Shart of the Deal 2: The Takers

 

This blog (me, Vixen!) understands that Trump thinks of himself as the Deal-maker, and his mishpocha love that for him. We discussed The Shart of the Deal a minute ago, and it's holding up. He imposes a threat, and will accept any terms that make him look like he got his "deliverables". He just got the Mexican president to send 10,000 troops to the border that were going anyway. He got Justin Trudeau to agree to the same kind of commitment he was already making. 

It's ok--just so long as Trump gets to take credit for something, even if it was nothing he actually accomplished (other than demonstrating to our allies that his government is duplicitous and not to be trusted, ruining our relationship in a completely shartastic way!)  And the 30-day pause probably just means we get another round of Trump drama. 

But the thing to recognize is Trump didn't do anything other than wreck our allies' faith in us Just like him patting himself on the back for the flow of the water (which is idiotic) into lakebeds that have nothing to do with the already-contained LA fires. It's bullshit--but he's a tv president for dipshits who watch too much tv. 

Which brings me to Elon Musk--his avatar Vizier and the shadow-president. 

Trump takes credit. I don't know what Musk is taking--but it's a whole lot, because he's rooting through our servers, gathering our information, and I have no earthly idea what all he means to do with it. But he is using boys young enough to be his sons to do it. 

Egads, I Hate JD Vance.

 

Of all the trifling twats that ever twatted triflingly, JD Vance feels like he might be both the most trifling and twattiest. The adoption of Trump's victimization fetish that the US has been "taken advantage of" is so uniquely lame and fucked up. Did Lady Liberty get railed by the big old Lumberjack? How sway? 

Trump himself conflated the Canadian trade deficit thing with our actual US debt, which this asshole put 8 trillion American dollars on. As a member of the party that DOES NOT swan about preaching "fiscal responsibility" while racking up losses by granting tax cuts to the rich at every opportunity, um. 

Fuck you. Fuck you from the soles of your shitty unspurred feet to the crown of your molting head. And what I say for Trump goes ditto (megadittoes. even!) for his mini-me. 

JD Vance tells stories. That is to say, more appropriately, he lies, and he knows and accepts that he lies. 

Let's know and accept that. too. And acknowledge how unacceptable that behavior is. 

TWGB: Putting us on the Map

 

You know, maybe Trump can't end Russia's war in Ukraine with a phone call, or bring the hostages home from Gaza, or really do anything at all in the Middle East except make things worse, and maybe he won't bring down grocery prices and it's a whole lot to think he'll do much about fuel prices, but maybe he and his magic Sharpie can change the map! 

The Gulf of Mexico was the Gulf of Mexico, before there was a USA. If we have a national security issue regarding Greenland, well, we have had an air base there since 1943--Pituffik, formerly known as Thule. (Does he think it went away because the name changed? He seems to have a problem with accepting that military bases can change their name but still exist. His sense of object permanence is fleeting.) 

Stupid or Bad Faith?

 

Rampell: Do you know that there actually was bipartisan legislation intended to to increase our fentanyl detection technologies at the border. And trump killed it.

Jennings: You keep fighting these old battles. Donald Trump won.. Mexico has to do something.

Rampell: They have… pic.twitter.com/szaKgKSuGI

— Acyn (@Acyn) November 27, 2024

This is why I think cable news is basically worthless: someone like Scott Jennings (it could be so many other GOP mouthpieces, though) will argue something that is either based in sheer ignorance (possible) or they HAVE TO know better than, but this is the GOP line and their "job" is to defend it. The networks can argue that they are doing this for "balance"--but that's not what it is. They are airing out a position that is basically absurd with no penalty for either lying or being as dumb as a stump.

I used to go back and forth with myself about this kind of representation, especially at the top of the Bush years. Is it ignorance, is it lying, and what's worse?

And the answer is: what does it matter? If a position is completely detached from facts, it just is bad. Donald Trump winning an election doesn't change the facts of what is happening at the at the border with Mexico any more than George W. Bush winning affected whether invading Iraq over WMD's (dumb--or lying?) was a good idea. 

