As it appears the House will vote today on TrumpCare, here is Last Week Tonight with John Oliver breaking down the new Republican TrumpCare health insurance bill in wonderfully entertaining detail. Let's just say that they find a few things problematic with it. But then, as they point out, so do so many people on both sides of the aisle. John Oliver tells you why...
0 Comments
You may recall that in the film, Love, Actually, there is an iconic scene where the actor Andrew Lincoln comes to the home where Keira Knightley.lives and starts a playback of Christmas carols on his iPod, as he stands outside in the street and silently tries to unsuccessfully woo her with placards. You may also know that much of the original cast has reunited for a sequel, of sorts, 14 years after the original film. It's not a real sequel per se, but a 10-minute film that updates the characters with most of the original cast, and it's written and directed by the original writer-director Richard Curtis. (The only actors who I know for certain are not in it are Alan Rickman who passed away, and Emma Thompson who played his wife, and said Curtis had told her it was just too difficult and sad to work her into the story.) The 10-minute film will play during a TV special that is -- well, let them tell you. But the date is this May 25. An absolutely adorable and thoroughly charming ad was just released, and here it is. Fortune magazine has just released its list of the World's Greatest Leaders. They described the list of 50 as, "In business, government, philanthropy and the arts, and all over the globe, these men and women are transforming the world and inspiring others to do the same."
Just for a sense of perspective, Pope Francis #3. Jeff Bezos of Amazon is #4. Angela Merkel, the chancellor of Germany, is #10. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is #21. And according to Fortune magazine, the Greatest Leader in the entire World, coming in at #1, is...Theo Epstein, president of the Chicago Cubs!! No, really. Honestly, it's a strange list, even when one takes into consideration the "...and inspiring others" part. There are some fully-understandable names on it, along with a few head-scratchers. For instance, the list includes Janet Yellen, Justin Trudeau and Jamie Dimon, but also Samantha Bee as #19 Greatest Leader in the World, John Kasich (at #12, no less, perhaps most known for getting about 3% of Republican votes in the primary and not wanting to be vice president), Shakira at #27, Joe Biden -- but not Barack Obama, Melinda Gates -- but not Bill, and some others, graspable and otherwise. I think it's terrific that they included Ava DuVernay on their list of 50 -- if her name isn't familiar to you, she directed the movie Selma, just won an Oscar for producing the documentary 13th, which she also directed, and is the first black woman to direct a movie budgeted at $100 million, though it hasn't been released yet -- but they have her as the 6th Greatest World Leader. One spot above U.S. National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster, and two ahead of Tsai Ing-Wen, the first female president of Taiwan. Hey, to each their own. So be it. It's a list. And at the top of the Fortune magazine list (which you can see in full here), head-scratches or not, there he is, Theo Epstein at #1 -- the World's Greatest Leader. Hey, it's great to have one's love of a baseball team so richly justified... Boy, is there going to be fun and joshing at the Cubs Spring Training camp and through the entire season, as if celebrating their first World Series in 108 years wasn't enough. Here's what Fortune wrote about him, and their reasoning -- "The Cubs owe their success to a five-year rebuilding program that featured a concatenation of different leadership styles. The team thrived under the affable patience of owner Tom Ricketts, and, later, under the innovative eccentricity of manager Joe Maddon. But most important of all was the evolution of the club's president for baseball operations, Theo Epstein, the wunderkind executive who realized he would need to grow as a leader in order to replicate in Chicago the success he'd had with the Boston Red Sox." And no, Donald Trump was not on the list. Nor was the team president of the St. Louis Cardinals. I don't know. Not a clue.
