combine to create a high-end “glamping” experience with tent-style cabins and a recreated restaurant for those shelling out $1,600 for four nights to stay at Chilkoot Trail Village. “At the heart of the village is a replica of the famous Arctic Restaurant & Hotel, that was ‘the place to be’ at Bennett City during the stampede to the Klondike Gold Rush in 1898,” states the attraction’s draft website by Nature Tours Yukon, which will market the frontier-inspired experience.
The promoters are treating the family link to the controversial politician as an awkward historical fact rather than a marketing ploy. “For us, it’s more of a campfire tall story,” says Nature Tours president Joost Van Der Putten.
Would that change if Trump wins, and this becomes part of presidential family lore? “Probably not, and you never can tell the way things work out,” Van Der Putten says. “In marketing and sales, you have to seize opportunity as it comes; that is something Mr. Trump is teaching us.”
Due to the 1918 flu pandemic that felled Fred Trump, Donald never got to hear Klondike tales from his grandfather, or learn about the hard work trudging through Yukon mountains or running an anything-goes restaurant. Fred Trump’s grandson isn’t one to tolerate a kitchen’s heat or an Arctic deep freeze. But the bold and whatever-it-takes-to-prosper steps? Those seem to be inherited traits.
Donald Trump's ancestral whore house gets a new lease on life Just off the shores of Lake Bennett, enjoy the best swan and caribou meat you’ll find anywhere in these mountains, and probably better than anywhere in Canada, believe me. Many people from many tents are saying the whiskey is very, very, classy. And the ladies—they’ll make your head spin, and many other things. Those other tents and hotels serve horse meat, and it’s disgusting. If you want luxury as badly as you want gold, there is only one place, and only one name.
America’s Last King: The Unsettling Parallels Between King George III And Donald Trump
By Willard Sterne Randall
Photo Credit: Allan Ramsay [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
When he assumed his nation’s highest office, he had no previous governmental experience. Born wealthy, he’d never worked for anyone else. Now his nation’s commander in chief, he had never served in the military.
For his every move, he relied on a secretive, eccentric advisor bent on reshaping the nation’s political order. Demanding absolute loyalty, the new ruler did not trust anyone more popular than he was, and detested all opposition.
If these facts sound familiar, they fit not only Donald Trump but America’s last king, George III.
He came to power at the moment of England’s greatest glory, its defeat of France for control of North America.
For a century after a bloody civil war that had ended with the beheading of its king, England’s monarchs had reigned, not ruled, all power vested in Parliament. Ministers backed by Parliament ruled.
Since the Restoration, monarchs had contented themselves with acquiring estates and amassing art collections — and lovers. They concentrated on maintaining a Protestant dynasty and defeating the hated French in a contest for global monopoly. Only one ever tried to turn back the clock to a powerful monarchy. He was forced to throw his mace into the Thames and flee for his life.
George III, shunned by his dissolute father, lived with his mother and eight siblings until the day he inherited the throne. Home-schooled by the reclusive John Stuart, Earl of Bute, he learned to abhor Parliament and opposition of any kind.
Still unmarried when a courier interrupted his daily ride to tell him the old king was dead, George promptly fired his brilliant and popular prime minister, William Pitt, replacing him with his tutor, a man so unpopular that crowds often attacked his carriage.
While George prided himself on being the first Hanoverian king born and bred in Britain, he feared an Englishwoman would have powerful court connections. Bute advised him to seek a bride in Germany, home of his ancestors. George never met 17 year old Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz until she arrived with her ladies-in-waiting and went right into isolation. She soon began to bear George’s 14 children.
Suffering from porphyria, a rare hereditary metabolic disorder, George took advantage of severe insomnia — he once went entirely without sleep for 72 hours — to write nocturnal notes, letters, critiques of cabinet ministers and generals, letters to citizens with complaints. Nothing was too great or trivial, from the stipends of parish clergy and the royal laundress’s pension to his comments on military campaigns.
Obsessed with time and timepieces — he gave Charlotte 24 bejeweled clocks for their bedchamber — often before five in the morning he dipped his quill, noting the minute and the hour atop each missive. Even as Parliament refused to pay for a private secretary, George advocated importing cheaper workers to drive down wages and increase employers’ profits.
Living frugally day to day, he lavished money on renovating the new royal residence, Buckingham House. In private, he entertained his queen by playing the harpsichord; they sang and conversed in German. She loved opera; he, theater. He first acted in a Roman play at 10. He roared his approval at David Garrick’s plays.
