Sunday, January 29, 2017

1.29.17: Q: Where Are We? A: President Trump's America

President Trump's executive order on Friday banning the issuance of visas and other immigration benefits from seven Muslim countries - Yemen, Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Libya - caused spontaneous demonstrations at international airports across the country.

The executive order doesn't exclude green card holders, which is an I-551 visa giving you the right to travel freely to and from The United States.

From the executive order...
(source: http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politics/text-of-trump-executive-order-nation-ban-refugees/)

     I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas).

The green card visa is not included in the exemption, which hence denies people their rights. That's why White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus was very careful to say "moving forward" it would not affect green card holders, but right now anyone outside of those exemptions is supposed to be turned back.

Is what President Trump doing lawful? Yes. Is it antithetic to American values? I'd say, "most certainly," and I'd add that it is counter productive to what Mr. Priebus said the executive order was designed to do, which was keep the American people safe. It actually puts us at greater risk. And to top it off, the president has said that in these countries, we'll give religious preference to Christians and other minority religions.

But as The Wall Street Journal's Kimberley Strassel pointed out, President Trump is fulfilling campaign promises.

Senator Tim Kaine's (D-VA) rhetoric seemed a bit over the top, or did it? He said it wasn't a coincidence that the executive order of visas and a Holocaust Remembrance statement from the White House that didn't mention Jews were issued on the same day.  Actually, I think it was a coincidence that they were issued on the same day but not that they had the same sentiment, which plays right into Steve Bannon's reputation and track-record - anti-Semitic and xenophobic.

It wasn't an accident that Donald Trump used the phrase "America First" in his inauguration speech, widely concluded that Mr. Bannon had a hand in writing it. That was the name of the American movement in the 30's that was opposed to involvement in WWII and advocated staying neutral between Britain and France vs. the Nazis.

And speaking of Nazis, here's the White House Statement on Holocaust Remembrance Day:

“It is with a heavy heart and somber mind that we remember and honor the victims, survivors, heroes of the Holocaust. It is impossible to fully fathom the depravity and horror inflicted on innocent people by Nazi terror.
“Yet, we know that in the darkest hours of humanity, light shines the brightest.‎ As we remember those who died, we are deeply grateful to those who risked their lives to save the innocent.
“In the name of the perished, I pledge to do everything in my power throughout my Presidency, and my life, to ensure that the forces of evil never again defeat the powers of good. Together, we will make love and tolerance prevalent throughout the world.”

And don't forget the major diplomatic rift we now have with Mexico, which is squarely the president's doing, but yet completely unnecessary. There's also a whiff of suspicion about the fact that not included in the executive order travel ban are any majority Muslim countries where the Trump Organization has business ties.

Mr. Priebus with regard to the executive order - "apologize for nothing here," and on not mentioning Jews in the Holocaust Remembrance statement, "no regrets." Not to mention the fact that he couldn't even bring himself to say during the interview (to clean this up) that Jews were killed during the Holocaust, saying insufficiently that "Jews suffered." Suffered

The New York Times's Thomas Friedman assessed that the executive order wasn't thought out enough, but it doesn't seem like it. It leaves one to alarmingly ask, "Where the hell are we?"

Panel: Kimberley Strassel, The Wall Street Journal; Doris Kearns Godwin, presidential historian; Thomas Friedman, The New York Times; Michael Steele, former RNC Chair

Sunday, January 22, 2017

1.22.17: KellyAnne Conway Should Just Stop - Alternative Facts are Falsehoods

With all due respect to KellyAnne Conway, reciting that Donald Trump won the election over and over again has gotten old due to the childish nature of how it is used as a counter argument to every question from the press.

If she and White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, and their boss the president are upset at their treatment from the press on the first day, then "too damn bad," as they say because this isn't going to get any easier especially if Mr. Spicer intends to continue with giving 'alternative facts' as Ms. Conway outlined what he said.

Alternative facts? Alternative facts are, indeed, falsehoods. Ms. Conway's admission of the press secretary using alternative facts is as stupid as it is stunning.

Ms. Conway spoke defensively, so much so that she lost her cool, which clearly confirmed that she didn't have any adequate or acceptable answer to give Chuck Todd's single question of "What was the motivation of the press secretary to go out on his first day and state falsehoods? Why was that necessary?"  It really is ridiculous, which Ms. Conway took offense to, and said that Mr. Todd was laughing at her. At this point, Ms. Conway played the victim, which is another tactic that she needs to stop. Ms. Conway works in the White House, the ultimate bully pulpit so he attempts to illicit sympathy for being attacked really shows weakness of the Administration's character.

One last thing about Ms. Conway's interview... She said that the mere presence of President Trump at CIA Headquarters shows that he has respect for the intelligence community. Right. This magnanimous gesture was really just the president covering his butt on the fact that he compared CIA staff to the Nazis a week ago in a tweet. And if the intelligence community thinks that Donald Trump has respect for them, sympathetic to the scope of dangerous work they do, then they're not very, well... Intelligent.

Suffice to say that I've lost my patience with KellyAnne Conway because she's incapable of answering a question in a non-defensive tone and to give an answer based in verifiable fact aside from one, that Donald Trump won the election.