Speaker Johnson Can Get Lost

 

I have some questions about just what Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House, thinks his job in the US House actually is, because he said this:

“President Biden falsely claimed yesterday he needs Congress to pass a new law to allow him to close the southern border, but he knows that is untrue,” Johnson said. “As I explained to him in a letter late last year, and have specifically reiterated to him on multiple occasions since, he can and must take executive action immediately to reverse the catastrophe he has created.”

Ok, he's wrong on what needs to be done, because closing one border doesn't actually fix immigration but even if Johnson doesn't understand the problem is bigger than just "people try to come though the Mexican border and Biden isn't fixing it" the solution is that we have an equal but separate branch of government that could compel him to do so.  It's in the Constitution--he can check it out. 

The Senate worked on a bill because they understand their job--get things done. If the border and Ukraine funding and funding for Israel are all bundled: figure out a way. But in addition to denying ANYTHING needs to be done about the border during what Republicans have been alleging is a crisis, Speaker Johnson is going to deny the House voting on the Senate bill and wants to put up a standalone bill for aid to Israel. And claims he was cut out of being briefed on the Senate bill. 

Oklahoma Republican Sen. Lankford says that just isn't true--and I believe him. Maybe Mike Johnson claims that God called him to be another Moses, but in real life he knows he's Speaker of the House because Trump suffers it. And Trump already told us what he thinks about a border deal or Republicans who would support one. 

The GOP are Not Serious People

 

During a discussion about whether to ban TikTok, Nikki Haley called Vivek Ramaswamy "scum" in the third Republican debate on Wednesday, as the two presidential candidates once again went at each other repeatedly and fiercely on the debate stage. pic.twitter.com/lWXqHM7xAt

— CBS News (@CBSNews) November 9, 2023

You know, I only like one thing about Nikki Haley, and it is her palpable dislike of Vivek Ramaswamy because: Girl, same.  He's a smug know-nothing jerkface who says outrageous things trying to provoke a moment when he is way out of his depth but finds himself in an environment where people hear sizzle and think "steak"--not "flash in the pan."

She just isn't much better, she's only been at it longer, and that is the feeling I get about the 2024 GOP field. And Trump has been at making up shit and getting applauded for it longest and is best at it, and wasn't even arsed to be there so, DERP! He won. By sheer default. As in, he didn't show up, but, um, neither did anyone else there. Chris Christie attacked him--but from a little place called "too little too late." And while Nikki Haley said Trump wasn't right for this time, she never really articulated why or let us know if there was some PRESSING REASON for his not being right. And we all probably know she'd vote for him--right? 

As for Trump, the twice impeached and four-times indicted one-term wonder, he said his friend Lil' Kim the Rocketman, who sent him "love letters" was responsible for over a billion people. 

Trump, confused: Kim Jong Un leads 1.4 billion people

(North Korea has a population of 26 million) pic.twitter.com/yJua4sbG7m

— Biden-Harris HQ (@BidenHQ) November 9, 2023

He's maybe thinking of President Xi of China? But who knows, when this is a guy who thinks Hannibal Lecter loves him?  (Hannibal Lecter, can you believe? We're hearing more and more good things. A man of excellent taste.)

TWGB: The Apple of Putin's Eye

 

There might be some residual gasps in the collective politics-viewing audience at the idea that Trump doesn't want to do any debates but get over yourselves--Trump never did. I remember when he ran a weird veterans' charity telethon thingie that ultimately resulted in a settlement regarding his fake charity, just for the purpose of dodging a primary debate in 2016. (His kids were even sentenced to "how not to rip people off" school.) He never changes. And in his circumstances, why debate? How awkward would it get, after all, him with the two impeachments and four so far indictments and 91 charges? 

He of all people knows he has the right to remain silent. (But can he?)

