Monday Reads: Clearly Unfit to Serve

Not a float. Not satire. Actually the @realDonaldTrump. #BeAshamed

Good Morning Sky Dancers!

Every day releases a new barrage of evidence and reasons to throw every thing we’ve got into the arsenal of removing this unfit and clearly illegitimate president. The latest Dumped Trump appointment went on Sixty Minutes to discuss the many ways he experienced an unsuitable personality for any serious job actively chip away at American law, constitutional values, and norms. I’m not sure if I’ll actually read former FBI Director Andrew McCabe’s book since it just verifies what we know.  However, it is certainly yet another Tell-All that shows us how deeply in trouble the we are because the Republican Party refuses to act on its sins. We clearly are reaching the point where ridding the country of this parasite is our only way to a decent future.

I spent Saturday night at the Krewe de Vieux parade in my first chance to do Carnival Season where I could avoid the news but not politics. I’m going to share some photos of the floats and krewes which are clearly political.  This is not exactly a G rated krewe so be care viewing some of the videos if you’re sensitive to crass stuff.

 

And this was clearly my favorite. My friend Grace snapped a pic of her in the den.

Back to the Paley interview and this link that will let you watch it if you missed it.

McCabe is a lifelong Republican who had a sterling 21-year career at the FBI; serving as head of counter-terrorism and number two under Comey. But he was fired last year for allegedly lying to his own agents about a story he leaked to a newspaper. Not since Watergate has the FBI been drawn so deeply into presidential politics. Andrew McCabe was pulled into the center of the tempest on May 9, 2017 when he was summoned by the president hours after Comey was fired.

This is probably the best look we’ve had to date of what started the Mueller probe. It seems to have come directly from the number of Trump Campaign-Russian interactions that we’ve heard about for the past 3 years.  This is from Carrie Johnson at NPR.

“I don’t know that we have ever seen in all of history an example of the number, the volume and the significance of the contacts between people in and around the president, his campaign, with our most serious, our existential international enemy: the government of Russia,” McCabe told NPR’s Morning Edition. “That’s just remarkable to me.”

McCabe left the FBI after 21 years last March, when he was dismissedfor an alleged “lack of candor” in a media leak probe unrelated to the special counsel investigation.

While he declined to conclude that Trump or his advisers colluded with Russia, McCabe said the evidence special counsel Robert Mueller has made public to date — including new disclosures about an August 2016 meeting between former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Konstantin Kilimnik, whom the FBI has linked to Russian intelligence — “is incredibly persuasive.”

 

Trump worried McCabe from the outset with what CBS characterizes as a “bizarre” interview.

Before he was fired from the FBI, Andrew McCabe was summoned to the Oval Office to interview for the position of FBI director. “It was a bit of a bizarre experience,” says McCabe, recalling his meeting with President Trump.

“He began by talking to me about his Electoral College results in the state of North Carolina, which I didn’t really know about or understand how that related to the position of FBI director,” says McCabe.

Mr. Trump also talked about “the support that he enjoyed within the FBI,” says McCabe. “He estimated that 80% of FBI employees must have voted for him, and he asked me if I thought that was true. I said, ‘I have no idea who people in the FBI voted for. It’s not something that we discuss at work.'”

There are more really strange anectdotes including Trump indicating that he wanted McCabe to say that every one in the FBI supported the Comey firing which was clearly not true.  But meanwhile, we have bigger fish to fry at the DOJ in its current state. From Morgan Chalfani at The Hill: “Five things to watch as Barr takes the reins of Justice, Mueller probe.”

Barr is expected to make major changes at the Justice Department, beginning with his choice for deputy.

Rod Rosenstein, who had been overseeing Mueller’s investigation, is expected to depart in the coming weeks after two years on the job. Barr told lawmakers last month that Rosenstein had informed him of those plans and that he had agreed to stay on for the transition.

Various names have been floated as potential candidates for the role, which is subject to Senate confirmation. The New York Times reported that Barr intends to name Jeffrey Rosen, the current deputy secretary of Transportation, to serve as his No. 2.

It is unclear whether Barr will keep on Matthew Whitaker, the controversial figure whom Trump appointed acting attorney general following Sessions’s ouster. Whitaker, a former U.S. attorney in Iowa who worked as Sessions’s chief of staff, quickly emerged as a top target of Democrats as a result of statements he made criticizing Mueller’s investigation before joining the Justice Department.

Whitaker tangled with House Democrats in a testy hearing earlier this month, during which he defended his decision not to recuse himself from Mueller’s investigation and insisted he had done nothing to interfere with the probe. Whitaker also frustrated lawmakers by refusing to answer various questions about the investigation and his conversations with Trump.

