TWGB: Alternative Electors, Alternative Facts

 

Consider if you will the sound of accountability riding an elevator to the penthouse where one man lives-- in his own mind, a master of all he surveys, largely because he's been wearing blinders the whole time. He doesn't see accountability approaching him, but all the same he waits for the dreaded "ding" of destiny reaching his floor. Once again, I'm talking Trump World, which is for all intents and purposes--the twilight zone. 

The New York Times had a big reveal about the cynical hacks cooking up the alternate electors scheme--or should we use the lexicon of the moment before it was corrected and call them "fake"? They apparently had consciousness of their fakery and bad faith. They knew what they were doing danced on the edge of the illegal. And the GOP nominee for governor of my state, who definitely was at the Capitol 1/6, was the point person for trying to throw away my vote, which I still resent. Also, he's a goddamn anti-Semite. (What has two thumbs and hates Nazis? Vixen Strangely. Points to self with two thumbs, super-demonstratively.)

Anyway, it really seems like the DOJ is looking at Trump as a big part of their investigation because yep--they say so. Merrick Garland is definitely not ruling indicting Trump out, despite Lester Holt's bullshit framing. I just want to point out that saying that the indictment or prosecution of Trump is going to tear the country apart is editorializing and framing this possible eventuality as if the Trump stans would be justified for freaking out and fucking up--they wouldn't be. Trump lied in a way that has already caused deaths. His lie, his BIG LIE, and the faith of those who still believe in it, needs to be cratered because it is, in fact, a lie. Framing anything in the way where he plausibly could have won, or that his second term was stolen, is grievous journalistic malpractice. There are no two sides of this story--because look at this shit:

A Virulent "Hoax"

Trump calls coronavirus criticism Democrats' 'new hoax' and links it to immigration https://t.co/Q2JfVQtklA

— The Guardian (@guardian) February 29, 2020

"Hoax" seems to be Trump's magic word for dismissing any news he doesn't particularly care for. The story about Russian assistance to his 2016 campaign? He calls it a hoax--but it certainly isn't. The impeachment over his abuse of office in holding military aid over Ukraine's head to extort an investigation into Hunter Biden? He calls it a hoax, but the details of the extortion plot are quite clear when you eliminate his apologists' obfuscations. And now that the stock market, what Trump believes to be a key indicator of his strong economy (it isn't) is being affected by the spread of the COVID-19 outbreak, and cases here in the US are documented with some accounting of Trump Administration cock-ups, Trump and his pitiable lickspittles like Mulvaney and Pompeo are comfortable suggesting that this, too, verifiable as many details may be--is a hoax. The virus only exists to fuck with Trump's re-election plans. Pay it no mind.

Of course, if it was a "hoax", that wouldn't entirely explain why, consideration of the coronavirus enters into postponing a summit with Asian leaders. That much is real. But I guess, the hoax part is supposed to be the bit where a whistleblower was removed for pointing out that infectious disease protocols were not observed when dozens of Health and Human Services workers met with Wuhan evacuees, who were not tested, and these personnel afterwards just....went about their business. We aren't supposed to note that the Administration hobbled our pandemic readiness, or that crisis management after the fact is a poor substitute for preparedness when a crisis does hit.

It Was Against the Law

Breaking: GAO concludes that “OMB withheld the funds from obligation for an unauthorized reason in violation of the ICA.1 See 2 U.S.C. § 684. We also question actions regarding funds appropriated to the Department of State (State) for security assistance to Ukraine.” pic.twitter.com/CdUWpFK8kd

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) January 16, 2020

Oh, would you look at that. Apparently, there was a law broken.

In other news. there has been an announcement that an investigation has been opened--into the surveillance of Ambassador Yovanovitch. This is actually showing more concern for the safety of US State Department personnel than I believe Pompeo has shown regarding this matter.

And the day is still young.

UPDATE: Very interesting:

FBI investigators went to the home and the business of Robert Hyde on Thursday. The agents were seen by CNN and confirmed by a law enforcement official. They were at the home early Thursday morning in Weatogue, CT before going to Hyde’s business in Avon, CT.

— Shimon Prokupecz (@ShimonPro) January 16, 2020

UPDATE: Apparently, Hyde had quite a lot of fire power when a visit was paid to his home last year. His personal history--it is not great.

TWGB: Where is the Defense?

Rep. Jordan says Congress won’t be able to question the one “who started it all,” referring to the whistleblower.

Rep. Welch: "I'd be glad to have the person who started it all to come in and testify. President Trump is welcome to take a seat right there." pic.twitter.com/nE8Exwn3CG

— BuzzFeed News (@BuzzFeedNews) November 13, 2019

The funny old thing that wrecks the defense for President Trump is that the White House has not been forthcoming with access to the people who should be able to, reputedly, sort things out. We have the call summary, which is "THE TRANSCRIPT" that Trump has Tweeted that he would very much like us to read, the whistleblower complaint (which we were told is irrelevant since it contains so much hearsay), and the transcripts of the closed-door depositions of people who were very truly adjacent to the apparent extortionate goings-on. And now we have the beginning of the open hearings.

If Team Trump wants a good defense, they shouldn't be expending so much energy on what the whistle-blower knew and when he/she knew it (although the report gives a good accounting of that much), let alone who that person is, because it simply should not matter. We wouldn't suspend a criminal trial on the basis of not knowing who called 911, and we shouldn't hold up anything to do with the impeachment proceedings because we don't know who the whistleblower is. It's a waste of time. The problem is "what was the President of the US about when he apparently extorted the president of another country with aid that was already allotted in exchange for receipt of bad press/oppo research on a potential political opponent?" The whistleblower could be a socialist, a Dallas Cowboys fan, an enthusiastic kiwi fruit eater, a Scientologist--it just doesn't matter as much as what the principals in this matter did.