So of course he has to give something in return to focus your weary eyes on himself, so he's sat with Fox News has-been Tucker Carlson for what will certainly not be just an hour or so of indulgent ball-stroking. I'm sure the taint will be involved. (Oh, my goodness! Was I scatalogically minimizing Carlson's professionalism? Fuck no. Everyone knows paying attention to the taint is essential good whoring practices.)

Where was I? Oh, anyway, Trump says the weirdest things in the friendliest of interviews--like when he just recently told us he was the apple of Putin's eye, and that's why he'd be able to finagle the deal to end the war in Ukraine. 

Would it Have Made A Difference?

 

When most people hear that Trump was thinking of firing missiles into Mexico to take out the cartels and then act as if maybe some other country did it, I'd like to think they would see all the many problems with the plan right off the bat. Like. leaving aside the moral or legal questions (which never would occur to Trump, anyway), we are firing over what border with what missiles, now? It wouldn't exactly take Sherlock Holmes to sort out what had taken place. Are we sure we could pin-point the location of cartels without so-called "collateral damage"? 

It's bad because it violated international law, sure, but it's also really fucking stupid. And yet, from the stable genius mind that wanted to make a moat next to the border wall and booby-trap it, is it so hard to believe? That's right--we heard crazy-ass shit from behind the scenes of the Trump Administration quite a few times. We already knew he wanted to shoot immigrants in the legs (they did get tear gassed). It's not, then, a shock to also know he wanted George Floyd protesters shot in the legs, as well. (They also got tear gassed. Apparently, Trump's bloodlust is mollified by having a little chemical warfare, as a treat.) 

Trump fans knew what he was when they picked him up. I don't think they would have been put off by those things at the time, any more than they were put off by the prospect of extortion of other world leaders or some light treason. Not when Trump could point to the wreckage and say "See? I was doing something."

That may sound incredibly pessimistic, and it is. We can criticize Esper for saving it for the book, but unlike with journalists whose principal duty should be getting these things out, I can appreciate what Esper saw his duty as being (swatting these sorts of things down--weekly!?) at the time. 

I just know that if there is a next time, Trump will find people less inclined to swat him down. He will have his own Lavrovs, Peskovs and Shoigus. 

I don't think we can say how things would be different for sure if Esper told the world then. It's like conservatives pointing out the violation of the Alito leak rather than looking at the scope of the argument. The real horror is that Trump is a mad idiot--but we knew that. The real horror is also that a large part of the population still likes their mad idiot. That's the bit to organize against. Everything else is theater criticism. 

Opinion: Bret Stephens Should Get Stuffed

 

For Democrats, comprehensive immigration reform presents an "opportunity to defuse the political bomb Republicans would love to plant right under them. And it’s a jobs-creating infrastructure program to boot," writes Bret Stephens. https://t.co/85RmS1adbx

— New York Times Opinion (@nytopinion) April 6, 2021

The wall is not a jobs-creating infrastructure program; it's a symbolic boondoggle that doesn't actually work because people can go over it, under it, and around it, and building it wouldn't defuse the political "bomb" the Republicans keep lobbing because it is a basically rhetorical bomb and we don't defuse those by accepting their framing.

He uses a vehicle crash (grisly enough) as his example of what's bad about immigration--shouldn't there have been another barrier for these people to have butted up against before their collision? (And if my mother was a quill I could have been a poem....)

Here's the grisly part: the wall, and the policies of Trump, didn't actually stop people from wanting to come here. They come here because they believe the US is nonetheless, a better place to live. Treating people who are amongst us with compassion is a choice we can make for us--the inducements for migrants to come exist whether we decide to be bastards or not. 

He seriously writes this admitting all the reasons he's not actually quite right: he knows it's not a true physical barrier and doesn't address the root causes, but says it's better to try and give the Republicans something they want in order for a chance at comprehensive reform. But no--the wall option exists in the first place, as far as I can tell, so that Republicans can focus on that, call it a plan, and never deal with the actual hard thinky/worky bits.  