Even if Barr does not decide to keep Whitaker, some say it’s possible he could find a new home in the White House.

“He had to navigate some pretty treacherous waters and he did that very skillfully and if the president is looking for someone else to serve the administration that brings some excellent experience under fire, then I think Matt would be somebody that would fit that description,” said Ian Prior, who worked with Whitaker as a department spokesman under Sessions.

Even though real evil is resident in the White House, Republicans clearly want to put and keep Democratic politicians on the defensive.  From Cheryl Gay Stolberg at the NYT:  “Republicans Hope to Sway Voters With Labels That Demonize Democrats”.

In the 116th Congress, if you’re a Democrat, you’re either a socialist, a baby killer or an anti-Semite.

That, at least, is what Republicans want voters to think, as they seek to demonize Democrats well in advance of the 2020 elections by painting them as left-wing crazies who will destroy the American economy, murder newborn babies and turn a blind eye to bigotry against Jews.

The unusually aggressive assault, which Republican officials and strategists outlined in interviews last week, is meant to strangle the new Democratic majority in its infancy. It was set in motion this month by President Trump, who used his State of the Union address to rail against “new calls to adopt socialism in our country” and mischaracterize legislation backed by Democrats in New York and Virginia as allowing “a baby to be ripped from the mother’s womb moments before birth.”

Then last week, Republicans amped it up, seizing on a Twitter post by a freshman representative, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, which even some Democrats condemned as anti-Semitic, and ridiculing the “Green New Deal,” an ambitious economic stimulus plan unveiled by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a self-described democratic socialist. Suddenly even Jewish Democrats were abetting anti-Semitism and moderate Democrats in Republican districts were Trotskyites and Stalinists.

“Socialism is the greatest vulnerability by far that the House Democrats have,” Representative Tom Emmer of Minnesota, the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said in an interview, adding that he had also instructed his team to spotlight “all the extreme wild ideas” that Democrats espouse, “on a daily basis, on an hourly basis if it’s available.”

House Republicans have identified 55 Democrats they regard as vulnerable, including many freshmen. Some flipped Republican seats last year, some represent districts carried by Mr. Trump in 2016, and some are in districts held by Republicans until recently. Bruised by their losses last year, Republicans are determined to start earlier and be more aggressive on the offense in 2020, and are hoping to exploit the Democratic presidential candidates’ courtship of the left.

An advertising offensive is already underway. The Congressional Leadership Fund, a political action committee affiliated with House Republican leaders, began running digital ads last week that link two freshmen who flipped Republican districts, Representatives Colin Allred of Texas and Antonio Delgado of New York, to Ms. Ocasio-Cortez and her “radical Green New Deal assault on the American economy.”

 

But, they have the crazy to deal with all the same and the latest bit sinking Republican Policy is the obvious failure of the tax cuts to deliver to any one but the very rich among us.

Jonathan Swan–writing for Axios–characterizes it like this: “Governing on the edge.”  My stomach frankly can’t take any more of this. I’m an old lady that wants a peaceful retirement and a stable social security income.

A senior government official who was involved in the spending negotiations over the past few weeks told me the experience taught them something disturbing.

“We’re going to go to the edge on everything,” the official said on Friday, shortly after Trump signed the bill to fund the 25% of the government that had shut down for 35 days on his watch.

Why it matters: The White House has just gotten through a spending fight that pushed Congress — and the federal workforce affected by the shutdown — to the brink. But even uglier skirmishes are imminent, including whether to raise the federal government’s debt limit and break Congress’ self-imposed budget caps.

What’s next? In a phone conversation this morning, I asked a senior White House official if he thought the shutdown had any benefit for the Trump administration.

  • “I think it’s absolutely been effective, because the president is winning the message on border security,” the senior official said.
  • Trump “was able to use that 35-day period to highlight that issue and all the polling data that we’ve got seems to indicate that while we did get blamed for a shutdown, the numbers moved dramatically in our favor on the issue of border security,” the official said. “And that never would’ve happened if we’d signed the bill back in December.”
  • (FYI: I’m not aware of public polling that shows a dramatic improvement for the president on border security; though the White House has mentioned private polling that shows numbers moving in their direction in key swing districts.)

I also asked the senior official if he would dispute that characterization that this administration will “go to the edge on everything” — especially on impending battles over 2020 spending levels and raising the debt limit.

  • “If you get the impression that it’s going to be intentional, I think that’s unfair,” the official said. “If you think that’s the practical outcome, that’s probably accurate.
  • “If we know one thing about Congress, it waits to the very last minute to do everything anyway.”

I certainly hope Marcie can make sense of all of this for me.  Here’s her take on the McCabe interview.  Check out her latest dissection of  the four big Trump turncoats or three if you want to dump Manafort.

