bureaucracybusters

Posts Tagged ‘FOX NEWS NETWORK’

D-DAY BECOMES T- (TRUMP) DAY: PART TWO (END)

In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on June 13, 2019 at 12:27 am

For most Americans, June 6th marked the 75th anniversary of D-Day. A time to remember and celebrate the more than 160,000 troops—73,000 of them Americans—who liberated France from Nazi slavery. 

But for President Donald Trump, D-Day was simply another opportunity to slander men and women he considered “enemies of the people.”

On that day, President Donald Trump was to join European leaders—such as England’s Queen Elizabeth II and France’s President Emmanuel Macron—in celebratory observance.

But for Trump, honoring the dead—and a handful of D-Day survivors present at the ceremony—was a distant priority. 

American military cemetery 2003.JPG

Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial

First must come a soft-ball “interview” with Right-wing Fox News Network—even if it meant postponing the opening of D-Day ceremonies until he deigned to show up.

And conducting that interview was Right-wing Fox News host Laura Ingraham—who gave a stiff-armed Nazi salute at the 2016 Republican National Convention that nominated Trump for President.

Laura Ingraham: What could you do to unite the country at a time of great polarization, what else could you do? 

Donald Trump:  So, I think success should unite the country but I will tell you the more successful we’ve come the more angry people like Nancy Pelosi, who don’t have what it takes, if they don’t know what’s going on they get angry. They should — an example is Mexico, I said we’re going to put tariffs on because we want you to help us because they won’t pass any legislation in Congress and I have Senators and others and Pelosi coming out saying how horrible. 

What they’re doing is they’re hurting a deal, they should be saying we’re with the President, we’ll do whatever he wants to do and Mexico would fold like an umbrella. Now, I have these people and I’m saying there’s some republicans too,

[NOTE: Since becoming President, Trump has repeatedly tried—and failed—to curb illegal immigration from Central and South America. In May, he threatened to slap tariffs on goods from Mexico unless its government imposed strict controls over would-be immigrants traveling through its borders.]

On June 7, 2019, syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist Peter Wehners appeared on the PBS Newshour to review the week’s major political events.

Shields—a liberal, and Wehner, a conservative—reached disturbingly similar conclusions about the behavior of President Donald Trump on the 75th anniversary celebration of the D-Day landings.

Image result for Images of Mark Shields and Peter Wehner

Peter Wehner and Mark Shields

Peter Wehner:  in terms of watching it, it reminded me of why it was the Greatest Generation. It’s been called the Greatest Generation.The more you find out about what happened 75 years ago on Normandy Beach, the more extraordinary is, the courage and the valor and selflessness…

But, for me, what was, well, frankly, sickening was this interview that Donald Trump did with Laura Ingraham on Fox News, not just what he said, but where he said it. He had thousands and thousands of gravestones behind him, these people who had been cut down in the prime of their life. And he was attacking Nancy Pelosi and Robert Mueller, who himself was a—was a war hero, in petty terms.

And to have done it then was, in my mind, a desecration at a sacred place. And it was another window into the bonfire of anger and resentments and grievances that is Donald Trump.

Mark Shields: I would just add this….that the 9,388 Americans, husbands, fathers, sons, brothers, sweethearts are buried there who either died at Normandy or in the liberation of France. And it was a time in this country, it was a we generation, not a me generation.

I mean, we had 20 million victory gardens that civilians built that provided 40 percent of the vegetables for the whole country. We rationed everything from gasoline, to liquor, to cigarettes, to butter, to meat….

And all Americans were part of the collective effort, the collective sacrifice, and it was led by those at the top….The president of the United States had four sons. Every one of them served in combat. Every one of them was awarded in combat. You take the…sickly son of a multimillionaire, who asked his father to use his contacts to get him into combat, John Kennedy, rather than stay out….

One out of four American males served in World War II. And now we have one-third—one-percent of Americans serving. And they are serving over and over and over again.

Judy Woodruff (moderator): It’s been 75 years, Peter Wehner. What remains in the American psyche from that?

Wehner:  Well, we’re an angry country, a more divided country, and a more tribalistic country than we were then. It’s important to say that, in many ways, we’re a better country too, if you’re a minority or a woman, all sorts of things where we have made progress….

The thing is that the American capacity for self-renewal can be great. And sometimes, when virtues are taken from the life of the nation and an individual, you remember why they matter to begin with. And, hopefully, commemorations like this can—can remind us that there are things that are worth fighting for and worth living for.

D-DAY BECOMES T- (TRUMP) DAY: PART ONE (OF TWO)

In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on June 12, 2019 at 12:07 am

June 6, 2019, marked the 75th anniversary of D-Day—the Allied invasion to liberate France from Nazi Germany, which proved one of the pivotal actions of World War II.

Shortly after midnight, on June 6, 1944, 24,000 American, British, Canadian and Free French troops launched an airborne assault on German positions. This was followed at 6:30 a.m. by an amphibious landing of Allied infantry and armored divisions on the French coast.

The operation was the largest amphibious invasion in history. More than 160,000 troops landed—73,000 Americans, 61,715 British and 21,400 Canadians.

Field Marshal Erwin Rommel—the legendary “Desert Fox”—commanded the German forces. For him—and the Germans—the first 24 hours of the battle would be decisive.

Initially, the Allied assault seemed likely to be stopped at the water’s edge—where Rommel had insisted it must be. 

German machine-gunners and mortarmen wreaked a fearful toll on Allied soldiers. But commanders like United States Army General Norman Cota led their men to victory through a storm of bullets and shells.

