Courting Disaster

​I was going to write about the circus grift on the White House grounds on Sunday, an embarrassment filled with flying motorcycles, razzle dazzle and corporate pay-to-play branding that reprehensibly misused military honor guards and had absolutely nothing to do with America’s 250th anniversary or “Freedom", and didn’t even mention that the day was the 250th anniversary of the founding of the U.S. Army, but was only a gaudy extravaganza to massage Trump’s massive, but fragile ego.

But instead, I thought the announcement that Department of Justice (sic) was opening an investigation of California Gov. Gavin Newsom and his wife Jennifer Siebold Newsom was more worthy of longer comment.

Gov. Newsom is, of course, one of Trump’s most vocal and harshest Democratic critics, and considered a political rival who is strongly believed will be running for president in 2028.

His wife founded two charity foundations, the Representation Project, a nonprofit organization, and co-founding the California Partner's Project, a nonprofit that promotes gender equality.  She is also a documentary filmmaker.  From all reports, legal experts say that it looks like she is being investigated for tax violations.

Another probe is believed related to Newsom's former chief of staff, Dana Williamson, who was indicted last year on nearly two dozen federal charges and pled guilty last month to three counts on wire fraud, filing a false tax return and lying to an FBI agent. Gov. Newsom was not related to any of the charges.) 

Is it possible that Jennifer Siebold Newsom did commit a tax violation?  Absolutely.  Is it far more probable that she didn’t and Trump’s DOJ specifically was illegally targeting her just for being married to the Governor of California who Trump hates?  O dear heavens, of course!  Most assuredly.  “Probable” is the most low-key, yet fully accurate term I could think of.  (For that matter, even if she did commit a tax violation, it’s still illegal to target someone just on the basis of who they are or what they said, without first having the evidence of a crime.)  This certainty of targeting is not said for biased reasons, but because the Justice Department actually has very strict guidelines with many steps required before investigating political figures or their families -- none of which were followed.  Moreover, there are reports the First Assistant U.S. Attorney did actually, specifically target Newsom.  (More on that in a moment.)  And furthermore, not long ago, Trump said that Gov. Newsom should be investigated and that “I think it would be a great thing.”

 But even far more to the point, here is just a little list of Democratic politicians, government and public figures, and journalists who have been outspoken critics of Trump and then been indicted or had investigations opened against them by Trump’s DOJ as part of his "I Will Be Your Retribution" Malignant Narcissism Tour.

("Your" will be herewith defined as "My.")

Gov. Gavin Newson, (D-California)

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-California)

Gov. Tim Walz (D-Minnesota), political opponent 2024

Mayor Jacob Frey (D-Minneapolis)

Mayor Kaohley Her (D-St. Paul)

Mayor Ras Baraka (D-Newark)

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Arizona)

Sen. Elisa Slotkin (D-Michigan)

Rep. Jason Crowe (D-Colorado)

Rep. Maggie Goodlander (D- New Mexico)

Rep. Chrissie Holihan (D-Pennsylvania)

Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Pennsylvania)

Rep. Lamonica McGiver (D-New Jersey)

Letitia James, NY Attorney General

Attorney General Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota)

District Attorney Fani Willis (D-Fulton County)

District Attorney Mary Moriarity (D-Hennepin County)

Jack Smith, Former DOJ Special Counsel

James Comey, former FBI Director

John Brenan, former CIA Director

Christopher Krebs, Former Cybersecurity Agency Director

John Bolton, Former National Security Advisor

Jerome Powell, Federal Reserve Chairman

Lisa Cook, Federal Reserve Governor

George Soros, Democratic Megadonor

Don Lemon, Journalist

Georgia Fort, Journalist

ActBlue, Democrat fundraising organization

Southern Poverty Law Center, civil rights organization

Cassidy Hutchinson, Former White House Aide

E. Jean Caroll, who twice successfully sued Trump 

Gee, what a long list of coincidences.

As Henry II said of the Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Becket to no one in particular, but to everyone in earshot.  “Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?” 

And then Becket was arrested.  And executed.

And as Trump said, in praise of China dictator Xi ending presidential term limits.

"He's now president for life. President for life. And he's great.  And look, he was able to do that.  I think it's great. Maybe we'll give that a shot some day."