Mr. Todd went hard at Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) about holding up confirmations, like for the prospective new CIA Director Mike Pompeo, accusing the senator of playing politics, trying to give equal tough treatment to both sides.  In this case it is unwarranted but Mr. Todd is hamstrung in taking this tact lest he be accused himself of favoring one side over another... again.

Even if Mr. Schumer is playing politics with the confirmations, so what. No president has ever visited CIA Headquarters on his first day and no CIA Director has ever been confirmed on the first day. The senate will vote Monday and Mr. Pompeo will be confirmed. Again, Ms. Conway lecturing anyone of delaying confirmations is disgusting Republican hypocrisy due to the fact that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) blocked the confirmation hearing of Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court.

This isn't going to get any easier for the Trump Administration and nor should it. The administration has done this to itself. It's strange to me that the most powerful group of people in the world is incapable of collectively coming up with a single statement that is compassionate or magnanimous in tone.  President Trump has yet to say one thing in terms of outreach to the millions of Americans who didn't vote for him. Hence, bigger crowds than anyone expected showed up for women's marches all over the world.

And one more time, though the panel was pretty inconsequential in terms of their impact today, I have to draw exception with something that the ultimate cynical enabler aka Hugh Hewlitt said about Donald Trump's inaugural speech. Mr. Hewlitt said that most memorable (important) line for him was that the president said he was going to destroy Islamic terrorism completely.  First, that proclamation is incredible hyperbole. Never mind that Mr. Trump said the country is a disaster, "American carnage," is the term he used. Oh, and forget about the fact that he also used the phrase "America first," which is a phrase that isolationist Americans with Nazi sympathies like Charles Lindbergh used in the 30's to dissuade the public from helping England and France in WWII.  In 16 minutes, Mr. Trump disheartened Americans and scared our allies around the world. Way to go. Mr. Hewlitt would say that he wouldn't have done it that way or that he's not defending it, before going on to defend it.


Panel: Kristen Welker, NBC News; Eliana Johnson, Politico; Hugh Hewlitt, Salem Radio Network; Chris Matthews, NBC News


One more thing...
Is Tom Barrack a member of the administration? Does he speak for the president?


Sunday, January 15, 2017

1.15.17: [NOTES] John Lewis, Reince Priebus, Dianne Feinstein and The New Abnormal

John Lewis, Reince Priebus, Dianne Feinstein and The New Abnormal

Panel: Helene Cooper, The New York Times; Danielle Pletka, American Enterprise Institute; Rich Lowry, The National Review, Jeffrey Goldberg, The Atlantic Monthly

This Week:
Trump's nepotism hiring of son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

Trump's 'bizarre' (Chuck Todd's word) news conference. Concede 'bizarre,' but it was definitely not presidential.

Inspector General opening an investigation into FBI Director James Comey's handling of Hillary Clinton's emails.

Senate Intelligence Committee opens investigation on Russia's interference in our election.

And then,
Congressman John Lewis (D-GA): Trump isn't legitimate. "I think the Russians participating in getting this man elected."
Finds the prospect of working with Donald Trump almost impossible.
The legitimate comment - understand that he said, but I would have advised against it.

John Lewis: Will never forget or forgive Donald Trump for saying Vladimir Putin is a better leader than Barack Obama.
A shameful statement from Trump, and yes, he did say that.

Trump's Reaction to Congressman Lewis's statement on 'legitimacy':
Your district is in horrible shape and crime infested. All talk talk talk, no action...
Again, not presidential - not even close.

Reince Priebus Interview

Mr. Priebus: It's shocking he, John Lewis as historic as he is, would question the legitimacy of the election. What he said was irresponsible.

About Michael Flynn talking to the Russian ambassador 5 times on the day new Russian sanctions kicked in...
He's the national security advisor and he talks to our countries' representatives everyday, it's part of his job. But, it's not his job, yet! So did the White House Chief of Staff on "Meet the Press" just acknowledge that Michael Flynn violated the Logan Act?

Trump and his methods of communication...
Rich Lowry: Welcome to the new abnormal.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Trump is easily trolled. What happens when someone like North Korea or China say something he doesn't like?
His response to John Lewis was not an appropriate action.

Danielle Pletka, on John Lewis comment: Russia doesn't necessarily want Trump, but they want people to question everything. John Lewis didn't mean to help that cause, but he's in effect helping that.

Helene Cooper: Twitter tantums are not the way a president should respond.

Danielle Pletka: This is what the American people chose.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) Interview
She regrets the president-elect's response [on John Lewis's comment] - not seeing the bigger picture.
Trump needs to step up and realize he represents the whole country.

Chuck Todd: Did Russia interfere with the election, and did it affect the outcome?
Senator Feinstein: Yes and yes. The aim was to bring down Hillary Clinton, a sophisticated two-year operation.

The senator is not ready to say that James Comey should be fired, yet.
The Wall Street Journal: Comey must resign.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Director Comey has united Republicans and Democrats - neither are happy with him.