Into the Jaws of Death 23-0455M edit.jpg

Omaha Beach – June 6, 1944

The allied casualty figures for D-Day have been estimated at 10,000, including 4,414 dead. By nationality, the D-Day casualty figures were about

  • 2,700 British
  • 946 Canadians
  • and 6,603 Americans.

The total number of German casualties on D-Day isn’t known, but is estimated at 4,000 to 9,000.

One of those who traveled to Normandy, France, to commemorate that Allied sacrifice was President Donald J. Trump. Others included England’s Queen Elizabeth II and French President Emmanuel Macron. 

On June 6, 2019,  Trump granted an interview with Right-wing Fox News host Laura Ingraham.

With the crosses of fallen World War II heroes visible over his shoulder and aging veterans waiting for  the  D-Day commemoration ceremony to begin, Trump kept everyone waiting for him to show up.

Image result for Images of Trump / Laura Ingraham D-Day interview

Donald Trump’s D-Day love-fest

In fact, he bragged about it on camera:  “Listen to those incredible people back there,” Trump said, motioning towards the ceremony stage. “These people are so amazing, and what they don’t realize is that, I’m holding them up because of this interview. But that’s because it’s you.” 

Although Trump had admitted—on air—that he was holding up the D-Day ceremony for this interview, Ingraham later told Fox viewers: “By the way, some of you may have heard or read that President Trump supposedly held up the entire D-Day ceremony in order to do this interview with me. That is patently false. Fake news.”

Ingraham opened by asking about D-Day—whose honoring ceremonies her interview was preempting. Then she moved on to topics guaranteed to arouse Trump’s bile.

Laura Ingraham: We passed Nancy Pelosi as we were walking up to the stage earlier, she said some pretty harsh things over the last 24 hours, leaked out from her caucus, she said I don’t want to impeachment, I want him in prison, meaning you. How do you work with someone like that?

Donald Trump: I think she’s a disgrace. I actually don’t think she’s a talented person, I’ve tried to be nice to her because I would have liked to have gotten some deals done. She’s incapable of doing deals, she’s a nasty, vindictive, horrible person, the Mueller report came out, it was a disaster for them.

They thought their good friend Bobby Mueller was going to give them a great report and he came out with a report with 13 horrible, angry Democrats who are totally biased against me. A couple of them worked for Hillary Clinton, they then added five more, also Democrats, with all of that two and a half years think of it, from before I even got elected they’ve been going after me and they have nothing.

[NOTE: On a day for honoring the sacrifices of America’s soldiers. Trump savaged Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who had served as a Marine Corps infantry platoon commander during the Vietnam War.

Among the military awards he received were:

  • The Bronze Star Medal with Combat “V” for heroism (for saving a wounded Marine while under enemy fire).
  • The Purple Heart Medal (awarded for wounds in combat).
  • Two Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medals with Combat “V”.

Trump, on the other hand, is a five-time Vietnam war draft-dodger who falsely claimed he suffered from “bone spurs” in his heels.]

Director Robert S. Mueller- III.jpg

Robert Mueller

Ingraham: Do you mind if he testifies still, before you said you didn’t care if Mueller testified.

Trump: Let me tell you, he made such a fool out of himself the last time she—because what people don’t report is the letter he had to do to straighten out his testimony because his testimony was wrong but Nancy Pelosi, I call her nervous Nancy, Nancy Pelosi doesn’t talk about it. Nancy Pelosi’s a disaster, OK, she’s a disaster and let her do what she wants, you know what?

[NOTE: There is a longtime tradition in American politics that no criticism is aimed at a President when he’s traveling overseas.

Nancy Pelosi, as Speaker of the House of Representatives, held to that tradition while she attended the D-Day ceremonies. Asked to respond to Trump’s attacks on her, she said: “I don’t talk about the president while I’m out of the country. That’s my principle.” 

Trump, however, did not adhere to the same principle.]

THE REAL REASON WHY TRUMP WANTS A WALL

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on January 1, 2019 at 12:16 am

There’s a popular misconception about President Donald Trump and his efforts to build an illegal alien-proof Border Wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.

The misconception is that he simply doesn’t understand that it won’t work.

Among the obstacles to erecting such a barrier:

  • The United States/Mexican border stretches for 1,954 miles—and encompasses rivers, deserts and mountains.
  • Environmental and engineering problems.
  • Ranchers who refuse to give up any of their land.
  • Building such a wall would cost untold billions of dollars.

Another problem: The United States is surrounded by water on three sides—East, West and South. So anyone with a boat can smuggle illegal aliens into the country at any point along its 12,383 miles of coastline. 

No automatic alt text available.

For those who get seasick, there’s a land route available—not across burning Mexican deserts but under them. 

Over the years, officials have found nearly 200 tunnels along the 2,000-mile-long U.S.-Mexico border, mostly in Arizona and California. They range from rudimentary crawlspaces to “super tunnels” that cost more than a million dollars and are equipped with elevators, ventilation shafts electric lights, and disguised exits and entrances.

Many of those who want to infiltrate the United States can simply fly in.

Wealthy and pregnant Chinese women often fly to the United States to “anchor” themselves via a baby born on American soil. The same is true for many Russian women.

And the Number One cause of illegal immigration: Foreigners’ overstaying their visas. 

In 2017, more than 600,000 foreigners who legally entered the United States overstayed their visas and remained in the country by the end of the year, according to the Department of Homeland Security. 

A far cheaper and more effective way to combat illegal immigration is readily available through the United States Department of Justice: Simply indict the CEOs of those companies that systematically engage in violating America’s immigration laws by knowingly hiring illegals.

