From the archives. This week's contestant is Joe Sorenson, from Albuquerque, New Mexico. Happily, I was able to get the hidden composer -- in fact, the hidden song had so much in common at the start with one of the composer's most famous pieces that at first I thought that that was the hidden song. It wasn't, just the composer style. (And in fact, the hidden song turns out to quote a different piece by the composer. Ah, well, at least I got the composer right, whatever the reasoning.) As for the hidden song, it's nicely-hidden, but as I listened on, I felt comfortable with my guess. And was right about that, too. So, a full victory all around! Huzzah.
0 Comments
From Mother Jones: "Top Aide Leading GOP Response to Kavanaugh Allegations Resigns Amid Prior Sexual Harassment Claim"
To give full credit, the original reporting on this is from NBC News. The aide denies the allegation. No word, though, if he denied it "vehemently," just like Brett Kavanaugh has with the accusation about him. Also, no tweet from Trump saying that if the charge was true, why didn't the woman file a complaint with the FBI and have them investigate. Between this resignation and allegation, and Sen. Grassley's aide Mike Davis having to delete his problematically-biased tweet earlier in the week, it's impressive that Chuck Grassley hasn't been even more of a bully to to Dr. Christine Balsey Ford given how this has must be such trying times for him... P.S. The article tells an even more damning story, with the aide's connection to Ed Whelan, the man who distributed the fake story about Brett Kavanaugh's supposed-doppleganger that was so massively ridiculed and discredited he apologized for it. You can read the full article here. What kind of a day was it in Trump Land? A day like any other, except...You Are There!
I don't even know where to begin, so we'll just toss a coin: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) gave Dr. Christine Blasey Ford -- who says she was sexually attacked by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh -- until sundown to show her face in the town square, or the little lady is a yellow-belly coward and has to git out of Dodge. The New York Times reported that Rod Rosenstein supposedly suggested wire-tapping Trump because of concerns over the 25th Amendment and mental incapacity. Trump reverted to being Trump and tried to "slut shame" a sexual abuse victim by tweeting, "I have no doubt that, if the attack on Dr. Ford was as bad as she says, charges would have been immediately filed with local Law Enforcement Authorities by either her or her loving parents. I ask that she bring those filings forward so that we can learn date, time, and place!" Rob Goldstone, who set up the 2016 Trump Tower meeting, did an interview with Cynthia McFadden of the Today show. He said that while he didn't know specifically who wanted the meeting, he nonetheless acknowledged that, yes, it was clear to him that what was being discussed was a dirty offer from the Russians. And floodwaters as a result of Hurricane Florence have overflowed a dam at a North Carolina power plant. Reports are that toxic coal ash from the plant's dump site may be flowing from the dam's lake into nearby Cape Fear River. Various thoughts: Don't worry about the toxic coal ash, Trump is on the job. There he is in North Carolina telling a guy big congrats on having a boat land in his front yard (as if the "Finders Keepers" rule applies) and offering "Have a good day!" to a hungry, drive-thru local resident receiving a box lunch at a center for those in need of food. No paper towels were thrown this time -- although, they probably could have been helpful with all that coal ash. Thanks to Rob Goldstone's admission, it looks like the Special Counsel's office found a roomful of witches this time! It's sort of hard to imagine that the Republican Party -- knowing how the years have damned the GOP senators' treatment of Anita Hill 27 years ago testifying against Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas over sexual abuse -- not only wouldn't treat with the utmost deference the next woman who claimed being sexual attacked by a Supreme Court nominee, especially with a mid-term election coming up and women already flocking to Democrats, but would bizarrely and actually treat her...worse! I've heard two suggestions that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford could make if she decides to turn down the Republican senators' bullying. One is that she go on 60 Minutes, and there can be interviewed in depth for the public to see in prime time. In fact, I can't imagine that the show hasn't long-since contacted her and are ready to go at a moment's notice if she says 'yes.' But I especially like the second suggestion from Norm Ornstein. He said that Democrats should organize their own official government hearing with Dr. Blasey Ford. And they could have every witness there that she wants called, people who have said they were aware of the attack long before Brett Kavanaugh was a Supreme Court nominee. And they should have the person who administered her lie detector test there to testify. And Democratic women and men senators should question her. As for the Rod Rosenstein story, Ari Melber did an impressive, intricate breakdown of the timeline of events surrounding the Department of Justice meeting with Mr. Rosenstein, including how it all related to newly-appointed Chief of Staff John Kelly (who was included in the article, as being the person Rosentein supposedly suggested he talk to). The specifics and dates are detailed, but the bottomline is that it's near-ludicrous for the story to have played out as written. Logistically possible, yes, but problematically unlikely for everything to fit in like clockwork, including that Rosenstein was new to his position and Kelly was not yet appointed to Chief of State and just a lower-level functionary