We interrupt our Jo Stafford-Paul Weston Fest for an old song parody from Randy Rainbow. In fact, I don't think I've posted this before -- it may be old enough that it came before I came upon the fellow. The song is about Steve Bannon, and it's too remarkably-appropriate for today and Bannon's conviction to not post it. This is even more impressive when you reaiize it's from almost five years ago, August, 2017. All the better, it's a funny song with good lyrics and particularly top-notch editing. Even if there was nothing else, the title alone is good enough.
0 Comments
Oddly, the biggest news of the Select Committee Hearings may have been announced before Thursday’s gathering took place. That’s when the report came down that they would be having more hearings (plural) in September. This isn’t the end – just the cliffhanger before Season 2 begins in two months. Clearly, that’s from all the new information that they’ve been getting, much of it coming after Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony apparently opened the floodgates. Also, I suspect that they hope (and perhaps even expect) to have more information coming as a result of the deleted Secret Service texts. It should also be noted that the Select Committee has said that it would be issuing a preliminary report in September, and that a longer, final report later. Putting these two occurrences together, it’s hard to imagine that more hearings and a preliminary report in September won’t be in some ways impactful before the November mid-term. Is that intentional or kismet? Probably a little bit of both (particularly, in the question of timing, with the preliminary report), but y’know, this is about an Insurrection to overthrow the government and democracy. If the timing doesn’t work out well for the people enabling a coup, that’s a shame. I thought the use of video of Republican leaders Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy decrying the Insurrection in the immediate aftermath was excellent and important. Later on, of course, we know they circled the wagons and played politics, McCarthy most especially. But in the moment of the horror, they spoke what they felt. Even to the degree of talking about removing Trump from office. And it was there on video and audio. I also thought the Select Committee was exceedingly smart in its choice of the two Select Committee members to lead this particular hearing about Trump’s inaction during the Insurrection. Adam Kinzinger and Elaine Luria both served in the military and could speak with great understanding of “dereliction of duty.” The moment I heard this announced, I have no doubt that it was very intentional. And that point was driven home when Rep. Luria made certain to note she served in the Navy for 20 years. And when Rep. Kinzinger said that he too served in the military – and currently serves in the Air National Guard. And with that in mind, the most important comment of the night was perhaps when Mr. Kinzinger said that Trump didn’t "fail to act, he chose not to act.” Kinzinger followed that by specifically referencing “dereliction of duty.” And “dishonor.” It was a theme that got repeated throughout the night, that Trump chose to act, making Trump’s inaction part of a knowing plan, not mere incompetence or callousness. This was later driven home when, during the peak of the mob violence forcing evacuation of the Capitol, we saw that Trump was not calling to resolve the Insurrection, but rather calling senators to try to advance the plot. And the only reason someone like Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) wasn’t able to help Trump at the moment was because he was being told he had to leave at risk of his life. The Select Committee used a particularly smart, indeed clever touch in their management of the evening. All testimony has said that Trump spent the whole afternoon of inaction just watching television, and more to the point, specifically watching Fox “News.” So, the Select Committee showed precisely what Fox “News” had on the air at exact moments when Trump was watching the channel. Making clear he was aware, in fact had to be aware of the mob attack on the U.S. Capitol and overall violence. And their decision to point out that members of Congress who were among those enabling the Big Lie were subsequently caught on video fleeing. Josh Hawley most stands out – giving his “power fist bump” to rile up the crowd, and then later seen not just walking out as senators were evacuated but literally running away to safety. It was also good to finally see far more footage of the White House lawyer Pat Cipollone’s testimony, which has only been hinted at and teased the week before. For all his substantial words, probably the most meaningful was when he named all the people present at the White House on January 6 who wanted the mob dispersed – but left out one name. Unwilling to reveal communications with Trump. But adding, “I think you know.” Everyone at the White House wanted the mob dispersed, everyone. But one. But perhaps the most wrenching footage and radio traffic was of danger faced by the Secret Service protecting Vice President Pence. And above all, audio of the security official describing how personal some of the calls from agents were, saying goodbye to family members. It was so emotional to the official that he didn’t want to talk about it. On the other end of the spectrum, the oddest revelation of the night was hearing that the official White House photographer was told not to take pictures there on January 6. As odd as that story is, it is also deeply telling. Since the only serious reason you wouldn't want someone -- whose sole job is to take relentless photographs for history and the official record -- to not take any pictures is because you have something you want hidden. Which is a pretty clear focus on consciousness of guilt. Or perhaps it was the raw footage of Trump preparing for his January 7 speech, unable to say the words that the election was over. Though clearly, because the words were written for him, he knew that's how everybody who mattered felt and felt so strongly that they wanted it said. As for the two witnesses, it was especially important to have Matthew Pottinger right there, the then-Deputy National Security Advisor explaining why Trump’s tweet at 2:24 PM calling Vice President Pence a coward pushed him to almost immediately decide to resign. “Pouring fuel on the fire” was the appropriate phrase repeatedly used about that tweet, which witness after witness was horrified by. By the way, I had one other takeaway from this. Why Mike Pence thinks he has a snowball’s chance of getting the Republican Party nomination for president is delusional and one of life’s mysteries. The base of the GOP still considers him a traitor, the man who kept Trump from still being president, who many of them wanted to actually kill. That’s not going to be forgotten anytime soon. And you can drop the word “soon.” Pottinger was also particularly eloquent when he spoke when one goes through the court appeals process, to then not accept court rulings is an attack on our rule of law and democracy. Sarah Matthews, the former White House Deputy Press Secretary, wasn’t as impactful as Pottinger, but added a great deal in describing her efforts to try and write the proper and appropriate words Trump needed to say, all of which were rebuffed. And when it was clear she would have to be put in the position of defending Trump’s action, she knew she couldn’t and so she too resigned. If I had any complaints about the hearing it was what I consider two omissions. The first was not repeating relentlessly that Trump's inaction for 187 minutes. They discussed his inaction, but not the the specific, galling length. "All afternoon" is not as meaningful as "for over three hours" and "for 187 minutes" Trump did nothing, over and over. And the other is that I'd have loved if they used a timeline to keep those three hours in perspective. Having "markers" all along the way would have let people focus more clearly on where things stood all along the way. But those things aside, it was handled very well. Adam Kinzinger’s angry closing speech was particularly strong. Hammering the point about dereliction of duty and the Insurrection being a stain on our county. Making clear that this wasn’t merely about January 6, but that the “forces Donald Trump ignited that day have not gone away. The militant, intolerant ideologies. The militias," he said. "The weird fantasies & disinformation. They’re all still out there, ready to go.” Laws are just words on paper, he said, they mean nothing unless public officials support them. “Oaths matter, character matters, truth matters.” Closing with making clear that that unless we support these, the shining city on the hill (his nod to Ronald Reagan’s conservatives) will not endure. What I liked most in Elaine Luria’s closing statement was that she again returned to the point of the night – that this isn’t about inaction. It’s more than that: Donald Trump summoned the mob. Attacked the Vice President. Commiserated with the mob. And in her best comment of the night, drawing a subtle, but clear line to showing this was all a part of a plan we all hear mad in the open public, saying about his words praising the mob, “It was his newest version of ‘Stand back, and stand by.’” And once again, Liz Cheney had a superb summation of the night, with controlled outrage. And for me, the best thing she said – which was said throughout the hearings, but not nearly as eloquently as last night, and should be front and center – was to make clear that the witnesses we have heard at each hearing have not been Trump’s opposition enemies. They have been his staff, family, friends, lawyers and advisors. All acknowledging their involvement being there when it all happened. And we will leave it to The Happenings to reiterate her final words. Continuing with our tales about Jo Stafford and her husband Paul Weston that I’ve posted the past two days, this goes off in another direction and is a real treat – for a couple of reasons. At the heart of it is that is a segment of The Jack Benny Program in 1958 when Stafford and Weston come over to Jack’s house, and he tries to get them to record a song he wrote. And it’s so terrible that the only way they can think of getting out of it is by channeling their 'Jonathan and Darlene Edwards' alter egos, and audition another song for him (the Jimmy Van Heusen-Sammy Cahn classic, "All the Way") as horribly off-key as 'Jonathan and Darlene' would. A little background about the song will add to the scene. This is a running gag in the series. Jack is convinced it’s the greatest song ever written and can’t understand why it hasn’t yet become a huge hit. And he’s always trying to get guests to record it. But no one ever will. No one even wants to merely consider being remotely associated with it, trying to avoid hurting his feelings, but usually -- after he doesn't take the hint -- having to eventually explain how terrible it is. The song is “When I Say ‘I Beg Your Pardon,’ That’s When I’ll Come Back to You.” And it’s pretty bad, most especially as big hit songs go. It also helps to know that there’s one specific word in the song where everyone always stops and almost shouts it out again to Jack in bewilderment – and in exasperation he always explains why he properly used it. But there are two other treats in the sketch. The first is that the main guest in the sketch is the great Ed Wynn, who is thoroughly joyful here. (He does miss a cue at one point, but Paul Weston covers for him.) And the other treat is that near the end, another big name, surprise guest comes along. And what adds to the fun is twist on the whole, ongoing effort. If you didn't see this yesterday, buckle your seatbelt. This a yowza response by Jamie Raskin to Congressman Chip Roy (R-TX) who infuriated him about totally misinterpreting the Constitution, which one really shouldn’t do to a Constitutional scholar. Especially one who you know is a Constitutional scholar. Jamie Raskin is really good at this. And clearly not only had enough, but knows that this is far too important an issue today that rest on decorum. This is tour-de-force. I'm unable to embed the uninterrupted video of his response, but this video from the MeidasTouch folks is the next best thing, only slightly interrupted by their commentary for about 10 seconds. Back in 2020, I wrote about the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact – and then reposted it here with much more information this past June. A few things have come up recently that make it worth addressing again.
Just to quickly reiterate, the Compact says that a state will give all its Electoral votes to whichever candidate wins the national popular vote – not to the candidate who wins its state. In order to not disadvantage states who adopt the Compact early, the law doesn't kick in until enough states have passed it so that their collected Electoral votes add up together to a minimum of 270. That, of course, would then be enough to give the election to the candidate who won the national popular vote – regardless of how other states vote who haven’t signed the Compact. After all, once a candidate receives those 270 Electoral votes from the states who have passed the Compact, that candidate is elected president. One reason this is more in the news is because a bipartisan bill has been presented in Congress to address at least some of the problems with the current presidential election process. It does not deal with anything about the Electoral College, which they can’t do unless it’s voting on a Constitutional Amendment. But at least the bill recognizes there are serious problem with presidential elections that needed fixing. Mostly, it focuses on reforming the Electoral Count Act of 1887, and reforming the process of certification. Among some of its features, the bill makes clear that the Vice President’s role is purely ceremonial and cannot affect results. It requires 20% of each chamber to challenge a state’s certification, not just one person each as is currently the case. It also addresses alternate slate of electors – if a state had appointed a slate of electors before a specific deadline, that will take precedence over any electors appointed after that deadline. The governor of a state must certify these electors – if not, the matter can be appealed to federal court and that decision is final and must be used by Congress. There are other items in the bill, and it will not doubt go through changes. A companion bill also helps protect poll workers. You can read more about it in detail here. It’s not a lot, but it’s a solid start given the problem. And it’s a massive problem, one I’m not only more convinced needs to be fixed, but convinced the Electoral College has to be eliminated. It’s a wildly different world from 1776, and being the only country in the democratic world that doesn’t elect its leader by popular vote is not just crazy, but as we’ve seen, leaves the election open to massive ways to abuse it. Which returns us to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Since I last wrote, this is where things stand – The Compact has been enacted in 16 states who total 195 electoral votes. Among those states are California, New York, Illinois, Colorado, New Mexico, New Jersey, Maryland, and Massachusetts. Additionally, and importantly, the bill has now passed at least one chamber in nine other states that have a total of 88 additional electoral votes. These are the House in Arizona, Arkansas House, Michigan and Minnesota. And the Senate in Maine, North Carolina and Oklahoma. Additionally, the Compact passed both the House and Senate in Nevada, though it was unfortunately vetoed in 2019 by Gov. Steve Sisolak -- very surprisingly (and unfortunately), he's a Democrat. But given the changed political landscape, and him being a Democrat -- up for reelection in the mid-terms -- perhaps his view on the matter will be seeing it from a wider, now more-urgent perspective. But the specifics add even more encouragement. In Michigan, for instance, an initiative petition in September, 2021 has now been signed by 340,047 Michigan voters to put the issue on the ballot. The campaign is waiting approval from the Michigan Board of Canvassers. Yet also, a majority of Republican state senators and also a majority of Democratic state senators have sponsored National Popular Vote bill in the Michigan Senate – that’s 25 of the 38 Michigan state senators as sponsors. The only question mark is that that was done in September, 2018, nearly four years ago, so it still has a hurdle to overcome. The larger point being that along with those states where the Compact has already been enacted, these states above would give 283 electoral votes, 13 more than needed. Yes, that’s still an “if,” but it’s nonetheless states where the bill has already been at least partially passed. Furthermore, the bill has had unanimous approval votes in legislative committee in both Georgia and Missouri. That's an additional 26 electoral votes. Meaning that, right now, there are 309 electoral votes in active play. Meaning that there is a wiggle room of 39 electoral votes to work with, above the 270 needed. It’s clearly a slow process, but it’s made serious progress, and the potential of passage is not a pipe dream, but realistically possible. If you're interested in reading more, the National Popular Vote organization has a pretty good and extremely detailed website with articles, videos, updates, a breakdown state-by-state and more, which you can find here. |
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
|