I got a call from a friend yesterday, asking what I made of House Intelligence chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) and how he winged his way off to the White House, telling Trump about information he'd been given, and then holding a press conference about it all afterwards. What I made of it?? I don't freaking know. I don't have a flying idea. But then, I'm not alone, given that all the career experts from the House and Senate and the FBI and national intelligence who I watched and read didn't know what to make of it either. On just about every level. I mean, even starting with why on earth Devin Nunes -- by himself -- got information, and not also the ranking Democrat on the committee which is standard procedure? And Nunes wasn't even clear in his press conference about what he then went and told Trump, contradicting himself about four times about if the president was recorded, or wasn't, but may have been referenced, though he wasn't, but could have been, and that it has nothing to do with the investigation anyway, though there's no need to call for a new hearing because his committee as already investigating it, however he'll know more on Friday when the evidence is in. So, he doesn't even have the evidence yet? And even that, of course, doesn't even touch on the core question of why on earth he did it. And by "it," even that covers a multitude of layers. Like "it" being either going to Paul Ryan first, or heading to the White House, or doing so without the ranking Democrat or holding the press conference. Take your pick. The only theories that come closest to making sense -- though "closest" is a relative term -- is that it was related to Nunes having no experience in the field of intelligence before being appointed chairman, and having been on the transition team for Trump, and was contacted by a whistleblower or maybe even the White House itself and was subsequently directed by someone to distract attention away from not only how bad the hearing was going for Trump but also the disastrous reports that day from the A.P. about former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort having been paid $10 million by Russian oligarchs, making Manafort an unregistered foreign agent which he lied about. But even that whirlwind -- if it was in the range of true -- still doesn't explain the "why" Mr. Nunes did not include his ranking Democratic partner on the committee Adam Schiff once he got the information, or why in the world he even did go to the White House. So, what do I make of it? Seriously????? If intelligence experts at this are flummoxed, I don't stand a chance. And even that's before even adding into the mix that on the opening day of the committee hearing, pretty much the only thing that Republicans focused on was not the subject of the hearings at all, which was Russia, but that information had been leaked -- and now here is the chair of the committee not only leaking information...but actually leaking classified information!! (No, what he leaked wasn't very detailed, but when you're dealing with classified information, the concept of "not very detailed" isn't on the table.) Is it possible that there's a perfectly good explanation for this, for which everyone will say, "Ohhhh, okay, I get it now, that makes sense, fair enough, good for him"? I'm tempted to say no, there's not. It's that loony from every angle. But reality tells us that, sure, something reasonable is "possible." But possible isn't probable, or likely. Keep in mind, too, that not only did Devin Nunes still insist that there's no evidence that Trump was wiretapped, but there's nothing illegal or even wrong with intelligence services having foreign espionage targets under surveillance and if an American citizen participates in those conversations they can still be recorded. (Their names are supposed to be redacted in transcripts, although there are exceptions to that.) But this isn't at issue. So -- what in heaven's name is going on? Hey, I don't know. I would suggest, mind you, that it doesn't seem good for Trump, which I say for many reasons, not the least of which is that when Trump was asked later if he felt that what he was told had "vindicated" him, he did not answer, "Yes, absolutely, completely vindicated 100 percent!! It was all fake news. Fake, fake, fake news!! Terrible people. Fully vindicated!!," which is what we'd expect from Trump if the information even came within spitting distance of actually vindicating him -- but instead, he merely half-heartedly answered, "Partially vindicated." And then repeated that again, reinforcing it half-heartedly. "Partially vindicated." Of course, the very important thing to remember is -- this hearing isn't even about "vindicating" Trump's tweets that he was wiretapped by President Obama, which everyone has refuted...including Devin Nunes. The hearing is looking into Russian involvement in the U.S. presidential election and possible collusion by the Trump campaign. So...no, I don't have a clue what went on today. The only thing that I feel comfortable saying about Devin Nunes's actions today is that "Intelligence Committee" is beginning to seem like it's mis-named. I've been posting a series of videos that began with one from The Netherlands, which remains the best of them all, about how if Trump says America First, can their country be second. I figured we should return to The Netherlands, though it's a big change of pace. Here is the song "Do-Re-Mi" from The Sound of Music -- in the national Dutch production from eight years ago. It's not the most clever staging of the number, but they do a nice enough job. And hey, they're able to remember how to sing all the words in Dutch, so that's impressive on its own... And yes, on the line for "Fa," it does sound like she's singing, "Your father is in hell." I'm just going to guess he's not. Unless he doesn't like listening to musicals, especially those sung in Dutch. (P.S. What they're actually saying is, "Je vader is een held" which translates to "Your father is a hero.") Moving back for a moment to the draconian Trump budget -- which budget director Mick Mulvaney has done such a bizarrely tone-deaf job defending to the point that it's almost performance art -- it's important not to let it get lost in the shuffle of the House investigation that's been generating all the deserved headlines. Among the inexplicable cuts in the budget, the Wheels on Meals program has gotten the most attention, though quite a few other programs have, as well. One of those is public broadcasting. And to make the case for continuing to fund that to its fullest, we're going to head back almost half a century, to 1969, and let Mister Rogers, of all people, to make the case. That year, there were Senate hearing in the Commerce Committee, and Fred Rogers showed up to testify. His show Mister Rogers' Neighborhood was still so new that the committee member questioning him, Sen. John Pastore (D-RI) had no idea who he was. But that aside, this gentle and soft-spoken man (who would go on to receive a Lifetime Achievement Honor from the Television Academy) was so eloquent that he ended up pretty much getting the PBS funding right there on the spot. One does wonder, though, if Mister Roger would feel comfortable telling Donald Trump that "I like you just the way you are..." |
AuthorRobert J. Elisberg is a political commentator, screenwriter, novelist, tech writer and also some other things that I just tend to keep forgetting. Feedspot Badge of Honor
Archives
May 2024
Categories
All
|
© Copyright Robert J. Elisberg 2024
|