Four times so far in this investigation, Trump’s aides have started the sentencing process for their crimes designed to obstruction Robert Mueller’s investigation. All four times, before four different judges, their misplaced loyalty to Trump above country has come up. And with both Flynn and Manafort — where the judges have seen significant amounts of non-public information about the crimes they lied to cover-up — two very reasonable judges have raised explicit questions about whether Trump’s aides had betrayed their country.

Trump wants this to be a case of contested claims of betrayal. But the judges who have reviewed the record have used striking language about who betrayed their country.

I doubt we’re going to get any resolution of anything soon but I will say that I hope the Democratic committee chairs in Congress get the lead out!  For some more video and fun on Krewe du View you can check this out!

If you haven’t read this from The Atlantic  with the lede “When James Comey Was Fired” please do so.

 I wrote memos about my interactions with President Trump for the same reason that Comey did: to have a contemporaneous record of conversations with a person who cannot be trusted.

People do not appreciate how far we have fallen from normal standards of presidential accountability. Today we have a president who is willing not only to comment prejudicially on criminal prosecutions but to comment on ones that potentially affect him. He does both of these things almost daily. He is not just sounding a dog whistle. He is lobbying for a result. The president has stepped over bright ethical and moral lines wherever he has encountered them. Every day brings a new low, with the president exposing himself as a deliberate liar who will say whatever he pleases to get whatever he wants. If he were “on the box” at Quantico, he would break the machine.

This quote came via my friend Adrastosno at his blog First Draft who basically headlined his thoughts the same way. “Unfit President”.  You can also read more at BB’s  Valentine’s Day thread here.

What’s on your reading and blogging list today? 

 


26 Comments on “Monday Reads: Clearly Unfit to Serve”

  1. dakinikat says:

    From my friend …. he and I were on the same track this morning

  2. dakinikat says:

    • NW Luna says:

      Certainly there is the question (not really a question anymore) of Trump’s mental stability. Even more important is Trump’s corruption and treasonous actions.

    • quixote says:

      (Gaah! Closeup of revolting mug! Brain bleach running low. Send supplies! #NationalEmergency)

  3. NW Luna says:

  4. dakinikat says:

  5. NW Luna says:

    Schiff is one of our Congresspeole who won’t mess around. He should extend the investigation beyond the NRA to Congresspeople. But now that I think about it, this may lead to them, since there are obvious ties between the NRA and Republicans.

  6. dakinikat says:

    Some one needs to be thrown in jail …

  7. NW Luna says:

    As a clinician, I’m pissed off at this article, in which the author conflates treatment to reduce mucous membrane irritation, abrasions, and infections (and incidentally, reduce pain with intercourse) with a treatment to produce male erections.

    For the elderly and others, drugs are available that aid sexual experience. But insurers and Medicare won’t pay for them.

    • dakinikat says:

      Medicare’s formulary is really really really strange. I’m not sure how they arrive at the silly thing. It seems like maybe clinicians don’t get much input. Maybe it’s a big pharma thing?

      • NW Luna says:

        Medicare doesn’t seem to be as bad as many insurance companies, at least as far as the barriers put in place to discourage you from getting the patient what they need. But contrary to what a lot of people think, private insurance does not cover Viagra. Neither Medicare nor private insurance will cover “non-medical” treatment, by which they mean not only what they consider cosmetic or sexual-health treatment but also dental, audiology, vision. Fertility treatment has usually not been covered but I think that’s changed, which I find odd considering before the ACA many didn’t cover contraception. However private insurance does cover vaginal estrogen medication to treat ‘atrophic’ vagina, aka venerable vagina, as it can help prevent genitourinary irritation and/or infection. It doesn’t act to increase blood flow to the clitoris, so the author’s assumption that it’s the female equivalent to Viagra is incorrect.

        I recall one insurance company which covered any and all formulations of testosterone for testosterone insufficiency (this is an extremely rare condition, contrary to what pharma advertising tells men), but would only cover one formulation of estrogen.

        Long ago I gave up expecting health insurance policies to have anything rational about them.

  8. dakinikat says:

  9. Minkoff Minx says:

    I haven’t been able to even read the blog because of the mental issues the news has just dragged me down to…I’ve avoided Maddow, and tonight my dad forced me to watch it. This shit with Roger Stone and threatening a federal judge! Why is he not in fucking jail, bail revoked? My blood pressure is so up, I can hear the pulse in my ears!

    • quixote says:

      I’m with you JJ. The only kind of news I can deal with is text where I have control over how long I spend on any part of it. There’s just too much that’s utterly awful and if I can’t skip over it, I’d be biting the furniture.

      As for Stone, Yes! My question exactly!

    • dakinikat says:

      I am right beside you.