Twitter has really been going Full-MAGOP Crazy the past week, not just far more than usual, but overwhelmingly more than usual – which (in addition to Trump melting down) is, it seems another indication of how the trial is going. But also how the comfortable, ordered MAGA world -- where black history doesn't exist, books you don't like are banned, the womenfolk can't get abortions like it was in 1864, law and order existed only to keep minorities in their place, science isn't real, and Trump wasn't showing early signs of dementia, and more -- is going in general, spinning more out of control than they like. And that’s the point here. Not that there is all this “outrage,” but that it’s grown so pronounced within such a short period of time as a touchstone for getting a view into the MAGOP mindset.
And further, to be clear, I don’t just mean the general public MAGOPs ranting and lying and howling at the moon, but well-known Republican figures with their hair on fire, picking on anything even remotely connected to Biden to slam him, no matter how insignificant, and often quite-literally lying about anything they can. Because they seemingly have nothing else to offer. Thoughtful debate is one thing, is something else. This is grasping at whatever they can, no matter how small, holding out hope that it’s a lifeline as they tread water in the middle of the ocean. [UPDATE: After writing that about "no matter how insignificant," just this morning I see that the latest line of outrages MAGOP attacks at President Biden are about the shoes he's now wearing.] This will be long, but that’s because the examples are need to at least give a hint of the depth and spread of it all. And even that won’t come close to doing justice to this new spurt of wailing For instance, there’s a video of a speech that President Biden made on Wednesday where he screwed up reading the TelePrompter and read the word “Pause.” It was pretty poor, though amusing. However, high-visible Republicans were picking on that as if it was the end of the world – including Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, Richard Grenell (Trump’s former Acting Director of National Intelligence), Don Jr. and Megyn Kelly. Actually, Ms. Kelly went even above and beyond most when she commented on the video: “He might have just lost. Seriously.” I wrote back -- "Seriously"?? Because of that??! You think saying “Pause” will actually lose President Biden the election? And you want us to take you “Seriously”? It's telling that misreading a TelePrompter bothers you *THAT MUCH*!! -- but not Trump and his mental breakdown gibberish saying made-up words like "illegal adlinthin" and “Weak niks.” And him being found liable for rape. And found guilty of 10 years of business fraud. And saying he wants to be a dictator. And saying he wants to throw out some of the Constitution. That latter paragraph, by the way, is an adaptation of what’s now become my standard reply on social media to extreme-right “outrage” at something they find so despicable and apparently the end of democracy as we know it about President Biden. Debating such an over-the-top reaction has no point. Nor does explaining why they’ve misunderstood the horror they’re reacting to. Instead, saying that "You’re supporting someone found liable for rape, who said he wants to be a dictator” seems a more pointed way to reply. Kari Lake has been especially prominent among the outraged, repeatedly trying to infuriate her supporters, without really having a strong grasp on facts or policy…or what position to take (witness her first being for Arizona’s 1864 total abortion ban, than against it, and now for it) – though in fairness, she’s so deeply reality-challenged that it seems like she’s more trying to audition to be Trump’s VP choice (which will never happen because in her one and only race, she lost – and “loser” is the most damning word to Trump). More troubling for her is that her flailing comes across as desperate, so totally off the ledge, which appears to be an indication of her concern about her Senate campaign against Ruben Gallego is going. As just one example, she wrote – “Joe Biden and Ruben Gallego want to raise our taxes by 5 trillion dollars! They've spent so much time in the swamp that they're completely out of touch. Ruben, not all of us can be bankrolled by DC lobbyists. Why are you supporting this attack on American small businesses & families? Of course, what the truth-challenged Ms. Lake left out (not shockingly) is that this tax hike is over ten years. And half of that is for the very wealthiest Americans who've been underpaying for decades. (A Forbes article noted that billionaire on average only pay 8.2% in taxes.) The other half of that tax hike is for corporate taxes. None of the raise in taxes is for most Americans. Moreover, the proposal actually bring down deficit spending! Ms. Lake also posted a video of her Democratic opponent celebrating after the House passed its Ukraine aide bill passed by a massive 311-112 majority. And so, her only response was to trod out a Trumpian attack -- “Ruben Gallego parading around the floor of Congress waving a foreign flag tells you all you need to know about his priorities. 