The wall itself isn't a serious bargaining chip--it's a talking point. If you give them that, they don't need anything else. The wall is the barrier to real conversations about immigration. (It's also an environmental disaster and a shambles for property rights on the border, for a whole other conversation.)

A wall as an opening is not good symbolism, or anything else. 

Nielsen Bites the Dust

One of the worst moments, perhaps, of outgoing DHS chief Kirstjen Nielsen's tenure was probably the time she sat in a Mexican restaurant and got hollered out by DSA activists. How in the hell was she there appreciating the food of Mexican culture, likely prepared by people of Mexican and maybe other non-US western hemisphere descent, after defending policies that treats these human beings like they are not properly human? Because this is the inflex point between understanding people are people, and not seeing them as such. She didn't think about where she was and how it connected to what she was doing. What was happening at the border was not supposed to intersect with her life.  Who were these illegal entrants to the US, and who were their support group, anyway? 

There are so many really bad moments to choose from in Nielsen's DHS admin. Her hearings were closemouthed and clueless. Who admits they don't exactly know how much how much border wall there is and how many kids have died in CBP or ICE custody or acts shocked that separation policy psychologically damages children? She boldly stated that asylum seekers were illegally entering the US, when this is the only way they can seek asylum, and denied there was a separation policy, when this very policy had to be later defended and was rejected by the courts. 

(And they still do.)  ("Defensive asylum" can be claimed wherever the claimant got through, and it should be up to a court to determine the validity of the claim, however loose the proofs of such might be--but this isn't up to DHS. This is why Trump is currently going fucknuts about judges.  He just hates immigration he can't control, period.)

Anyway, a more detailed story about her resigfiring (my term for people who have been told by the administration to go get up on their shield and ride it out) might be made that includes her attempts to warn Trump of how continuing legally-scrapped policies would be unwise or how isolated she was in terms of supporters, but I can't see how it matters. When being asked to do immoral things, she declined to leave.

I don't know what I should think about the removal of Secret Service director "Tex" Alles, either--especially having happened so precipitously on the heels of the arrest of the woman who was rather conspicuously not supposed to be at Mar-A-Lago.

(Can I just address this bit:

Secret Service agent Samuel Ivanovich, who interviewed Zhang on the day of her arrest, testified at the hearing. He stated that when another agent put Zhang’s thumb drive into his computer, it immediately began to install files, a “very out-of-the-ordinary” event that he had never seen happen before during this kind of analysis. The agent had to immediately stop the analysis to halt any further corruption of his computer, Ivanovich testified. The analysis is ongoing but still inconclusive, he said.

Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article228963409.html#storylink=cpy

Um, I think Q did this sort of thing in Skyfall  and everyone was like, "Shit, this millennial Q is such a rookie why is he even?" and it was one of the only bad things in Skyfall.)

Anyway, my theory of Trump is he wants all his shit super compartmentalized to maintain lots of control, so of course he does not like Secret Service being really hands-on. He loves people having access at his Winter WH and probably tries to maintain an own-brand security perimeter that keeps actual government agency professionals at a distance.

Because he loves crimes. Also hates transparency. And also needs lackeys to keep up his super dubious border crisis position. So that is my opinion of Trump and I know, I have said all these things before.

UPDATE: Here is part of Nielsen's legacy. I don't know if CNN or Fox has an option on her already, but please, think about whether what she accomplished was truly reprehensible before offering her ass a job in any opinion-making forum. Her opinions are contemptible.

Should This Stand?

This is going to be a pretty short post because it's already the wee hours and I am certain there will be great shades of fuckery to confront on the morrow, but there is something especially weird about the tendency that President Trump has to undermine the various intelligence agencies who actually do the work of gathering information and analyzing it to provide context that should inform Trump's decision-making process. This relationship should not be either adversarial, nor should it be a top-down thing where Trump dictates what "reality" is.