And slap convicted CEOs with a mandatory prison term of 20 years.

Other CEOs would take notice—and take drastic steps to ensure that their companies strictly complied with Federal immigration laws.

Related image

So: if The Wall won’t keep out illegal aliens, why is Trump so determined to build it?

Simple: The real purpose of The Wall is not to keep illegal aliens out. It’s to keep Donald Trump in—the White House.

According to a December 17-22, 2018 Gallup poll, Trump’s approval rating stands at 39%. Fifty-five percent of Americans disapprove, and five percent had no opinion.

Trump knows he won’t win over those millions of Democrats who detest him—and especially those who salivate at his possible impeachment.

So it’s only the views of his Rightist followers that he cares about. And especially those views as expressed on the Fox News Network.

Case in point: Trump’s meeting in the Oval Office on December 11 with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY). 

Its purpose: To discuss Trump’s demand that Democrats provide $5 billion to fund his border wall—or face his shutdown of the Federal Government.

While the three agreed that “we need border security,” Pelosi and Schumer disagreed that “the wall is a part of border security.” 

Trump then bragged: “If we don’t get what we want, one way or the other…I will shut down the government. Absolutely.”

But Republican leaders in Congress didn’t want to be blamed for shutting down the government, seemed to persuade him to back away from his threat. The Senate passed a short-term funding measure without his wall money. 

Vice President Mike Pence told lawmakers that Trump was open to approving it 

Then the Fox News Network stepped in.

Related image

“I think a lot of people who voted for President Trump counted on him on this particular issue,” Fox & Friends host Jedediah Bila said.

“I think their feet were to the fire. And you see a lot of people around the country saying: ‘Hold on a second. You told us that you weren’t afraid to shut down the government, that’s why we like you. What happened? You just gave in right away?’”

And Right-wing columnist Ann Coulter said: “Trump will just have been a joke presidency who scammed the American people, amused the populists for a while, but he’ll have no legacy whatsoever.

“Trump will very likely not finish his term and definitely not be elected to a second term.”

For a man who has “joked” that having a “President-for-Life” would be “great,” Coulter’s words are a nightmare.

On December 22, Trump shut down the government.

In his classic book, Language in Thought and Action, semantics professor S.I. Hayakawa noted: “The symbol is not the thing.”

Yet for Trump’s fanatical base, the symbol is the thing. So if Trump builds a wall across the U.S.-Mexico border, they believe that, alone, will stop all illegal immigration

Even if hard, objective evidence overwhelmingly proves it won’t.

Trump may know that it won’t. But if he does, he doesn’t care.

He knows that his base believes it will. And he knows they won’t re-elect him if he doesn’t “build the wall.”

Maintaining himself in power and publicity is all that he has ever cared about—and all that he truly cares about now.

TRUMP’S TWO OPTIONS–BOTH BAD

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on September 11, 2018 at 12:08 am

Donald Trump is on the prowl. He’s looking for a traitor—or at least his version of one.

On September 5, Trump was rocked by an unprecedented scandal: The New York Times published an anonymous Op-Ed essay by “a senior official in the Trump administration.”

The writer called himself as a member of “The Resistance.” And he claimed that “many of the senior officials” in the Trump administration “are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of [Trump’s] agenda and his worst inclinations.”

Among his revelations:

  • “From the White House to executive branch departments and agencies, senior officials will privately admit their daily disbelief at the commander in chief’s comments and actions. Most are working to insulate their operations from his whims.”
  • “Meetings with him veer off topic and off the rails, he engages in repetitive rants, and his impulsiveness results in half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions that have to be walked back.”
  • “Given the instability many witnessed, there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president. But no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis. So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until—one way or another—it’s over.”
  • Trump had opposed expelling “so many of Mr. [Vladimir] Putin’s spies” in retaliation for the poisoning of a former Russian spy living in Britain. He also opposed putting further sanctions on Russia “for its malign behavior. But his national security team knew better—such actions had to be taken, to hold Moscow accountable.”

The Op-Ed ignited a furious guessing game among Washington reporters and ordinary citizens. Not since Watergate and Deep Throat had so many reporters and high-level government officials  tried to identify a news source.

Related image

Donald Trump

For many, it’s simply an enjoyable mystery.

For Trump, it’s a personal affront. Someone has dared reveal that he is not in total command of the government that he heads. And, even worse, that a shadow government exists to thwart his often reckless and even dangerous ambitions.

Two days after the editorial appeared, on September 7, Trump told reporters on Air Force One: “Yeah, I would say [Attorney General] Jeff [Sessions] should be investigating who the author of this piece was because I really believe it’s national security,”

This despite the fact that:

  • No State secrets had been revealed, and
  • “Leaking” is a routine occurrence among officials at every government agency.

So will the Justice Department investigate a case under such circumstances? 

No one knows.

Jeff Sessions, official portrait.jpg

Jeff Sessions

Trump has locked himself into a no-win contest—to which there can be only two outcomes. And both of them will prove destructive to him.

Outcome #1: Trump doesn’t find the writer. Trump has always believed in conspiracy theories. and seen disagreement as betrayal. He will become increasingly paranoid and self-destructive, and the White House will become increasingly a place where few want to work.

Even under the best circumstances, any job at the Executive Mansion is tremendously stressful—filled with constant deadlines, turf battles between egotistical staffers, the threat of embarrassing exposure in the national media. 

If Trump insists that everyone now working for him be strapped into lie detectors, at least some people will refuse and leave. And getting well-screened and experienced replacements for such positions won’t be easy.