​Some day.  Or as he said running in the 2025 campaign, "I want to be a dictator, but only for one day."

Back to Gov. Newsom and his wife.  The investigation of them is reportedly being run out of the U.S. Attorney's Office in Sacramento, overseen by First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli.  He's the same lawyer who has opened an investigation into supposed election fraud in California, claiming even he would have indictments in one to two months…despite asking radio listeners for witnesses to support the "allegations".  As noted above, there are reports that Essayli told his staff to find a case specifically against Newsom that he could then prosecute.  (No, not "find me a crime," or something for which there was existing evidence, just something for which he could open an investigation about and after that try to find evidence.) This, not shockingly, is not how any prosecutors office are supposed to run by guidelines, where evidence of crimes are brought to them first, and then investigated to be able to prove them.

 John Flannery, a former Assistant U.S. Attorney, is the former boss of MS NOW’s Ari Melber.  He was a guest yesterday, and Melber asked him his view of all these investigations and indicts.

 Flannery’s extemporaneous response was a Masterclass in the law and democracy.  Its off-the-cuff eloquence built up force as it went on, so fluent it seemed he almost did it in one polite but enraged breath.  As offended by the misuse of his lifetime profession as he was angry by the trampling of the Constitution.  When I went back and transcribed it, the only thing I decided to change was adding punctuation marks in his non-stop soliloquy because that made it easier to read. 

“My view is that we make a mistake when we talk about ‘weaponizing.’  There’s a big difference between having a broad discretion to investigate a crime, but when you start something frivolous, when you have nothing but a fishing expedition, when you choose the target based on their visibility as a presidential candidate, and his wife to pressure him -- and because she’s active in the area talking about sexism and has had movies [she’s made] and so forth -- then what you have is, you have the appearance of attacking people for what they say, the First Amendment, and it’s the First because it is the way that we challenge the government, and nothing could be clearer in this case than that.  And when we’re challenging the government, no less than Justice Jackson said that if something is fundamentally improper, then it’s inappropriate and wrong and unconstitutional.  And we turn to the 15th and 14th Amendments to find the guidance for that.  ‘Due process’ means ‘fundamentally fair.’  This is not fair.

 “When I was an AUASA, if I was talking about where our investigation stood, and we hadn’t indicted and there hadn’t had a public hearing, I’d have been fired.  These people are not fired.  Why?  They gave answers and they tried to rebut the target of their investigation.  Why?  Because that’s what Trump wanted, whether he says it exactly or not.  They said, ‘We’re here in Sacramento, what do we have to do with D.C.?’  Well, you’re only a phone call away from the Oval Office.  And we see from the New York Times disclosures and others, there are no barriers to these people cooperating in violation of our laws and Constitution.  So, what do I think about it?  It’s a major miscarriage of justice, and if I was a judge we would start investigating with a Master and some funds, because we have some data points already.”

 But as pointed as John Flannery was, it was Gavin Newsom whose statement was the most powerful.  Newsom chose to get out front of the story, but instead of making it all about the investigation of himself and his wife, he turned the tables and did what you do to a bully, bluntly and aggressively made it about Trump and his abuse of power.  Right from his first words --

​In recent days, federal agents have knocked on the doors of family, friends and former employees.  Not because they found a crime. Because they are simply trying to find one. They are demanding records.  They are abusing the grand jury process.  Digging through years and years of random documents. Donald Trump isn’t just coming after me because of my mean Tweets.  He’s coming after me because I am considering running for President.  Because he hates that I’ve consistently called him out – over and over again – for his lies and deceit. Donald Trump is simply the most corrupt President in American history. He has turned the levers of government into his own personal power ministries to reward cronies and to try to jail his opponents.  His personal attorney now runs the Department of Justice, which has repeatedly gone after his political enemies. Ask Jerome Powell.  He sent them after James Comey.  Tish James.  Adam Schiff. He sent them after Tim Walz. And a woman that a jury found Donald Trump had sexually abused. One by one, anyone who has challenged Donald Trump has ended up on his hit list.  And today, I proudly join that list. 

​Newsom was only warming up.  He went on, unrelentingly.  

​​After calling for my arrest last year, Donald Trump directed his Department of Justice to investigate me. And just in the last week, I’ve learned his campaign has reached my own home: to get me, he’s coming after my wife, Jen. A public servant. A woman who has dedicated her life to supporting women and girls. Someone who has done nothing wrong, other than having the temerity to advocate for what she believes in. If they can’t intimidate me, they’ll go after the mother of our children. Donald Trump picked the wrong target. We have nothing to hide.  His political operatives can take every record and read every page. But they’ll be looking in the wrong place. Because if they really want to find corruption, look no further than 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Donald Trump is selling the presidency. He is running the largest cash heist in American political history — trading foreign tariff relief for approval of his golf courses. Day-trading behind the Resolute Desk. Reaping hundreds of millions of dollars in personal profit. He is doing it openly. He is doing it on camera. He did it last night on the White House lawn.  He is doing it through cryptocurrencies. He is doing it through the receipt of a $400 million private jet from a foreign government that he plans to keep when he leaves office. Through his sons’ ventures in countries where his own administration is simultaneously making policy. His personal fortune has skyrocketed by $4 billion since making his return to office.  This is the behavior of a regime, not a republic.  The White House has become a marketplace. A marketplace for sneakers, coins, and watches… cologne, guitars, bibles, and phones. Influence for sale. Access for sale. 

​​And in the end, Newsom concluded with a directness to his rival –

"To Donald Trump, who I know is watching, because he watches everything, I have a message for you. You can subpoena my records, you can investigate me, you can harass me, put my name on every and any enemies list you have, but leave my wife and family out of your personal vendetta."

I don’t know what the ultimate result of all this will be.  It could completely backfire on Trump and vault Governor Newsom’s stature higher and into the leading Democratic front-runner position.  Or not.  There even could be an indictment or worse.  But given Trump's history with these retribution attacks, the former seems far more likely.

But as blatant and infuriating and abusive and corrupt and disturbing as Trump’s action is (and of course it’s Trump’s action because it’s hard to imagine an Assistant U.S. Attorney investigating the Governor of California and his wife, a politician who is an outspoken critic of Trump and is seen as major Democratic candidate for president, without the approval of the Acting Attorney General of the United States – a man clearly auditioning to become the official Attorney General – who wouldn’t act on such a thing without the approval of Trump, the person who can appoint him), I look at this the same way I look at all such actions by Trump:

As terrible as any Trump actions are and harmful to the United States…they are just as harmful in return to Trump, and at times even more so.  An ongoing disaster for him.  Self-inflicted, time and again.  Because at this point, with only a paltry 34% approval, the American public knows who Trump is, a small-minded, insecure, malignant narcissistic, pathological lying, wannabe fascist dictator with dementia that is degenerative -- who just held a gaudy,  razzle dazzle, circus extravaganza to massage his massive, but fragile ego.  And as hard  as it is to miss that whole, long list of Democrats and any level of opponents who’ve been investigated or indicted by his DOJ, it is near-impossible to miss Trump's government investigating the wife of the Governor of California, the largest state in the country, and the Governor himself who is seen as a candidate for the presidency

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNWMBA9oqWE

Last Week Tonight Last Night

If you didn't see "Last Week Tonight" with John Oliver on Sunday, his Main Story was on the By-Election in Makerfield, England.  And while that might not sound like a report of great interest -- it was, and was wonderful.  First, it's an election that could determine who the next British Prime Minister is, and second -- any story about politics in England is the ideal set-up for John Oliver to be glorious and hilarious.

I'll just add to stick around to the very end because, ever the professional comic, in order to go all in and pay off a great joke, be sure to check out Oliver's expression at the 28:09 mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZL_TctrNco

Let's Make a Deal

This is ludicrous.  The only people who think that what Trump announced as being a Great Deal is, actually, a “Great Deal” are MAGAs who also think that Trump is from God, the greatest president in U.S. history and sane.

This is a "Great Deal" only if you think it's great that when Trump had to pick which of the three possible doors the Grand Prize was hidden behind, he instead chose Door Number Four.

 To start with, before even getting into the "deal," three things must be remembered:

 1.  At the start of Trump’s war of choice against Iran, he said that he would only accept “unconditional surrender.” 

2.  We had a nuclear treaty with Iran before Trump tore it up.  This included a promise from Iran that it would not pursue nuclear weapons. 

3.  Before Trump attacked Iran, the Strait of Hormuz was wide open and free.

 So, what does his “Great Deal” accomplish?

 It pauses the fighting and extends the current ceasefire for 60 days -- a current "ceasefire" during which both sides have continued fighting and bombing each other. 

It reopens the Strait of Hormuz, which was open before Trump attacked.

In addition...well, no, that's pretty much it.

 Actually, the better question to ask is what doesn’t it accomplish?

It does not end the war.  This only pauses the fighting.  To actually end the war, the two sides actually have to still negotiate all those pesky details.

It does not open the Strait of Hormuz to immediately “Let the oil flow,” as Trump crowed that he was "ordering" -- which only Iran could order.  That’s because there are still mines laid in the Strait which will need to be swept and removed.  It will take weeks, if not months (if not many months) for the oil to “flow.” 

The “Great Deal” still doesn’t have an agreement signed off with Israel, who can break the “Deal” apart since their interests with the threat from Iran are different from the interests of the United States.  Something that could weaken our relationship with Israel, a great enemy of Iran. 

The deal does not state what concessions the United States will give to Iran, which most analysts say will include some sort of payment – whether it’s unfreezing Iran funds (the exact same thing President Obama had done that Trump slammed him for doing) or paying reparations, even if Iran will have to meet certain conditions,  or some other form of payment.  Payments – it must be noted -- which not only do some analysts say will be massive, but will also allow Iran to purchase missiles to replenish its arsenal that the U.S. had destroyed.

(How massive? Just this morning, VP "JD Vance" confirmed reports that as long as Iran met "certain obligations" they could have access to $300 billion in reconstruction funds!!!  Let's put this in mind-numbing perspective:  Trump and MAGOPs went ballistic when President Obama unfroze $1.7 billion of Iran's own money. This is $300 billion that we would pay to Iran!  Also, $300 billion is almost 600% more than the entire budget of Iran!  It's one full year of the country's GDP.)

The “Great Deal” not only does not accomplish a regime change, which was an initial goal of Trump’s, but a more hardline regime is in place in Iran with a much younger leader.

 And there is no agreement of any kind to do with Iran’s nuclear program, which Trump said was the entire reason for him attacking Iran and starting the war in the first place, the only thing (beyond even caring how American were affected) that he said he cared about.  And which Iran has said it will not give up.  That has to be negotiated.  Which is a whole lot to negotiate

Nor is there an unconditional surrender that Trump had insisted he required.

So, to recap –

There is no end to the war, just a pause to continue the existing ceasefire pause. 

 The Strait of Hormuz, which had been open before Trump attacked, will re-open in perhaps a month.

There is no regime change.

There are no details about Iran’s nuclear program, which was the point of Trump’s war.

 We will likely make some sort of huge (possibly monstrously enormous) payment to Iran which will allow them to refill their missile arsenal. 

And for all this – it has cost the United States a minimum of $30 billion.  Trump’s war of choice has drastically depleted our own long-range missile stockpile which will have to be replenished – which will take a long time and cost a great deal of money.  Our allies in the area have not yet agreed to the deal. There are 13 Americans dead (and thousands of Iranians, including a 200 schoolchildren).  And Iran showed it is stronger than it was before and now has leverage by demonstrating they can stop the flow of oil by controlling the Strait of Hormuz with drones.  With the same regime younger and more hardline. And cost Americans an extra $60 million in higher gas prices and inflated airfare alone -- along with inflation rising 50% to its highest rate in three years.

And all of this comes without knowing the details of the "Great Deal."  And not knowing what's to come.  Well, as they say, the devil is in the details.  Unfortunately, since what we do know is so empty (at best) and bad, it's like the devil is also in the Oval Office.

So, basically, for a minimum of at least $30 billion in government costs and lost lives and $60 million paid by American consumers, we depleted our own arsenal of missiles to get Iran to eventually open the Strait of Hormuz which was already open before Trump attacked the country.  And will likely give a now-strengthened, more hardline Iran a potentially gargantuan amount of money to rebuild their missile stockpile we destroyed. 

Calling this a “Great Deal” is only a “Great Deal” if you ignore two things:  the meaning of the word “Great.”  And the word “Deal.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vLq9CYizsY