The IC has provided credible information that ISIS is still active, that North Korea has not stepped down its nuclear program, that Iran is still largely abiding by its nuclear agreement, and that while border security is important, the overland threat is sort of not that big a priority. And Trump rubbishes it all, and then posts the above Tweet that tells us not to believe our eyes and ears about what IC professionals who have sworn an oath to protect and defend this country are saying, believe Trump! Trump might trash treaties and hate NATO and not even understand what defending allies is about, and for that matter, believes climate change is a hoax even though the Pentagon takes it seriously now, and has been doing so for years.

Any person with an open and rational mind, being confronted with information from people who have made it their lives' work to provide high-quality information in the service of their country, would try to incorporate at least some of it into their own frame of reference to try and do their own job better.

Not Donald Trump. He seems to find expertise suspect and is intensely uncomfortable with the very idea that he might not be the smartest person in the room. And it seems like he prefers to take his cues from actually stupid people, like the cast (I cannot call them "journalists") of his favorite shows on the Fox News channel.  Could anyone think for an instant that Lou Dobbs knows more than the FBI about law enforcement or counter-terrorism? (Dobbs has the distinction of being an original "birther" and having been dropped by CNN for his especially anti-immigrant views. His only distinguishing quality seems to be his bigotry.) Let alone weighing in on the rare genius of other Fox personalities like Tucker Carlson and Jesse Watters, who do not understand that the sun and wind still can generate electricity even when it is very cold, because they are functionally science illiterate, and who promote racist propaganda because they are...

Well, by any stretch, not persons who should be trusted over the actual people doing national security work, anyhow, regardless of whatever low esteem they should actually be held in. But it nonetheless remains that Trump, despite having qualified professionals that could provide him with good information, prefers his entertainment to inform his world.  Quite possibly because he lacks the attention span for anything other than "the shows".

But there are fewer professionals available to try and amend Trump's odd mental topiary,  owing in part to the thanklessness of the job and Trump's own limited arsedness to replace the brain-drain in his administration with good quality people, if he could even get them. In fact, his recent shut down was explained somewhat anonymously as an opportunity to purge careerists--quite baldly admitting that expertise wasn't really the Trump Administration's thing.  

Long story short, Trump harps on the Deep State because competent people see through his bullshit, and this gives him a lot of discomfort. So how long will anyone want to stay on when words will be put in their mouths, and their genuine assessments will be supplanted with Trump's casual falsehoods? Especially when he prefers, when his lie is called out, to continue not listening. 

The Trump Shutdown

It isn't an entire year that Donald Trump has been president, and yet, with Republicans in control of both houses of Congress, the government is now facing a shutdown because, as everyone probably should have known during 2016 but just enough failed to take into account--he hasn't the least clue what he's doing. 

He articulated a lot of promises during the campaign about building a wall that Mexico would pay for (but it most certainly will not) and deporting millions of undocumented immigrants. That sort of thing doesn't seem very in line with the idea of crafting "a bill of love" with respects to DACA recipients, anymore than his basically ending it by executive order did. 

It really doesn't make sense then, that Democrats should be faulted for the GOP deciding to hold both DACA and CHIP beneficiaries hostage in the continuing resolution debate. And yes, this is exactly what they had done, as Mitch McConnell, may his neck skin rise up to swathe his breathing holes, clearly Tweeted:

The intention being to bully the Democrats into picking CHIP kids over DACA, and probably ensuring DACA protection would never happen. I mean, the GOP basically considers DACA to be an amnesty. Trump put DACA on the line. Majority Leader McConnell never did boo about renewing CHIP. If the GOP cared about either, they could have easily ensured their continuation--even without Democratic agreement (although they would have had it). Instead, they held them to lord over Democrats for a continuing resolution that there's no real reason to believe the Democrats would have been against if there hadn't been hostage-taking by the party that happens to be the "government shutdown experts" in the first place. Thus resulting in the first time a government shutdown has occurred with a White House and Congress both in the same party's power.

And of course it's Republicans. Because they can't govern, because they don't seem to know what government is for.