And George III chose a playwright as the commanding general of his most fateful military expedition.
At first, as Americans protested Parliamentary taxes, George wrote he believed the “mother country” should practice “moderation” and “firmness” with her recalcitrant colonies. But after the Boston Tea Party, he wrote, “The colonies must either submit or triumph. . . . We must not retreat.”
The first year of the American Revolution went badly for the British. Bloodied at Concord and Bunker Hill, stymied by Benedict Arnold’s navy on Lake Champlain, nearly losing Canada and repulsed at Charleston, the first British commanders felt the wrath of George’s disapproval.
The theater-loving king knew “Gentleman Johnny” Burgoyne, a mediocre playwright and compulsive gambler. Illegitimate son of an earl, Burgoyne had distinguished himself in combat as the risk-taking commander of the Coldstream Guards.
Sent to America as second-in-command of the failed first invasion from Canada, he hurried back to London to draw up plans for a new invasion. On March 26, 1777, in a private audience, the King personally approved Burgoyne’s secret orders to launch a second invasion from Canada to split off rebellious New England by marching south from Montreal to Albany to link up with an army led by Sir William Howe, to march north from New York City.
In addition to taking heavy artillery, Burgoyne was to employ “savages” and “light forces” made up of German jaegers. Often misidentified as Hessians, they were schoolmasters, tavern keepers, tramps, violinists — anyone their princes could round up and pack off to fight. Rented out, they were literally owned by their prince: If they died, the prince was compensated, not their families. It was George who, against Burgoyne’s wishes, insisted “Indians must be employed.”
The plan began to fray by the time Burgoyne was ready to march. Fifteen percent of the mixed force of British, German and French-Canadian troops had to be left behind to garrison Canada. Only 400 Native Americans turned up. To drag 144 heavy cannons and haul enough provisions for 30 days for nearly 10,000 men — including 1,000 gallons of rum — Burgoyne needed 1,000 horses; he could only buy 400. The German cavalry would have to walk.
It rained for three weeks as they slogged south along the New York shore of Lake Champlain to the accompaniment of German martial tunes, soldiers and their wives struggling through the quagmire. Only officers got to sail.
Convening a “Congress of Indians,” Burgoyne threatened the Americans: “I have only to give stretch to the Indian forces under my command . . . to overthrow the hardened enemies of Great Britain.” His theatrical speech only guaranteed that thousands of American militia would turn out to oppose him.
Ordering “a reliance on the bayonet,” Burgoyne reached Ft. Ticonderoga, abandoned when the British took an undefended hill overlooking the fortress. The Americans had begun a fighting retreat.
Yet when the King heard of Ticonderoga’s fall, he exulted to the queen, “I have beat them, beat all the Americans.”
But he had not. Time became Burgoyne’s worst enemy. All night, he could hear the dull thwack of axes and the crash of trees as a growing American army blocked the only road, slowing Burgoyne to a mile a day. Rations dwindled; dragoons were still on foot. A German raid on Vermont to round up beef cattle and horses failed miserably. Burgoyne lost one-fifth of his force.
By the time he crossed the Hudson at Saratoga, he faced thousands of entrenched Americans armed with newly arrived, French-provided artillery. In two losing battles, Burgoyne’s army hemorrhaged casualties even as thousands more Americans encircled him.
Howe never arrived. He unilaterally decided to take Philadelphia and settle in for the winter.
Outnumbered three to one, Burgoyne surrendered. King George’s invasion plan did not include an exit strategy.
The greatest victory of the Revolutionary War, Saratoga convinced the French that, with enough military assistance, the United States could defeat England.
Disgraced, “Gentleman Johnny” returned to the one place he would ever receive accolades — the London stage — with the King cheering lustily in the audience. He had little else to cheer; he had lost America.
Willard Sterne Randall is the author of "Unshackling America: How the War of 1812 Truly Ended the American Revolution," a journalist and author of several biographies of Founding Fathers. He is a Distinguished Scholar in History and Professor at Champlain College. He lives in Burlington, Vermont with his wife, with whom he has co-authored multiple volumes of history.
A Bare Majority Of White Voters Are the Only Ones Happy With Trump
A Bare Majority of White Voters Are the Only Ones Happy With Trump
White Americans remain the only major demographic group in which the percentage of people who think Donald Trump is doing a good job outpaces the number who think he's doing poorly. That finding comes from Pew Research Center, which polled more than 2,500 adults around the U.S. between June 8-18. While African Americans and Latinos overwhelmingly…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)