Outcome #2: Trump does find the writer. In that case, Trump’s Mount Rushmore-sized ego will demand the writer’s prosecution and imprisonment—if not execution.

Since the writer didn’t leak State secrets, there won’t be any legal basis for such a prosecution. So this will be seen as a vendetta driven by an authoritarian man’s ego. 

Moreover, Trump will run headlong into the danger of unleashing a Constitutional crisis.

His hatred of the “fake news” has long been known. The only media he watches and considers reliable is Right-wing Fox News Network, which acts as his personal cheering squad.

The rest of the media will see this—correctly—as an outright attack on their Constitutionally-protected freedom to discover the news and report it. And they will depict it as such.

Picking a fight with the national news media is a no-win situation for Presidents: The media have the resources to “dig up the dirt” on their enemies—and a unique megaphone to give voice to it.

Donald Trump has earned the hatred of many of the reporters covering him. And they will relish doing all they can to bring him down.  

And while Republicans have marched in lockstep with Trump from Day One, even they may well hesitate to support him in an all-out war on the press. After all, they have to run for office every two years (for the House of Representatives) or six (for the Senate). 

And they know how dangerous it is to antagonize the reporters and editors who cover them. 

For Trump, there will be the very real danger that, this time, they won’t back him.

Richard Nixon learned the hard way how dangerous it is to go to war against a free press.  

Donald Trump may be about to do the same.

WHY SETTLE FOR PRESIDENT WHEN YOU CAN BE COMMISSAR?

In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on January 15, 2018 at 1:07 am

On January 17, Arizona United States Senator Jeff Flake is expected to do the unthinkable.

According to CNN, he will deliver a speech on the floor of the Senate where he will compare President Donald Trump’s attacks on the news media to the poisonous rhetoric of former Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin.

Jeff Flake official Senate photo.jpg

U.S. Senator Jeff Flake

In one of those attacks—on February 17, 2017—Trump had called the press “the enemy of the American people.”

“The FAKE NEWS media,” he tweeted, “(failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!”

A day earlier, during a press conference in the East Room of the White House, Trump had delivered an unhinged rant, full of anger, personal attacks, self-pity and self-glorification.

Among the topics he covered was his all-out hatred for the press: “….The press has become so dishonest that if we don’t talk about it, we are doing a tremendous disservice to the American people. Tremendous disservice. We have to talk about it to find out what is going on, because the press, honestly, is out of control. The level of dishonesty is out of control.”

Both during his 2016 Presidential campaign and since his inauguration, Trump has called for “opening up” the libel laws to penalize reporters and authors with draconian fines. He has repeatedly attacked any story he dislikes as coming from the “fake media.”

Donald Trump

On the other hand, he has lavishly praised such Right-wing media as Breitbart and Fox News Network. These have steadfastly supported him despite overwhelming evidence that his 2016 Presidential campaign received subversive support from Russian Intelligence officials.

“Mr. President,” says an excerpt of Flake’s upcoming speech made available to CNN, “it is a testament to the condition of our democracy that our own President uses words infamously spoken by Joseph Stalin to describe his enemies.

“It bears noting that so fraught with malice was the phrase ‘enemy of the people,’ that even Nikita Khrushchev forbade its use, telling the Soviet Communist Party that the phrase had been introduced by Stalin for the purpose of ‘annihilating such individuals’ who disagreed with the supreme leader.

Joseph Stalin

“This alone should be a source of great shame for us in this body, especially for those of us in the president’s party. For they are shameful, repulsive statements.

“And, of course, the president has it precisely backward—despotism is the enemy of the people. The free press is the despot’s enemy, which makes the free press the guardian of democracy.

“When a figure in power reflexively calls any press that doesn’t suit him ‘fake news,’ it is that person who should be the figure of suspicion, not the press.”

Flake—or someone acting on his orders—had clearly leaked an advance text of the speech to the media.

On the January 14 edition of “This Week,” ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos already knew about Flake’s plan to deliver the speech.

“What are you trying to do?” Stephanopoulos asked.

“What I’m trying to say,” replied Flake, “is you can talk about crowd size, and that is pretty innocuous if there is a falsehood there. But when you reflexively refer to the press as the ‘enemy of the people’ or ‘fake news,’ that has real damage. It has real damage to our standing in the world.”

This will be part of a series of speeches Flake intends to give about Trump’s relationship with the truth and the press.

It is especially ironic that a Republican should condemn another Republican as following in the footsteps of an infamous Soviet dictator.

From the end of World War 11 to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Republicans slandered every Democratic Presidential candidate as a witting or unwitting agent of “the Communist conspiracy.”

Trump, however, has repeatedly praised Russian President Vladimir Putin, both during his Presidential candidacy and since taking office. In fact, Putin remains the only major public figure that Trump has never criticized.

Perhaps his most infamous defense of Putin came on the December 18, 2015 edition of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

The host, Joe Scarborough, was upset by Trump’s praise for Putin: “Well, I mean, [he’s] also a person who kills journalists, political opponents, and invades countries. Obviously that would be a concern, would it not?”

TRUMP: He’s running his country, and at least he’s a leader. Unlike what we have in this country.

SCARBOROUGH: But again: He kills journalists that don’t agree with him.

TRUMP: I think our country does plenty of killing, also, Joe, so, you know. There’s a lot of stupidity going on in the world right now, Joe. A lot of killing going on. A lot of stupidity. And that’s the way it is.

There may be more than a little envy on Trump’s part for how Putin has dealt with his media.

On July 2, 2017, Trump tweeted a video showing him punching a man with the CNN logo superimposed on his head during a WWE wrestling match.