So, why aren't we hearing from Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo, Pence, Trump himself? It should be the case that, were the situation misconstrued and the actual situation wholly innocent, that the persons closest to it could most ably describe what really did occur? Would they not then be providing reams of documents, a surfeit of reasonings, to absolve them of their present dilemma? Why, instead, are the people who would be deemed most circumstantially culpable, like Mulvaney, just out there subpoena-dodging?

Could it be because, to use the vernacular, the defense ain't got shit? Because that is what it is starting to sound like.

TWGB: Charlie and the Foxtrot Factory

Even in a White House of never-befores, this may be one of the more head-spinning: The president’s chief of staff is trying to join a lawsuit against the president. ⁦@maggieNYT⁩ https://t.co/XzZVkKPSZx

— Peter Baker (@peterbakernyt) November 10, 2019

I'm not exactly sure how the Trump White House actually works, but it seems like the stuff of pure imagination. Can you imagine working there, yourself? All these people in what should be "golden ticket" jobs, the almost-poetic ejection of player after player according to some fault found by the um, well, testy Oompa Loompa who is actually in charge. How strange and wonderful!

If you want to change the world, there's nothing to it.

Except bribery and extortion and obstruction of justice and the whole deal looking more and more like a giant revolving clusterfuck.

Leading with Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney's lawsuit is an example of the kind of thing we're talking about: the story suggests there's a mystery around why Mulvaney is suing to determine whether he needs to comply with a House subpoena. He has two other choices--he simply refuses to comply, as others are doing, or he can just show up for questioning, so why opt for door number three? Because he already confessed to the quid pro quo part really publicly and cannot reverse-dive back onto the diving board, and the testimonies of Dr. Fiona Hill and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman both strongly implicate him as having relayed the terms to Ambassador Gordon Sondland. The freeze in the aid to Ukraine starts with, apparently, Trump's direction through the offices of Mulvaney and acting OMB Director Russell Vought.

Mulvaney himself could be caught on the horns of a dilemma: he can't testify because he already looks like he's highly "burnable" by Trump and because it would wreck his name with fellow Republicans, but he has a lot of exposure if he doesn't because Trump might have indicated he's already looking to unload him anyway (when I see journos the President questions about Mulvaney's future, I assume they aren't reading tea leaves but hearing chatter). So, if a court order compels him to talk, he wins because what choice did he have? And if the court goes along with a claim of "absolute immunity" (I guess that means a VIP-level executive privilege, no?) well he also wins because he doesn't have to talk and Trump has a little more reason to keep him.

Living there, you'll be free, if you truly wish....

Of course, waking up from that dream means still being really, really implicated in a conspiracy with extortion and bribery with lots of obstruction of justice on the side. And while the president might not be subject to being charged while he's in office (debatable) and might not be removed by trial, nothing quite so cozy pertains for Mulvaney.

John Kelly Misunderstands Trump

John Kelly says he warned Trump before he left: “Whatever you do, don’t hire a ‘yes man,’ someone who won’t tell you the truth — don’t do that. Because if you do, I believe you will be impeached.” https://t.co/QNCtU65ZOB

— Rebecca Ballhaus (@rebeccaballhaus) October 26, 2019

They do say the saddest words are "might have been", but I think this bit from former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly is also pretty pity-worthy:

"That was almost 11 months ago, and I have a lot of, to say the least, second thoughts about leaving," Kelly said. "It pains me to see what's going on because I believe if I was still there o someone like me was there, he would not be, kind of, all over the place."

The sad thing about that is that Kelly seems to be holding himself responsible, or believes that other people ought to be responsible, for reigning in Trump's worst impulses. It's a fallacy that Trump does not fail, but is being failed at every turn, that, as former NJ Governor Chris Christie has put it, Trump has been "ill-served" by the people around him. Trump promised that his government would be staffed with "the best people", and yet, we've seen an extraordinary turnover in staff in just one term, and Trump often indicates afterward that these were not, in fact, the best people.

At the end of the day, can't anyone just admit Trump's biggest problem is Trump? That a man we're going to entrust with the highest executive office should not need fucking baby-sitters? It isn't Kelly's fault, or even Mulvaney's fault that Trump is in the position he is. It isn't even the fault of the thousands of people who blew smoke up Trump's ass over the years and made him think he's the Pope.

Trump is Trump's problem. He's a grown man who can't hear the word "no", who needs happy news about himself to keep his mood elevated, and demanded the subscriptions of certain newspapers for federal agencies be cancelled.

How would Trump even know a person was a "yes" man? Wouldn't a person who always agreed with him just simply be "right"? Bear witness to what Trump considers the real story:

And the White House @PressSec Stephanie Grisham responded to former chief of staff John Kelly with a blistering comment. “I worked with John Kelly, and he was totally unequipped to handle the genius of our great President.”

— Kelly O'Donnell (@KellyO) October 26, 2019

"The genius of our great President." The "stable genius"? That statement from Grisham might as well have been dictated by the Dictator himself.

No. Trump would never have taken such advice as Kelly wanted to give about staying out of trouble and avoiding impeachment. A person whose cabinet meetings consist of his advisors praising him isn't looking for this kind of advice. If Kelly didn't leave under his own steam, he'd have been forced out, and someone like "cool step-dad" Mick Mulvaney would have always been ready to step in. Trump is not a toddler, but is habitually treated like one, even unto the latest item of fixing policy in Syria to "guarding the oil" because it met up with Trump's ill-formed obsessions.

Even Lassie would have let this dotard stay down in the well (like a dog!). Trump doesn't need saving. We need saving from him.