60 billion of our taxpayer dollars to secure Ukraine's border. Zero to defend our own. Radical Ruben will NEVER prioritize your safety.” Of course, in reality, Rep. Gallego was supporting a democratic ally that is under attack by one of America's top enemies -- celebrating a House vote passing overwhelmingly by a 3-to-1 margin that actually benefits American security in many ways. Not only is Ms. Lake ignorant of that and in the vast minority, and not only does she leave out that it’s Republicans who blocked the border security bill, but given her flip-flopping all over the room about Arizona’s 1864 abortion law, she has a personal challenge when it comes to prioritizing -- deciding what if anything her priorities should even be. I didn’t mean to skim over the aforementioned Charlie Kirk earlier, since he has been active doing what Charlie Kirk does, being outraged, going so far over the top you fear for his safety, trying hard to regularly “trigger the libs” and if it helps him to outrage his base, just lie. In another of his efforts, he wrote that “Biden just banned TikTok,” adding that “He is so controlled by the tech companies that he is risking his support with Gen Z.” Except, well, no, of course that isn’t true. After all, no, it’s the Senate and House (the Republican-led House, by the way) who banned TikTok and passed the law. President Biden signed it. But even more to the point, the reality is that it's not "banned" at all -- the company has 9-12 months to sell it. Either Charlie Kirk doesn’t understand all this and is just being his normal divisive self, or he don't get how bills work or what they say. Oh, by the way, you know who has banned this international version of China’s TikTok? China! (Yes, really.) This MAGOP “outrage” does sometimes reach comical levels. Like with Laura Loomer, a party mouthpiece of growing notoriety who Trump loves, who pulled out an old chestnut for some reason and then ratcheted it up, if only to express her head-exploding outrage at Democrats – and please Trump. “Hillary Clinton belongs in hell.” Okay, so that seems a bit hyperbolic, but hey, that’s just me. Even Rudy Giuliani popped up from hibernation to help Trump by pulling out an old chestnut, although he was almost beyond pathetic, when he weirdly cried out, “The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election was stolen. Change my mind.” (Okay, I couldn’t let that one pass. I replied, “You were convicted of defamation, ruining two women's lives, for saying lies like this, and fined $148 million. No one has to convince you of anything. Rather, what you have to do is pay the $148 million fine (after appeal) because of your lying and defaming about the election.”) Coming out of the woodwork, Newt Gingrich jumped in, as well, with a desperate effort to be “outraged” by the Manhattan election interference trial, although he avoided all reference to the concept of evidence, and the best he could offer was just to thrash for the sake of thrashing, “The cost of Trump’s New York trial should be charged to the Biden presidential campaign! It is all politics and no law.” This from the man reprimanded with an ethics violation when his own party was in control of the House. Never mind that his lie about “no law” being involved in the trials against Trump distracts from the reality that The Law actually found Trump liable (twice) for the equivalence of rape, and also found him guilty of business fraud. That’s largely the running theme in so many of this recent spate of “outrages.” Not that serious arguments for debate are made to support a position, but spewing out anger (some faux, some it seems out of insecurity) that sounds substantive, but is just misdirection at best, or lies at worst. Like when Ted Cruz (R-TX) disingenuously wrote the other day that “I could not support the foreign aid bill since it gave money to Gaza and did nothing to stop the invasion Joe Biden has allowed on our southern border.” Never mind, of course, that in reality President Biden endorsed the border security bill that Ted Cruz’s own Republican Party blocked. At the behest of Trump. Actor Kevin Sorbo didn’t have anything on topic to be outraged about, but when you see your well-ordered MAGA world coming apart, he threw in an old Republican lie to do his divisive, outraged part: “If you don’t pay taxes you shouldn’t be allowed to vote. Why should you