And on August 15, the President retweeted a cartoon photo of a “Trump Train” running over a CNN reporter.

Joseph Stalin ordered his critics executed in prison or exiled to Siberia. It’s clear that Donald Trump would like to have that same power.

REPUBLICANS: IF WE CAN’T OWN IT, WE’LL DESTROY IT

In Bureaucracy, History, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on December 26, 2017 at 3:26 pm

On March 19, 1945, facing certain defeat, German Fuhrer Adolf Hitler ordered a massive “scorched-earth” campaign throughout Germany. 

Albert Speer, Minister of Armaments for the Third Reich, was appalled. All German agriculture, industry, ships, communications, roads, food stuffs, mines, bridges, stores and utility plants were to be destroyed.

Albert Speer and Adolf Hitler pouring over architectural plans

If implemented, it would deprive the entire German population of even the barest necessities after the war.

Now living in a bunker 50 feet below bomb-shattered Berlin, Hitler gave full vent to his most destructive impulses.

Adolf Hitler addressing boy soldiers as the Third Reich crumbles

“If the war is lost,” Hitler told Speer, “the nation will also perish. This fate is inevitable. There is no necessity to take into consideration the basis which the people will need to continue even a most primitive existence.

“On the contrary, it will be better to destroy these things ourselves, because this nation will have proved to be the weaker one and the future will belong solely to the stronger eastern nation.

“Besides, those who will remain after the battle are only the inferior ones, for the good ones have all been killed.”

Republicans have adopted the same “my-way-or-else” stance as Hitler. Like him, they are determined to gain and hold absolute power—or destroy the Nation they claim to love.

Take their current attitude toward—and attacks on—the U.S.Department of Justice and its chief investigative agency, the FBI.

On May 9, 2017,  President Donald Trump fired FBI Director James Comey. Comey had been leading an investigation into alleged collusion between Trump advisers and Russian officials when he was fired.   

At first, Trump claimed that he fired Comey for mishandling the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. 

Related image

James Comey

But, during a May 10 meeting at the White House, Trump admitted to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak: “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.” 

Following the uproar over Comey’s firing, on May 17, the Justice Department appointed former FBI director Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to investigate any links the between Russian government and Trump campaign members.  

Congressional Republicans joined Democrats in praising the appointment.  

  • House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, who had relentlessly pursued Hillary Clinton, said: “Mueller is a great selection. Impeccable credentials. Should be widely accepted.”  
  • “I commend (Department of Justice) for bringing in an independent voice to help bring clarity to this situation,” said Senator Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. 
  • House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said, “My priority has been to ensure thorough and independent investigations are allowed to follow the facts wherever they may lead. That is what we’ve been doing here in the House. The addition of Robert Mueller as special counsel is consistent with this goal, and I welcome his role at the Department of Justice.” 

Yet, since May, Trump, his shills in Congress and Right-wing Fox News have relentlessly attacked Mueller’s integrity and investigative methods. This despite the fact that Mueller was appointed by Republican President George W. Bush and served with an impeccable reputation for 12 years as FBI director (2001-2013).

The attacks grew increasingly vicious as Mueller uncovered evidence linking former high-ranking members of the Trump Presidential campaign to Russian Intelligence officials:

  • Former  national security adviser Michael Flynn pleaded guilty in December to lying to the FBI about his private conversations with Russian ambassador Kislyak. He is now cooperating with Mueller’s office.
  • Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his deputy Rick Gates were indicted in October. They have pleaded not guilty and ordered under house arrest. 
  • George Papadopoulos, the former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, pleaded guilty in October to lying to the FBI about his dealings with two Russians who had ties to the Russian government. 

And the Republican response? 

  • “A witch hunt continues against the president with tremendous bias, no purpose and no end in sight,” charged Rep. Matthew Gaets (R-Florida).  
  • Gaetz joined Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Arizona) and Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) in demanding that Mueller resign because he was the FBI director in 2010 when Federal agencies approved the sale of Uranium One, a Canadian energy company, to a Russian nuclear-energy firm.  
  • “I think the public trust in this whole thing is gone,” said Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), a founder of the Right-wing Freedom Caucus. 
  • “Let’s start off with the head of the snake,” said Sean Hannity, the Fascistic commentator on Right-wing Fox News. “Mueller’s credibility is in the gutter tonight with these new discoveries, his conflicts of interests, his clear bias, the corruption are on full display. Mueller is frankly a disgrace to the American justice system and has put the country now on the brink of becoming a banana republic.”

There are three reasons for these attacks:

First, Republicans fear that Trump’s followers—the hard-core Fascists who turn out in mid-term elections—will reject them if they reject Trump.

Second, they fear that if Mueller’s investigation leads to Trump’s impeachment, they will be turned out of Congress—as many were after Richard Nixon resigned in disgrace.

Third, reports have circulated that many Congressional Republicans have received financial (and possibly intelligence) support from the Kremlin.

THE HEYDRICH SOLUTION

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on June 27, 2017 at 9:25 am

Johnny Depp is an acclaimed actor. But his skills as a comic have sparked a backlash. 

“When was the last time an actor assassinated the President?” he asked while speaking at the Glatonbury Festival on June 22.

Related image

Johnny Depp

The Glastonbury Festival is an annual, five-day celebration of contemporary performing arts that takes place near Pilton, Somerset (England).

Perhaps Depp sensed that he was making himself a target for the Secret Service, for he quickly added that he was not referring to himself: “I want to clarify, I am not an actor. I lie for a living. However, it has been a while and maybe it is time.”