Sunday, January 08, 2017

1.8.17: [NOTES] McCain, Graham, Conway, Carter - Russia and Obamacare

On the subject of Russian interference in our democracy:

Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) - Joint Interview

Senator McCain: I believe our intelligence officers

Senator Graham: If President-elect Trump is still skeptical that Russia tried to interfere with our   elections after the briefing, that's deeply unnerving to me... If one party is compromised, we're all compromised... I want to give Donald Trump the opportunity for Russia to pay a price. I want more sanctions, more help for the Baltic states. If he's still unsure, that will shake me to my core.

KellyAnne Conway - counselor to the president-elect
Russia allegedly attempt to influence the election, but they did not succeed in embarrassing this country on the world stage. They did not succeed.
When Donald Trump is president, he will meet with his intelligence team and then decide what to do.

Andrea Mitchell, NBC News
It's the attempt itself.
It's not just cyber, but also the propaganda wars.

David Brooks, The New York Times
Steve Bannon, senior advisor to the president-elect, wants a new world order of national populists against Islam. [read: Alliance with Russia]

Rick Santelli, CNBC
The timing of these intelligence briefings and release of the findings are politically driven.
[Congressional] hearings are kabuki theater.
You [NBC political reports] chose sides during the election. Impugning the integrity of reporters at his own network. Andrea Mitchell takes exception to this.

Ash Carter, Secretary of Defense
It's an aggressive act against our democracy.

On Obamacare:
Repeal and Replace
Clips of Senators Rand Paul (R-KY), Bob Corker (R-GA), Tom Cotton (R-AR) saying that it must be done simultaneously.

Rick Santelli
No problem with repeal, but a problem with the replace, because it will cost to much money.
Analogy of comparing healthcare to cars, each having components.

Andrea Mitchell
A silly analogy [a shot for questioning her integrity earlier in the show].

Prediction: repeal for certain, replace will leave a lot of people without coverage but with more "choice," and the replace will cost a lot of additional money.


Sunday, January 01, 2017

1.1.17: Whoa Is The Media in The Age of Trump/ (Sabbatical)

Only a dork who comments on "Meet The Press," wouldn't immediately raise his hands up and tune out when Mr. Todd introduced this week's program as a special examination of how the press should cover the news in the Age of Trump (capitalized because now it's an actual thing). Not exactly a ratings winner on New Year's Day and if Mr. Todd is in the studio by himself on what really isn't a slow news day given what happened in Instanbul last night (not mentioned), then just given everyone the day off.

Mr. Todd has focused on this very topic many times leading up to this point and it seems that he just doesn't know, asking as many people on-air as he can in an attempt to find out or passive aggressively trying to get everyone on the same page. The latter, I admit, is pretty dismissive, but more dismissively, one could say, "You what Mr. Todd - Media - get your act together and get over yourselves." But I wouldn't say that.

Hal Boedeker of the Orlando Sentinel said that journalists have to keep doing their jobs. In its simplicity, it's still the most insightful. He also pointed out that when you cite the specific press source, people take it more seriously. I think that Mr. Todd conflates what he does as a television political reporter with the established print media too much because they really are different animals, as it were. Editor-in-Chief of The Wall Street Journal, Gerard Baker, and the Executive Editor of The New York Times, Dean Baquet, showed complete faith in the journalistic mission. There is an obligation to the local community to disseminate information about the more practical matters in life - school and road closings, etc. - so there is that base-level trust. For political media, digitally and on-air, the audience is making values judgements. That local level of trust is one reason that makes the press the most likely of institutions to have the ability to regain public trust.

The other reason, and here is where the networks prove their profound relevance as well, is access to confidential sources with the government or administration.

Anyone who works for a government institution, to some degree still believes in the notion of the institution, no matter how ever 'seized upon' you think said institution is. There is also the believe in like institutions, a predisposition of trust to present the truth. People like that don't just go to anyone who will listen, not how it works. And when the stark reality of tragic events - a mass shooting or hurricane/flood - slap an administration in the face there's no shading the actions taken and how the American people react to to those actions.

Did the press completely screw up the coverage of the election and the national mood? Totally. Did they give Donald Trump a free pass on a lot of things - maybe, maybe not - but he definitely duped them all, on any given day.

If I had my two cents, I'd say to cut quickly through the bullsh*t, and stick aggressively to the substance. As noted on today's program, the press needs to find out more about Mr. Trump's businesses, no one even knows all of what he owns exactly. And more ominously, who or what government he's indebted to.


Panel: No panel, really.

A couple more things...
I want to take this opportunity on the very first day of the year to thank you for reading the column. We are, in fact, optimistic for the coming year of 2017 and I wish you all good health and fortune.

With the above said, I'm taking a sabbatical from writing the column for a couple of reasons. One, it has been a crazy and tiring election year and everyone needs a break to recharge. Plus there's still a lot of unsettled business to attend to: an inauguration, cabinet hearings, the first legislative priority out of the gate. I thought I'd wait until all the smoke clears to really have any inclination of how the future will come into focus.  Plus, there's some other writing I'd like to focus on, the time for which is long overdue. How long a sabbatical exactly? Not sure, honestly.

In the meantime, I'll be active on twitter: @MTPOpinion

Thanks again.