have control over a system you don’t contribute into?” he wailed. “Why?” he asks – well, because it's in the U.S. Constitution. Because we aren’t a plutocracy, where only the wealthy get to govern. Beyond that, it’s just lashing out without even attempting to think, which is so much the foundation of so much MAGOP “outrage.” After all, of course, just because people don't pay income tax doesn't mean they don't pay taxes! Most people have withholding tax taken from weekly paychecks, so they don't "owe" income tax. And for that matter, everyone pays sales tax on everything they buy. Those are actually “taxes” that go to government to contribute into the system. This is basic -- and well-known. Except to MAGOPs grasping for something, anything to be outraged at and blame Democrats and minorities. And then there’s Joey Mannarino., a prominent MAGOP fundraiser who is furiously angry about near-everything related to President Biden. He wrote in his standard blind, lying rage: “If Joe Biden passes a 44.6% capital gains tax (think cryptocurrency) I will absolutely be renouncing my American citizenship. I hold another one already.” Well, oh, my. Heavens to Betsy. Of course, reality down on Earth tells a totally different story. After all, Joe Biden doesn’t “pass” tax law with a wave of his Harry Potter-style wand. Such a tax hike could only become law if passed by Congress – which would include Republican votes. But almost more to the point is that – Even conservative Forbes writes that this proposal is only "incremental, not revolutionary" and "no cause for alarm." It’s just a small increase over the existing law – and further, the rate would only apply to those "with taxable income above $1 million and investment income above $400,000." Forbes adds "That isn’t quite as cataclysmic a policy shift as referring to a blanket 44.6% long-term capital gains rate would suggest." Long as this list above was, the full list is overwhelming longer. After all, I haven't even included the pure, flat out, standard, time-tested, brazen lying on social media by MAGOP elected officials like Jim Jordan, Marjorie Taylor Greene, J.D. Vance, Lauren Boebert and MAGOP megaphones like Fox's Jesse Watters, OANN's Jack Posbiec, Franklin Graham and many more. It would not only make this go on almost endlessly, but would risk readers throwing objects at their computer screens. You're welcome. To be clear, when I saw far longer, I don't mean just from high-profile MAGOP public figures, but also the base they go out of their way to outrage with lies, misdirection, Russian disinformation and more. And while I know this is common these days, the point here is that all of this above is just within the past few days, when the MAGA world appears to be unraveling. And the biggest cause – since when such a phenomenon occurs, you have to look at what is different that might have brought the increase about – seems to be seeing their infallible cult leader actually in court on trial…but also, perhaps, seeing him at the courthouse and rallies looking frail, and old, and shuffling, and lashing out even more than usual, calling for bloodbaths, confusing Jimmy Kimmel with Al Pacino, and seeing what looks like to psychiatrists as early stages of dementia as he rambles off on tangents in more odd directions than before, while making up gibberish words when his mind can’t come up with the real ones he wants. So, this growing outburst of flailing MAGOP angst by Trump acolytes has to be, in part, related to Trump’s own concern about how badly the trial is going after just days, and all his other trials and how clear the profoundly losing MAGOP position of abortion is – to which can now be added this week the Pennsylvania primary where he lost 150,000 votes to Nikki Halley who dropped out of the race seven weeks ago! (To which one can only imagine how many others wanted to vote for Haley but figured “Trump is the nominee, she’s not in the race, why bother going to the polls?”) The election is still seven months away. Trump is not going to get any better. The Manhattan trial will continue. The other trials, even if none start before the election, all hang over him. If this is the level of MAGOP meltdown outrage already – and man, have I left out not only a lot, but a lot that just totally delusion in its fury and grasp of reality – I can’t even begin to imagine how MAGOP heads are going to keep from exploding. By the way, to be clear, none of this means that the Republican Party won't do well in the coming elections. Or collapse under its own weight. Just that whatever happens, they are on a loop de loop rollercoaster without a safety bar. Yes, I'm biased. But then, I'm not the one melting down. Which makes it easier to see clearly. And biased doesn't mean being wrong. Just that you can appreciate the angst of people trying to undermine democracy and make the United States fascist, supporting someone who says he wants to be a dictator, throw out parts of the U.S. Constitution, was found liable for the equivalence of rape, and found guilty of ten years of business fraud.