Predictably, Donald Trump’s family did not find the joke funny. 

The next day, Lara Trump, wife of the President’s son, Eric, called Depp’s comments “really, really sad—as a family member and as an American.”

Related image

Eric and Lara Trump

Appearing on Right-wing Fox Network’s “Hannity,” she told its host, Sean Hannity: “It’s happening to Donald Trump because he is Donald Trump. Their candidate failed, because they have nothing else to say. They have no platform; they have no real leader; they have no message.

“So the only thing they can do is pile on the President. Unfortunately it is to the detriment of the country. 

“It’s really sick, Sean. The Republican Party is becoming the only party of tolerance here in the United States.” 

On Twitter, Donald Trump Jr. called for Disney to dump the star of the “Pirates of the Caribbean” franchise.

“President Trump has condemned violence in all forms, and it’s sad that others like Johnny Depp have not followed his lead,” said deputy White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

Apparently these Trump enthusiasts forgot Trump’s series of threats against his Republican and Democratic opponents throughout the 2016 campaign:

  • On March 16, he warned Republicans that if he didn’t win the GOP nomination in July, his supporters would literally riot: “I think you’d have riots. I think you would see problems like you’ve never seen before. I think bad things would happen. I really do. I wouldn’t lead it, but I think bad things would happen.”
  • That Republicans clearly saw this as a threat is undeniable. Paul Ryan, their Speaker of the House, said on March 17: “Nobody should say such things in my opinion because to even address or hint to violence is unacceptable.
  • On August 9, Trump told a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina: “Hillary [Clinton] wants to abolish, essentially abolish, the Second Amendment. If she gets to pick her [Supreme Court] judges, nothing you can do folks. Although the Second Amendment people–maybe there is, I don’t know.”

Clinton’s camp instantly responded with fury.

“Don’t treat this as a political misstep,” Senator Christopher S. Murphy of Connecticut, who has called for stiffer gun laws, wrote on Twitter. “It’s an assassination threat, seriously upping the possibility of a national tragedy & crisis.” 

“Well, let me say if someone else said that outside of the hall, he’d be in the back of a police wagon now, with the Secret Service questioning him,” said Michael Hayden, former head of the CIA and National Security Agency (NSA).

The Trump campaign issued a statement denying that he had meant any such thing. 

Three days after Trump’s Hillary remarks, Operation Antrhopoid, a UK-French-Czech historical film, appeared in theaters. Its subject: The 1942 assassination of SS Obergruppenführer (General) Reinhard Heydrich.  

Related image

A tall, blond-haired formal naval officer, he was both a champion fencer and talented violinist. Heydrich joined the Schutzstaffel, or Protective Squads, better known as the SS, in 1931, and quickly became head of its counterintelligence service.

Reinhard Heydrich

In September, 1941, Heydrich was appointed “Reich Protector” of Czechoslovakia, which had fallen prey to Germany in 1938 but whose citizens were growing restless under Nazi rule.

Heydrich immediately ordered a purge, executing 92 people within the first three days of his arrival in Prague. By February, 1942, 4,000-5,000 people had been arrested.

In January, 1942, Heydrich convened a meeting of high-ranking political and military leaders to streamline “the Final Solution to the Jewish Question.”

An estimated six million Jews were thus slaughtered.

Returning to Prague, Heydrich continued a policy of carrot-and-stick with the Czechs—improving the social security system and requisitioning luxury hotels for middle-class workers—alternating with arrests and executions.

The Czech government-in-exile, headquartered in London, feared that Heydrich’s incentives might lead the Czechs to passively accept domination. They decided to assassinate him.  

Two British-trained Czech commandos—Jan Kubis and Joseph Gabcik—parachuted into Prague. 

On May 27, 1942, the assassins waited at a hairpin turn in the road always taken by Heydrich. When Heydrich’s Mercedes slowed down, Kubis lobbed a hand grenade at the car. The explosion ruptured Heydrich’s diaphragm, spleen and lung.

On June 4, Heydrich died of his injuries.

For Donald Trump, movies and jokes about assassination carry supreme—if unnoticed—irony.

It is Trump who repeatedly raised the issue of using violence and assassination to attain political ends. The last thing he needs are reminders—like Depp and Anthropoid—that Right-wingers can also be targets for death.

SPOTTING EVASIONS: PART THREE (END)

In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on August 17, 2015 at 12:05 am

As the August 6 Republican debate wore on, so did the evasive answers.

Chris Wallace, Fox News Commentator to Businessman Donald Trump: “In 2011, you told Forbes magazine that ‘I’ve used the laws of the country to advantage.’  But at the same time, financial experts involved in those bankruptcies say that lenders to your companies lost billions of dollars.

“…With that record, why should we trust you to run the nation’s business?”

TRUMP: “Because I have used the laws of this country just like the greatest people that you read about every day in business have used the laws of this country, the chapter laws, to do a great job for my company, for myself, for my employees, for my family, et cetra.  I have never gone bankrupt, by the way.”

[Trump totally ignored the charge that “lenders to your companies lost billions of dollars.”  He bragged that he had “used the laws” to “do a great job for my company….”   He seemed to be saying that as long as he made a killing, it didn’t matter if his lenders got nothing.]  

Donald Trump

Chris Wallace persisted in his questioning: “Well, sir, let’s just talk about the latest example, which is Trump Entertainment Resorts, which went bankrupt in 2009.

“In that case alone, lenders to your company lost over $1 billion and more than $1,100 people were laid off.  Is that the way that you’d run the country?”