in the administration at that point. Details for the story come from people not in the meeting. Participants who were actually there say that Rosentein was being sarcastic when Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe brought up investigating Trump because of concerns over Trump's mental condition. A New York Times reporter defended his story because he said that , contrary to latter insistence that Rosenstein was just being sarcastic, he had instead responded at the meeting that, in fact, he was being serious. Okay, fine, let's say he did say he was being serious. I write dialogue for a living. It's REALLY EASY for me to figure out how that would go -- being sarcastic and serious at the same time. Andrew McCabe: The president may be having mental problems. What do we do about that? Should the Department investigate him? Rod Rosenstein: (incredulous, then sarcastically) What do you want to do, Andy, wire the president??” Andrew McCabe: (stares at him a moment in disbelief, then) You're joking, Rod. Right?? Rod Rosenstein: No, I am dead serious. Because you just suggested we investigate the president, and I want to know -- if you mean that -- how in the world that's supposed to work? Do you actually mean we should wire-tap him??? Andrew McCabe: No, of course not. Rod Rosenstein: Right. It's not a difficult concept. It is not reasonably believable that career, conservative, by-the-book Republican Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosentein was seriously suggesting that he bring a wire into meetings with the president of the United States. Who had appointed him to the job, it must be remembered, as well. But here's the thing for anyone conspiratorialist who thinks he Really Actually Meant it. If anyone believes that Rod Rosenstein was actually serious about bugging Trump because of the 25th Amendment...why didn't he?? Because -- he didn't. By the way, though, how crazy must the brain-sick lunatic stuff that Trump was saying in private have been for anyone in the Department of Justice to even JOKE about investigating the president, let alone THINK about it??!! One other thing. I like the New York Times. I don't like all the articles they write, but they're a deepy important, extraordinary source of information in the country. And if they thought this was a real story of political meaning, they should have printed it. But -- this doesn't remotely strike me as a serious story of political importance. They may have got the details right, but from all I've read and heard, they got the analysis and meaning of it wrong. And knowing the impact it would have on the country, I think it was a deeply bad decision to go with it. I should also note that, for all the coverage, I don't think it's a problematic story. Anyone who believes the worst here, believed in the "Dark State of the DOJ" already. Anyone who wants Rod Rosenstein fired over this, they wanted him fired already. And we know that Trump has wanted to fire Rosenstein for a year, so it doesn't matter if it's this reason or some other manufactured one. He has probably already decided to fire Attorney General Jeff Sessions after the mid-term elections, which would be the first step to trying to fire Rod Rosenstein, so it's all part of the same piece. Other than Trump's most loyal adherents, I suspect that most everyone else not only senses the story is probably off-base, but is probably also thinking, "I'm glad the Department of Justice was aware that Trump was probably nuts and keeping its eyes open." What's unfortunate though is that it does throw gas on the low-burning embers of Trump Acolytes. But they'll always find their next reason to get inflamed on behalf of their Beloved. Concerning Trump's tweet slamming Dr. Ford, Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) told reporters she was "appalled" by Trump's comment. Just appalled. I know, because, yeah, who in the world could have possibly seen that tweet coming...?? Though it's nice to know that Trump could finally make a comment that would publicly appall her. Andrea Mitchell wrote on social media that she wondered if this was a "warning shot" to the White House from Sen. Collins. Yes, it was. A sort of, "Okay, okay, I know what you actually think about all this 'men being accused of sexual abuse' stuff and don't ever believe any women, perhaps because you're one of the guilty ones, but if you tweet it out loud to the public AGAIN I may be backed into a corner" heads-up. What kind of a day was it? A day like any other, except You Are There... Let's head back into the rest of the world, where countries around the globe have joined in to compete with one another in these videos to make the case why they should be Second, as long as Trump as decided that America is first. This is Australia's turn. This is a little bit different from the others is a few small ways. The first is that it's preceded by a history of the "Comedy Against Trumpism" project. Also, they include some clips from several other efforts, which is great if you've missed most of the ones I've posted her (or just want a happy refresher). And finally, the have a twist late in their video, which sets them apart. But mostly, it's a funny funny entry in it's attempt to compete with the rest of the world. On MSNBC last night, they played a one-minute clip of Trump talking with Sean Hannity for yet another rally speech. Afterwards, the panel commented how surprising it's been that he was been able to stay reasonably on message in a fairly low-key way for him, saying things about Dr. Christine Blasey Ford like "She has to be given a chance to have her say," as well as noting that that It's been a week and we should move on at this point. What surprised me is that in that same clip he said to Hannity that some people could ask, "Why didn’t somebody call the FBI 36 years ago?" -- and no one mentioned it on the panel.
I still don't know how that is possible. It was an egregious comment, not to mention an idiotic one. When you're 15 years old (or any age, for that matter), you don't call the FBI because someone sexually attacked you. The FBI has only been brought up today because Brett Kavanaugh is nominated to serve on the Supreme Court, and they do background checks. One would think that that's pretty basic, and it doesn't require being president to have a grasp on that concept. But further, it's also pretty well-established all the many and understandable reasons women don't go to the police if they've been raped -- let along sexually attacked and were able to escape. So, on many levels this was a truly awful thing to have said, clearly demeaning the accusation because no charges had been filed when she was a terrified, traumatized teenager. The Trump comment came late in the evening, and I do suspect there will be more reference to it today. UPDATE: I wrote most of this article last night, but before posting it this morning I first checked the news for any new stories that might relate to it. It referred to the wonderful Stephanie Ruhle going on a rant on her MSNBC show, Velshi & Ruhle about this very quote. Alas, it's likely that other analysts won't deal with that quote, though not because they missed it. Rather because Trump went off message yet again and this time with a morning tweet. It's is similar and awful, and basically says that if there was really an attack he’s sure it would have been reported, so let’s find that out. It's possible that some reporters will put the two quotes together and note that Trump is beginning to stray off the reservation.) But back to Dr. Ford and her lawyers. Last night, the Ford lawyers released their conditions that they would agree to for Dr. Ford to testify. Most notably they include -- 1. Ford does not want to be questioned by an outside counsel. 2. Ford does not want to testify in the same room as Brett Kavanaugh. 3. Ford wants the Senate to subpoena Mark Judge and other witnesses. 4. Ford wants no time limit on her opening statement. 5. Work to ensure Dr. Ford's safety. 6. Can't testify before Thursday. 7. Public hearing with limited cameras. 8. Kavanaugh testifies first, Ford second. Not being a Senate testimony expert, those seem pretty benign, considering all the things that could have been demanded, including an FBI investigation. I'm sure there will be some give-and-take in negotiations (I suspect they'll insisted that Brett Kavanaugh, as the accused, go second), but it seems that the starting point should lead to her testifying next week. A friend also said he was surprised that they didn't include requiring an FBI investigation first. I was a little surprised, as well, but they did request it earlier, and in the end it's something that only the president can order, so making it a condition to the Senate, which has no authority on such a thing, perhaps made it moot for the list. My favorite condition on the list is the first one, and I hope they hold firm on it. It's obvious that the Republican senators are cowardly and afraid how they will appear, 11 older white men, several of who have already made damning, biased statements about Dr. Ford's charges. I know that some analysts have noted that there have been occasions when a committee had an outside counsel asking questions -- most famously for Joe McCarthy's investigative committee and during the Watergate investigations. But those situations were during investigations, and I know of no precedent where outside counsel was used to interrogate during confirmation hearing, as if it was a trial. By the way, speaking of question -- Chris Matthews yesterday had some great, basic questions to ask Brett Kavanaugh at the hearing that couldn't easily be dismissed with "I don't have a recollection of that event." Among them -- Did you drink in high school? Did you ever drink to excess so that you'd blank out? How many beers did it take for you to be drunk? Beyond all this, Republicans have to know -- or are so focused on their obsessive task at hand that they are not seeing the obvious -- that this confirmation hearing is not the end of the story. It's still possible that criminal charges could be filed in Maryland which doesn't have a statute of limitations on matters like this. While that's not likely, what is almost certain is that news reporters will be investigating. One legal expert put this in the best, most succinct way -- "In six months, some reporter is going to win the Pulitzer Prize for uncovering all this." Tracking down witnesses and evidence that Dr. Christine Ford is telling the truth that Brett Kavanaugh sexually attacked her with Mark Judge. And if Kavanaugh has been confirmed, bullied through the process by Republicans senators, ignoring the testimony of a woman presenting her traumatic experience to them -- just as they did 27 years ago with Anita Hill -- the GOP is going to have disaster on its hands. Pushing the man to the Supreme Court who she said sexually attacked her. You'd have thought Republicans would have learned from that experience in 1991, grossly mishandling Anita Hill in her Senate testimony against a Supreme Court nominee. But despite their insistence to the contrary, apparently not. The best I can figure is that many of them don't actually think it was mishandled. And in the end, I must finish the way I think all discussions of this topic should end -- it's not about Trump, it's all about the elected officials of the Republican Party. The other day, I wrote here about my realtor Carla Winnie having been a stage actress early in her life, and performing in the original production of the 1975 musical, Snoopy!!!, which was sort of a follow-up to You're a Good Man, Charlie Brown, though with a different team writing the wonderful score, Larry Grossman and Hal Hackady. I also posted a song from the original cast album that Carla sang on, "I Know Now." In 1988, CBS produced a cut-down animated version of the show with the Peanuts gang. This is a hoot of a clever number, "Everything You Can Be," which for reasons that will be clear is especially well-adapted to animation. Carla said it was a joy to sing on stage, but very difficult. However, she used it later on when she taught musical theater, specifically because of the challenge. Snoopy!!! had a pretty famous song come from it, "Just One Person," which The Muppets have performed so often many people likely think it was written for them. But as wonderful as that song is -- and it's great -- I may even like "Everything You Can Be More." The difference is that, much as I love the song, I think it is unlikely that I will ever learn to sing the words to it. |
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
Categories
All
|
© Copyright Robert J. Elisberg 2024
|