0 Comments
If you missed Last Week Tonight with John Oliver on Sunday, the Main Story was about UFOs. Yes, really. As you might imagine, this lent itself to a great deal of humor. That said, the focus was serious, dealing with the question of whether investigations into the issue have been substantive enough. While I agree with that point, I also think there have been some investigations that have more substantive that the show suggests. Regardless, it's a very entertaining piece. This is also where I again get to point out that when Oliver mentions (much too off-handedly, I believe, as just a name on a list...) the Army's Project Blue Book, I had an astronomy class at Northwestern taught by J. Allen Hynek -- who had been the civilian head of the project. The class was not about that, though he did devote two days to the subject. (Hynek was also the technical adviser on Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Spielberg even gives him a cameo close-up on the movie. It's in the final sequence when all the scientists are gathered in a semi-circle, and previously-abducted humans leave the ship. One of the scientists -- who looks exactly like an astronomer with with a gray goatee -- weaves his way through the crowd, steps forward, takes out his pipe, and gets a closer look. That's Dr. Hynek.) Three things I remember from the two days of UFO classes: One is that when he got a sense that the project was going to be closed down, Hynek made copies of material to take home so that he could later continue research on his own. A second thing is that he said that Project Blue Book was not allowed to be shut down until all cases were classified -- the problem for the government was that there were many still-open cases. So, what they did was classify those cases as "unidentified" and therefore could close down the project. And the third thing is that Hynek said he never came across a case that convinced him the UFO sightings were aliens -- but -- he said it is ludicrous to think that we are the only living beings in the universe. He said a whole lot more on the subject, as well as on astronomy in general, but after all this time, that's all I've got... And as a bonus -- I actually tracked down Dr. Hynek's scene, in Close Encounters of the Third Kind!! I'm sure there have been many people who've watched the movie of the years who have wondered, "Gee, that's a weird shot of just one guy pushing his way through, what is the point of that??!" Well -- now you know the point. I think TV legal experts have been doing a very good covering details of the Trump trial and analyzing their importance, often even giving virtual play-by-play reporting at times about what’s going on in court. Yesterday’s testimony from David Pecker seems to be generally thought to have been very strong for the prosecution – all the more so because Pecker is a close Trump ally. He’s laid out a strong vision of the long pattern over time of Trump’s efforts to commit election. Additionally, as former Watergate lawyer Nik Ackerman pointed out, his being able to identify and comment on an audio recording between Trump and Michael Cohen means that when Cohen (with his conviction of perjury allowing the defense an opening to try and undercut his testimony) takes the stand, many critical things he says will have already been verified – which only serves to shore up his credibility. From my end, not being a legal expert, there are often things separate from the legal minutiae that catches my eye. And the last couple of days, that’s been Trump’s ranting about how the massive legion of Trump supporters have supposedly been showing up on his behalf. In contrast, by most reporters’ accounts, there were only three such Trump people in the entire area that morning, although to be fair that number did change later, dropping down to one. Trump, however, has been melting down in his comments to waiting reporters on a wide range of subjects, none of which have any bearing in court (all the more so since he likely won't even be testifying -- though God-willing that will change...). But the most recent and repeated one raised an imponderable question for me, which I’ll get to in a bit. Indeed, he posted in a long FULL CAPS rant about it on his social media platform, outraged by how supposedly the police are putting up road blocks to stop traffic and keep his horde of supporters away. "THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WERE TURNED AWAY FROM THE COURTHOUSE IN LOWER MANHATTAN BY STEEL STANCHIONS AND POLICE, LITERALLY BLOCKS FROM THE TINY SIDE DOOR FROM WHERE I ENTER AND LEAVE," Trump wrote, in part. "IT IS AN ARMED CAMP TO KEEP PEOPLE AWAY." For the math challenged, the one person who stuck around is a smaller number than “THOUSANDS.” One of the most outspoken reporters about Trump’s claims has been MSNBC’s Vaughn Hillyard, who has not only shown footage of traffic comfortably driving by the courthouse and all the public walking around, including the many people there who are protesting Trump, but also has bluntly called Trump’s claims to be “lies.” The most-telling story about how disturbing the teensy pro-Trump crowds are to Trump is also the funniest for revealing his mindset, proving the point by him denying it. It began when New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman wrote an article that referenced how Trump was bothered by the small crowds were on his behalf. Fair enough, who wouldn't be bothered by three people showing up to support you, let alone just one, especially if you're a malignant narcissist? But that brought about a Trumpian reply -- “Maggot Hagerman of The Failing New York Times, falsely reported that I was disappointed with the crowds," Trump insisted in his gracious, social media post. "No, I’m disappointed with Maggot, and her lack of writing skill…" It should be noted that for the first time in recorded history "Elegance in Writing" is high on Trump’s list of qualities he most admires. This is most-especially surprising since “reading” is low on his list. There were other things he of course said also disappointed him (he’s Trump, after all) but, weirdly and amusingly -- and unintentionally -- in saying that Ms. Haberman's story was false, he did not say that her facts were wrong about the tiny one-person size of the crowds, only that he claimed he wasn’t disappointed by the size. Further, this insistence totally contradicted his previous ALL CAPS post fuming in anger over “THOUSANDS” supposedly having been turned away. THOUSANDS!!! (Question: can one person be considered a “crowd”?) All of which led to my imponderable. There is a side of me that thinks Trumps says his crowd of supporters is so massive in order to mostly convince his supporters who are watching him on TV -- while on the other hand, a side of me thinks he's doing this to mostly convince himself. I have no idea which is true. I’m sure both are true in part. What I don’t know is which is predominant. If I had to make a guess, it’s the latter, trying to convince himself. After all, everything with Trump begins and ends with Trump. So, convincing himself that there are THOUSANDS of supporters for him there – rather than three…or, ultimately, just one would seem necessary to salve his malignant narcissistic ego and allow him to function. All those other acolytes following his every word, waiting to be lovingly lied to, are the natural progression from that. The ultimate point to all this is that, whatever the legal realities of the court case are, it seems that this whole process for Trump -- not being in control, needing to follow the direction of the judge, having to listen to witnesses under sworn oath saying terrible things about him, needing to sit the entire time, not being allowed to say anything, having to get to court early rather than start his day as usual at 11:30 AM, none of his family there in support, only one supporter outside and on and on -- all that and more is clearly taking a huge toll on him. It's there in his hunched-over shuffling through the hallways, in his grimaces in court, in him seemingly so tired and bored that he's dozing off during testimony, in his needy claims of non-existent huge crowds, in his continually being unable to restrain himself and lashing out at witnesses and jurors breaking judicial gag orders, Sending a long, ranting post against Jimmy Kimmel having hosted the Oscars five weeks ago and confusing him repeatedly with Al Pacino. Rambling at rallies with inexplicable statements and gibberish made-up words, such as most recently "illegal adlinthin," "magastine" and "weak nicks" that psychiatrists say is often the first stages of dementia. Even Fox, seemingly to offset and explain away what it appears must be clear to them, in case things gets even worse, had host Jesse Watters note how “they are draining Trump’s brain by having him sit all day.” Yes, he really said that. That’s how bad Trump seems. People who work for a living, many in jobs of physical labor, many raising children, are asked to feel great sympathy for Trump for his burden of having to "sit all day" -- lest his brain drain. The presumptive GOP nominee to be president! (Actually what Watters said is even worse, as he added, “You’re going to take a man who’s usually golfing and you’re going to sit him in a chair in freezing temperatures.” Putting aside that no one is the courtroom is bundled and most are in shirtsleeves, how hilarious to hear the credentials of the presumptive Republican nominee for president described, not for his active efforts and exhaustive achievements on the world stage on behalf of America, but -- as "a man who's usually golfing"!!!!) And this was only Day Two of the trial. Which by all accounts is the most unimportant of his four indictments. And only having the first witness so far – and not even a hostile witness at that, but actually one of Trump’s longtime friends. Imagine how much more disturbed and drain Trump will get as this least-important trial drags on and more come pounding on him, as he deals at age 77 with the world he knows and needs, emotionally and physically, is peeled away. Insisting that there are huge crowds of support for him outside the enclosing walls of the courthouse that don't exist is only an indication of it all. The journey of a thousand supporters begins with a single misstep… Jon Stewart made his Monday appearance on The Daily Show, and the main piece he did was a slam on the breathless, hyperbolic coverage of the Trump trial. I thought his criticism was a bit off -- this, after all, is the first-ever criminal trial of former president, and wall-to-wall coverage is not terribly unreasonable, especially since no TVs are allowed in the courtroom. However, the perspective on how over-the-top and repetitive a lot of that coverage is was spot on. More to the point, it's almost all very funny. And funniest of all, without giving it away, is some self-awareness on Stewart's part, thoroughly willing to be the butt of some excellent humor. And as a bonus, here's Stewart's very good interview with Salman Rushdie, about his new book that takes a deep, insightful look at the near-murderous attack on him 18 months ago, and the societal culture where that fits in. It's a very thoughtful interview, but both Steward and Rushdie are able to bring humor to it. The other day, I wrote here about a weird story that concerned Trump going on a bizarre social media rant about Jimmy Kimmel hosting the Oscars. It was bizarre for many reasons. One was that the former president, facing four indictments, running for the White House again, was writing about the Academy Awards. Another was that the Oscars had been held five weeks earlier. Also, that he was ranting about something related to the Oscars that had bothered him so much that it was building up angst inside him for five weeks and felt compelled to write about it all of a sudden with no context to anything else. But most bizarre of all -- even more than all that -- is that Trump repeatedly confused Jimmy Kimmel with Al Pacino. In case you missed Trump's rant or forgot the specifics, here it is again, because it relates to what follows. A couple days ago, amid all the hooey swirling around Trump, with his election fraud trial about to start in Manhattan, a thought about this occurred to me. It was that with all the news and headlines and four court events for Trump that week alone (the trial, the bond hearing, the gag order hearing and the start of Supreme Court oral arguments on "total immunity"), this silly, bizarre, loony rant by Trump had faded into the woodwork. It was just Trump being Trump. Trump being obsessive about Jimmy Kimmel. Trump obsessing about the Oscars. Trump getting details wrong. Trump lying. That's Trump -- and you laugh and roll your eyes and shrug and move on to the next lunacy. Business as usual with Trump. Next! Except, then I also thought -- wait, what if this was President Biden? What if President Biden made a long social media post about...the Oscars? And what if it was a rant? And what if it was personal attack on one person? And what if he lied throughout it? And... and...and...and most of all -- what if in that post he repeatedly had confused Jimmy Kimmel with Al Pacino???!!! If that happened, it wouldn't have been a laugh, a bunch of late night talk show jokes, an eye roll, shrug and move on, next! It would have been blasting headline across Fox for days -- and probably would have been notable news covered by all actual news media. And...it should have been! The President of the United States doing all that, even without repeatedly confusing Jimmy Kimmel with Al Pacino. But add in that major confusion. It would have been a huge concern even in the Democratic Party about if President Biden was losing it, losing his perspective, losing his memory, and wondering if this actually was a first step of actual early dementia. But, of course, President Biden didn't do that. Trump did. And people just laughed, rolled they eyes, did some jokes, shrugged and moved on. Next! It's just Trump being Trump. Totally normal. And so Trump gets normalized. Except -- it's not normal. The social media posting was bizarre. And was troubling for what it said about Trump. His choice of what he felt compelled to focus on and rant about while wanting to be the most powerful man in the world, in charge of U.S. security, his finger on the nuclear bomb, on the eve of four court events that very week and four indictment trials. And repeatedly confusing a TV talk show host for the past 21 years with one of America's most famous Oscar-winning actors. If you keep bringing something up lunatic from Trump's past (and there is mountains of things to bring up), even if the "past" is just a week ago, it's dismissed as "old news," and "that was long ago," and "he didn't mean it" and having "Trump Derangement Syndrome" (a weirdly used name, I might note...) An acceptance that perhaps no one else in public life, but especially in politics, and most-especially presidential politics would be graced with. Yet it's the fact that all this lunacy from the past (wind turbines cause cancer, drinking bleach may cure COVID, airports existed in the Revolutionary War and on and on and on) began long ago and had continued on for years and is getting worse that is the very point of the acceptance and normalization of Trump's growing lunacy and, now, possible early dementia. The same illness that struck his father, Fred Trump. To be clear, this social media post isn't the worst thing Trump has done. It's not in the Top Ten. It might not be in the Top 100. Which is one of the main reasons it's laughed at and ignored. And is normalized, Trump just being Trump. While for anyone else -- anyone else -- it would likely be a cause of concern. And to be clear: as much as "Trump being Trump" sounds like a perfectly standard reason to accept anyone (like them or not) for just being himself, Trump being himself is Trump being a racist, pathologically lying, anti-Semitic, obsessively insecure, malignant narcissist -- found liable by two juries for the equivalence of rape and guilty of a decade of fraud, whose charity was shut down for "a shocking pattern of illegality." But hey, it's just Trump being Trump! I completely understand that people can't hold on to every lunacy Trump throws out into the world. The steamer trunk carrying them all would be much too crushingly heavy. But the point is that it was "loony". And it was, arguably further evidence of what many psychiatrists point out are pieces of evidence of early dementia. And that's nothing that should ever be normalized. For anyone. Including the crazy guy yelling at non-existent owls as city buses pass by. But most especially for anyone running to be president of the United States. Truly, just imagine if that post had been sent by President Biden. But...it wasn't. It was sent by Trump. And laughed at, and just moved on from. Next! But while actions like this by Trump should not continually be accepted as Trump just being Trump and normalized, they should be seen (and I would suggest must be seen) as Trump showing his growingly regular signs every day of craziness and, it seems, a mental breakdown and possible early dementia. Because the man does want to be President of the United States, wants to be a dictator, wants to throw out parts of the U.S. Constitution, and is a fascist and a danger to democracy. No, Jimmy Kimmel is not Al Pacino. And it's seriously not normal for anyone to repeatedly think so. The hors d’oeuvres tray has been ordered, the popcorn has been popped, and the mint juleps have been prepared, complete with little umbrellas. It’s going to be a fascinating week in the ongoing soap opera, "The Trials of Trump." The festivities start on Monday with a double-header. First, with the jury now selected, the Manhattan criminal trial of Trump for election fraud begins. If Trump is melting down this much already, after merely jury selection when all he has to do is literally just sit and do nothing -- and his ALL CAPS social media rantings are pretty manically concerning, as is his dragging, disheveled physical appearance -- imagine how worse it will be for Trump once the trial actually starts! And he hears people testifying under oath against him about committing crimes -- including from some witnesses who he considers loyal to him, but are sworn to tell the truth at risk of perjury. And recordings are played of him discussing his alleged crimes, and documents are presented with his signature. And this malignantly narcissistic, total control freak can’t say a word and has to sit there in polite silence. But that’s only Game One for the opening on Monday. Because also that same day is the court hearing to determine if Trump’s $175 million bond will be accepted, a problem since the bond company (with its own questionable history) is not being licensed in New York which is required by law. Given that the whole reason that the bond is needed in the first place is because Trump was found guilty of business fraud for overstating the values of his assets, it certainly removes the “benefit of the doubt” option of "This was just a bookkeeping oversight, Your Honor" from Trump’s defense. Further, Trump knows that if the bond isn’t allowed, New York Attorney General Letitia James will be able to start seizing Trump properties and selling them off. And it’s not just that he knows this in relation to the hearing…but he also will know it while sitting in court for his criminal trial, trying to be polite and silent, aware that his possessions might be taken. And all that is just Monday. We have the whole rest of the week ahead of us. On Tuesday, that is the critical gag order hearing, when Trump finds out if there will be sanctions against him for claims that he violated the gag order – violated them not just once, but 10 times. And if so, what will the sanctions be? There have long been debates about how a former president running for office again could be sanctioned and done in a way that is meaningful. Greater speech prohibitions might be problematic as infringements on his rights as a political candidate. Prison causes issues with his ability to campaign and with Secret Service protection. Money penalties are likely to have little impact on him, not just for his wealth but because Trump tends to send out email fundraising pleas and let his acolytes (or the RNC, now led by his daughter-in-law) pay his legal bills. But I have a suggestion – not that it will necessarily be listened to. While one other possibility is home confinement, my suggestion would be much more meaningful, I believe. It’s to put Trump in a court holding cell overnight. Just one night, for starters. He could be ordered to show up late, perhaps 10 PM and then let out early at 7 AM -- well-before the work day begins and he has time to wash up, get ready and meet with his lawyers before having to be in court. Doing this would not be putting him in prison, nor would it interfere with campaigning. After all, no campaigning events or meetings would take place during those hours. That's when people are asleep. But being put in a locked holding cell alone for 9 hours with the lights out would be hell for Trump – and have a meaningful impact on him. No one to talk to, not in control of his life, locked in a room, alone in the dark. Just one night might be enough to terrify and panic him into not breaking a gag order again. (All the worse for him, perhaps, for being a germophobe.) Further, since it’s not being sent to prison and only overnight when there’s no campaigning, it would take away a lot of any “substantive” outrage by Trump and his cult. (Though of course, they’ll all cry outrage even if he was locked in a Chucky Cheese for an hour with free pizza and games token.) But that’s my wish. But wait, there's more. Because that brings up Thursday. And Thursday’s Child, which as the rhyme says, “Has far to go.” On Thursday, that’s the day the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments about whether or not Trump has “total immunity.” This is something that Trump has long been putting full faith and insistence in, to make most of his troubles go away. And while I have no confidence in guessing what this Supreme Court will do, it is extremely difficult to believe that the Court will grant not just Trump, but any president “total immunity.” By Trump’s own lawyer’s argument in the Appeals Court, that would mean any president could order the Navy Seals to kill his political opponents. Even to this overly-political Supreme Court, that seems about 100 bridges too far. They might possibly grant a wider view of immunity than exists now (expanding the idea of what official acts by a president are), which could conceivably help Trump somewhat, but that’s only a might and possibly and conceivably, and so Trump’s fondest wish of “total immunity” would appear to be improbable. Not only because Trump is now not president, and such “total immunity” powers if granted would fall immediately to President Biden, but mostly because it seems anathema to democracy and the rule of law. Trump does get a breather on Wednesday -- not only are there no other court hearings, but there's no Manhattan trial that day either. On the other hand, he will have all this time to ponder the walls on all sides of him. And as the rhyme goes, "Wednesday's Child is a child of woe." It fits. And nothing on Friday. But then, it's always good to leave a day open at the end of the week, just in case you need it. That is some hectic week in court. Sorry, I mean courts. And now, let Monday begin!! |
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
|