TRUMP: “…First of al, these lenders aren’t babies. These are total killers….And I had the good sense to leave Atlantic City….Every company virtually in Atlantic City went bankrupt.

“…Seven years ago I left Atlantic City before it totally cratered, and I made a lot of money in Atlantic City, and I’m very proud of it….”

WALLACE:  “So….”

TRUMP: “And by the way, this country right now owes $19 trillion.  And they need somebody like me to straighten out that mess.”

[Trump bragged about making “a lot of money” in Atlantic City while ignoring the jobs lost by his employees and the monies lost by his lenders.  He said that America needed “somebody like me” to straighten out its financial mess.

[But there is a difference between making a profit for yourself as a businessman and ensuring a just society for all Americans as President.]

Fox News Moderator Megyn Kelly to former Florida Governor Jeb Bush: “…A story appeared today quoting an anonymous GOP donor who said you called Mr. Trump a clown, a buffoon….”

BUSH: “None of which is true.”

Then, after saying “I want to win,” he attacked President Barack Obama:

“We’re not going to win by doing what Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton do each and every day. Dividing the country. Saying, creating a grievance kind of environment.”

[From literally the first day Obama’s Presidency, Republicans tried to block every piece of legislation he proposed. This was especially true of his efforts to provide healthcare for all Americans.

[Thus, Bush slandered the President and distorted history while denying that he had slandered Trump.]

Jeb Bush

Sometimes it is the moderator who raises non-issues, as Megyn Kelly did with Senator Rand Paul:

“In the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling on same sex marriage…what will you do to ensure Christians are not prosecuted for speaking out against gay marriage….?”

[Christians are not being “prosecuted for speaking out against gay marriage.”  The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech, especially on controversial issues.]

Fox News Moderator Brett Baier asked Dr. Benjamin Carson: “As President, would you have used military force [in Syria, when its dictator, Bashir al-Assad, was found to have used chemical weapons against his own citizens]?”

CARSON: “…I would shore up our military first, because if you don’t get the military right, nothing else is going to work.”

[In short, Carson didn’t say whether he would have used military force in Syria.]

* * * * *

So how do you tell when a politician is evading?

First, educate yourself on the issues. If you know that President George W. Bush intended to go to war with Iraq when he took office in 2001, you won’t buy the line that he was the victim of poor intelligence two years later.

Second, pay attention to the question being asked. If it seeks a specific answer, the failure of a candidate to give one will alert you that s/he’s evading.  Be especially alert to the unwillingness of candidates to directly answer “Yes” or “No” questions.

Third, look for contradictions in the candidates’ statements. If he describes himself as “pro-life” but calls for huge increases in the nuclear arsenal, it means: He’s anti-abortion but pro-slaughter–so long as the victims aren’t fetuses.

Fourth, beware of meaningless babble.  A favorite trick of highly-polished debators–such as President John F. Kennedy–is to throw out impressive-sounding statistics which seem to answer the question but don’t.

Fifth, beware the emotion-charged story. To inflame Americans against Saddam Hussein in 1991, President George H.W. Bush clamed that Iraqi soldiers had ripped Kuwaiti babies from incubators. Only after the Gulf (oil) war did the story prove to be false.

SPOTTING EVASIONS: PART TWO (OF THREE)

In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on August 14, 2015 at 12:30 am

Most politicians are masters at evading questions they don’t want to answer.  And they are equally adept at giving answers that seem to be candid but in fact say nothing.

These skills were on full display during the August 6 GOP debate hosted by the Fox News Network.

For example:

Business Executive Donald Trump had just slammed the Federal Government’s failure to control illegal immigration.

And Fox News Moderator Chris Wallace wanted to know if Ohio Governor John Kasich agreed with him:

“When you say that the American government is stupid, that the Mexican government is sending criminals, that we’re being bamboozled, is that an adequate response to the question of illegal immigration?”

Related image

John Kasich

KASICH: “Now, he’s got his solutions.  Some of us have other solutions.  You know, look, I balanced the federal budget as one of the chief architects when I was in Washington.  Hasn’t been done since.

“I was a military reformer. I took the state of Ohio from an $8 billion hole and a 350,000 job loss to a $2 billion surplus and a gain of 350,000 jobs.”

[Kasich, more liberal-minded than his fellow Republicans, didn’t want to condemn Trump’s hawkish views. If he did, he would lose support from the anti-immigrant Republican base. So he changed the subject to his economic policies as governor of Ohio.]

WALLACE: “Respectfully, can we talk about illegal immigration?”

KASICH: “But the point is that we all have solutions. Mr. Trump is touching a nerve because people want the wall to be built. They want to see an end to illegal immigration.

“They want to see it, and we all do. But we all have different ways of getting there. And you’re going to hear from all of us tonight about what our ideas are.”

[Kasich totally evaded the question. He said that “we all have solutions” to illegal immigration.  But he never offered his.]

Fox News Moderator Megyn Kelly to Florida Governor Jeb Bush: “…For days on end in this campaign, you struggled to answer a question about whether knowing what we know now…we would’ve invaded Iraq….

“You finally said ‘No.'”

“To the families of those who died in that war who say they liberated and deposed a ruthless dictator, how do you look at them now and say that your brothers war was a mistake?”

Related image

Jeb Bush

BUSH:  “Knowing what we know now, with faulty intelligence, and not having security be the first priority when — when we invaded, it was a mistake. I wouldn’t have gone in.”

[Bush’s reply totally ignored that his brother, President George W. Bush, deliberately ignored all evidence that Saddam Hussein did not pose a threat to the United States.

[He also ignored the fact that his brother provoked a needless, bloody and financially ruinous war in Iraq.]