Trump, the populist common guy communicator and all around deal-making sonofabitch, who bragged to all and sundry that he could get shit done, got no shit done. The wall isn't happening, the GOP, trying to pin the failure of the CR on Dems not loving DACA enough just made it clear who really is supporting Dreamers, and in the meanwhile, funding CHIP is now and always has been a thing McConnell could introduce, right?

The GOP owns this, but as with so many things a lot of people have a piece of the ownership of, let's put Trump's name on this one. This is the Trump Shutdown. The Shithole Shutdown. This is his inaugural 1st anniversary present.  He said he alone could fix it--he can't even explain it. 

And tomorrow, there will be marches. Because we resist.

Pravderp

To be working in the Trump White House? Eventually, sure

I don't know how it can be true, but Melissa McCarthy's over-the-top representation of Press Secretary Spicer's occasionally bombastic style on SNL sort of makes me look forward to tuning in to the real thing. I feel like he's settling down so far as questions are kind of ordinary and procedural about the President's schedule and ordinary things, and those exchanges even show a little humor.

Still some howling moments though. 

Questions regarding whether certain internal loyalty requirements or micromanagement are slowing the staffing of key WH positions was met with a claim that the Trump Administrations was "ahead of the curve". That was pretty much true--in November and December. But it seems like it is lagging now, and not because of Senate delays. The relationship with Mexico was described as "phenomenal"--I guess "awkward" is definitely a phenomenon when one country decides to deport people to another country even if they aren't from there. Spicer also spoke positively about the task force VP Pence will be heading to look into the non-existent voter fraud. Which is happening eventually because we won't have an agency that does that.  Shame, too, because people who know there wasn't actually any voter fraud are asking for receipts (and they don't exist). Are they going to look for proof that the vocal people at town halls are getting paid next?

The narrative presented at these press briefings does look a bit different from objective reality. I've been mentally thinking of labelling it "Pravderp". You  know, part Pravda, the state-run paper that did what I guess RT does now, for the Soviet state. And "derp", because I don't know that our actual journos really buy into it. After all, the media were mostly trained at some point to know when to smell a rat, and dissembling right in front of them is bound to awaken even the most ossified nasal passages to the whiff of rodent scat.

Anyhow, it's my portmanteau, and I think I shall stick with it.

Trump Did Not Have A Great Day

Just for the record, April Fool's Day is still April 1st and has not been moved up to February 1st, no matter what kind of fooling went on this Wednesday. For one thing, it was the first day of Black History Month, so our President, Donald Trump, sat between Omarosa and Dr. Ben Carson to say some very important and historical things.  Here's a sample:

“Last month we celebrated the life of Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., whose incredible example is unique in American history. You read all about Dr. Martin Luther King a week ago when somebody said I took the statue out of my office. And it turned out that that was fake news from these people,” Trump said during his introductory remarks, gesturing at the pool reporters who had been allowed in to view the start of the meeting. “Fake news. The statue is cherished ... but they said the statue, the bust of Dr. Martin Luther King, was taken out of the office. And it was never even touched. So I think it was a disgrace. But that's the way the press is, very unfortunate.”

This is how you know he's genuine--he thinks the bust of Martin Luther King, Jr belongs in the Oval Office. And the lying media tried to own him over it--so who is really very discriminated against, anyway? Also, too:

I am very proud now that we have a museum on the National Mall where people can learn about Reverend King, so many other things. Frederick Douglass is an example of somebody who’s done an amazing job and is being recognized more and more, I noticed. Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, and millions more black Americans who made America what it is today. Big impact.

I wonder if he knows Frederick Douglass from Morgan Freeman. Nota bene: One of them is alive, and has played a president more believably than Donald Trump. I'm just saying.

But Trump went on from there to do a little statesmanship. Before his graham crackers and nap, apparently. He seems to have possibly suggested marching federales into Mexico (possibly the same or different from the ones he's marching into Chicago) to address "bad hombres".  Which is kind of condescending and threatening of their sovereignty and gross-- and then he called Australia and boasted about his electoral win (which isn't that boastable TBH) to Malcolm Turnbull, and ragged him over a refugee deal Trump pretty obviously only just found out about. 

This being the same day we all realize just how screwed up his first ordered attack in Yemen was, and have a picture of how personally liable he is as POTUS, reminds me of how much respect I have for this office because of the stakes--and how serious it is that the holder of that office be competent to serve.

We are Paying for the Wall

So, I guess I could try to leap on every stupid position the "Gish Gallop" Trump Administration is trying on--or, to keep myself actually sane, I could just address the biggest issue I can seize on at the moment, and here's one:  Despite claims that Mexico would pay for the entirely signifying wall Trump wants to put up, US Americans are going to pay for it. Via Sean "The Forehead" Spicer, the idea has been floated that Mexico could be made to pay via a 20% tariff on goods coming into the US from Mexico--

To be paid by? The American consumer, which would mean we are still paying for Donald Trump's signifying-ass wall! Whee doggies! That there is some rational approach to immigration and trade--alienate your neighbor and ally, and drive up prices for your own consumers. That's so damn dumb I'm glad it didn't come from Trump's mouth directly (but from "The Spicer Must Flow!")--that we know of--but both the Wall and protectionist schemes were both verbalized by Trump from the campaign pulpit, so I have to wonder if he thinks this is actually sound economics at all? Pay for the wall by obliquely shading Mexico, but in actual fact, levying the cost on the US taxpayer?

Cynical genius if you could keep US citizens from catching on that this is what is going on, right?  But what if it was patently stupid? As in, a president just promised to pay for a $15 - 25 billion not -necessarily needful project by levying a tax on goods--against most free trade prescriptions, that is to be paid by a) US consumers or, b) be obviated by owners of Mexican factories relenting and making a fraction of their goods in the US for sale without tariff--creating some handfuls of jobs but by crikey definitely not paying for any damn wall.

I think we are paying for it regardless.

Trump's Very Busy and Partially Mexican Day

There is a grain of truth in what the wag who coined this sudden trip to Mexico by the Trump Team as "a Hail Maria pass" is implying. This is the sort of "can't get worse" reasoning that leads to big splashy plays, which Trump, as a reality TV guy, completely understands. You do big things and get ratings. It makes sense. What gets ratings? Something to look at. What would people want to look at? Things to do with the issue he ran hard on in the primaries where all he did was win, of course--immigration and the big beautiful wall! Why wouldn't that be where he went? That was the most successful thing that worked for him. You build the great big beautiful wall with the nice door in it, and Mexico pays. Mexico pays and this is how the US wins--

Except this is incredibly dumb, and Trump could not possibly expect Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto to actually play along. See, this whole thing where Peña Nieto invited him so they could have a nice confab where Trump scored foreign policy bonus points as if he was not running against possibly the most travelled and foreign-policy-experiencing human of all time, where Trump looks like a God condescending to visit Mexico who he will so demand a payment for the building of a wall from, was always a dream.  As a candidate for office, not an office-holder, there's the Logan Act standing between him and crafting foreign policy--which doesn't preclude the actual host government official, Peña Nieto, letting him know what diplomatically isn't possible--Mexico will not pay for building that stupid wall. The Mexican President has a very low favorability, but not as low as damn Trump has in Mexico. Saying "Hell no!" to Trump should have got him a bump, but he squandered it  by not doing it at the presser, but after the fact. So he said "Mexico won't build that wall" and Trump has shit to say, because he isn't actually in charge of anything at the mo'.

So far, just reasonable. The news of Mexicans protesting this whole thing is hardly a concern. People can pretend he was being presidential, except for the lying about whether he discussed the wall and the paying thereof of with Peña Nieto--even though he says it was totally suggested and rejected. SO what went on from this?

He doubled-down on everything from the primaries. No amnesty. More deportations, He did not soften a damn thing, and left some watchers thinking maybe this here pivot is just not even a thing.

And once again, this pivot thing never did happen. Nope, not ever. His base would be too mad. He is anti-immigration guy forevs. So white, far-right and uptight, you guys.