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.
0 Comments
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. This was quite a find and will be a tremendous treat for people who watched the recent PBS three-part series Nolly, which starred Helena Bonham Carter. If you haven’t seen it, there’s still a lot to like in this (and I’ll give some background), but again, for those who did see the show, it may blow you way. A friend highly-recommended I watch. While I wasn't bowled over by the show, I definitely enjoyed the first episode enough to keep watching, and liked the second episode even more. It was very well-produced, Helena Bonham Carter was wonderful, and it had some excellent supporting performances -- but -- it was the third episode that totally won me over. That finale episode was truly superb, on a lot of levels. And made it all highly worth-while. Nolly is the true story of Noelle Gordon, who was a wildly popular soap opera star on British television of a show called Crossroads, the queen of British soaps for 18 years – until she was fired with no explanation, sent off into the sunset, as it were, sailing away on the QE2, waving to her show’s ‘daughter’ on the dock. It was a huge national controversy at the time, she was such a beloved personality for so long. She had been on the ATV network for 26 years, and not just as an actress but was the first woman to interview a prime minister on television, and in fact was the first woman broadcast on British TV in color when it was just experimental. And how she dealt with the firing and humiliation, including going on to appear in well-regarded production of Gypsy and handling all the questions of why was she sacked, is the focus of the third segment – which has two particularly superb monologues/scenes in it. (I don’t want to describe them more, in case anyone does decide to watch the show.) For those interested, the whole thing is only about 2-1/2 hours, and you can watch it on the PBS Passport site, which you can see here after signing in with a PBS subscriber account. Here's the trailer. Which brings us to "the find", and the point of this all. This video is an appearance by the real Noelle Gordon on a British chat show that took place less than one week after her final episode aired on Crossroads. The next episode hadn’t even been shown yet. It’s a fascinating interview, open and honest, gracious and pointed, and talks with host Russell Harty about her plans ahead (including working on Gypsy!). There are also a few unexpected moments I won’t give away, but will say it is surprisingly moving at times. At one point, too, she tells a story about auditioning in front of composer Frederick Loewe for the British production of Brigadoon – a story they use in the series, and she adds more detail here. (She got cast in the show, by the way.) She even sings a couple of songs during the interview. If you watch, stick around to the very end, because it looks like they kept the cameras running even after the broadcast was over. Unfortunately, I'm unable to embed the video on an outside website, but you can watch it here on YouTube. 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!! From the archives, and a fun, memorable one. This week’s contestants are Isabella and Francesca Dawas from Minneapolis, MN. And what’s shocking is that they are not twins, which will seem near-impossible as you listen to them, but they only refer to themselves as sisters. It’s possible that they just don’t mention that they’re twins, but it seems unlikely that sisters this giddy, talkative and close wouldn’t leap out to tell you that. As for the game itself, I got the hidden song extremely quickly, and I suspect most people will, since it’s not very well-hidden. As for the composer style, this is one of those areas I don’t know well and I just tossed a coin and guessed someone whose work I don’t know well. To my shock, I was right. I think I’ve guessed this person several times when I’m lost in the weeds, and it’s the first time I was correct. Huzzah!
Hosts Phil Rosenthal and David Wild are joined by Lily Rosenthal. If her last name sounds familiar, that’s because she’s Phil's daughter and now his co-author for a new children's picture book called "Just Try It! (A Phil & Lil Book)" with illustrations by New York Times bestselling author Luke Flowers. As the show writes, “It's a book about a food-loving dad encouraging his picky eater daughter to just try something new.”
|
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
|