BUSH:  “…As governor of the state of Florida, I called every one of [the families who had lost members in Iraq and expressed his condolences].

“…And, every one of them said that their child did not die in vain, or their wife, of their husband did not die in vain.  So, why it was difficult for me to do it was based on that.”

[This sounded plausible.  But then Bush moved to shift the blame from his brother to President Barack Obama.]  

BUSH: “Here’s the lesson that we should take from this, which relates to this whole subject, Barack Obama became president, and he abandoned Iraq.

“He left, and when he left Al Qaida was done for. ISIS was created because of the void that we left, and that void now exists as a caliphate the size of Indiana.”

[In fact, “ISIS was created because of the void” that emerged when Bush toppled Saddam Hussein. Hussein’s dictatorial rule had suppressed religious-based terror organizations like Al Qaeda and ISIS.]

For News Moderator Megyn Kelly asked Dr. Benjamin Carson: “Your critics say that your [foreign policy] inexperience shows.

“You’ve suggested that the Baltic States are not a part of NATO, just months ago you were unfamiliar with the major political parties and government in Israel, and domestically, you thought Alan Greenspan had been treasury secretary instead of federal reserve chair.

“Aren’t these basic mistakes, and don’t they raise legitimate questions about whether you are ready to be president?”

CARSON: “So, you know, experience comes from a large number of different arenas, and America became a great nation early on not because it was flooded with politicians, but because it was flooded with people who understood the value of personal responsibility, hard work, creativity, innovation, and that’s what will get us on the right track now, as well.”

[Carson totally evaded the question. He implied that other qualities–such as “hard work, creativity, innovation”–would make up for his lack of foreign policy experience and knowledge.]

SPOTTING EVASIONS: PART ONE (OF THREE)

In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on August 13, 2015 at 12:58 am

“For men in general judge more by the eyes than by the hands, for every one can see, but very few have to feel.  Everyone sees what you appear to be, few feel what you are.”

So wrote Niccolo Machiavelli, the father of modern politics, in his infamous book, The Prince.  

It’s a sentment that voters should constantly keep in mind–especially when watching televised debates between opposing candidates.

The August 6 GOP debate offered many examples of men appearing to address questions put to them. In fact, they generally refused to directly address the issues raised by the three Fox News Network commentators.

Related image

The candidates of the Fox News GOP debate

The evasions began early.

Fox News Moderator Megyn Kelly to Media Mogul Donald Trump: “Mr. Trump…you’ve called women you don’t like “fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals.”

“Your Twitter account has several disparaging comments about women’s looks. You once told a contestant on Celebrity Apprentice it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees.

“Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president, and how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who was likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?

TRUMP: “I think the big problem this country has is being politically correct.”

Related image

Donald Trump

[Trump did not refute that he had made insulting remarks about women.  He simply claimed that he was the victim of Political Correctness. And Kelly did not call him on his evasiveness.]

Then Kelly moved on to the subject of abortion–and Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker.

KELLY: “Governor Walker, you’ve consistently said that you want to make abortion illegal even in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother.

“You recently signed an abortion law in Wisconsin that does have an exception for the mother’s life, but you’re on the record as having objected to it.

“Would you really let a mother die rather than have an abortion, and with 83% of the American public in favor of a life exception, are you too out of the mainstream on this issue to win the general election?

WALKER: “Well, I’m pro-life, I’ve always been pro-life, and I’ve got a position that I think is consistent with many Americans out there in that…

“…in that I believe that that is an unborn child that’s in need of protection out there, and I’ve said many a time that that unborn child can be protected, and there are many other alternatives that can also protect the life of that mother. That’s been consistently proven.”

Related image

Scott Walker 

[Clearly, Walker did not want to admit that he would allow a woman to die rather than have an abortion.  Nor did he want to admit that he would force a victim of rape or incest to carry to full term the fetus of that victimizer.

[So he simply claimed that “there are many other alternatives that can also protect the life of that mother” without offering any evidence to prove it.]

Fox News Moderator Chris Wallace to Donald Trump:

“…You have repeatedly said that you have evidence that the Mexican government is doing this, but you have evidence you have refused or declined to share.

“Why not use this first Republican presidential debate to share your proof with the American people?”

TRUMP: “Border Patrol, I was at the border last week. Border Patrol, people that I deal with, that I talk to, they say this is what’s happening….”

[Trump’s “evidence” was strictly anecdotal.  He cited unmamed “Border Patrol” sources for his general statement and offered nothing more.]

Fox News Moderator Chris Wallace to Ohio Governor John Kasich on illegal immigration:

WALLACE: “Governor Kasich, I know you don’t like to talk about Donald Trump. But I do want to ask you about the merit of what he just said.

“When you say that the American government is stupid, that the Mexican government is sending criminals, that we’re being bamboozled, is that an adequate response to the question of illegal immigration?

KASICH: “Chris, first of all, I was just saying to Chris Christie, they say we’re outspoken, we need to take lessons from Donald Trump if we’re really going to learn it. Here is the thing about Donald Trump.

“Donald Trump is hitting a nerve in this country. He is. He’s hitting a nerve. People are frustrated. They’re fed up. They don’t think the government is working for them. And for people who want to just tune him out, they’re making a mistake.

[Kasich was avoiding giving a direct answer. More liberal-minded than most Republicans, he didn’t want to alienate their Right-wing base by opposing his party’s “deport them all” position.

[He needed time to think of a response that wouldn’t cost him votes–and bought it by throwing cheap flattery at Trump.]

%d bloggers like this: