Trump Off and Running Leaves Me in Wonder

Inexplicably to me, the official start of Donald Trump’s reelection campaign began Tuesday night in Orlando. Silly me. I thought the dastardly deed had been baptized back on January 20, 2017, when papers were filed with the Federal Election Commission by the Trump campaign declaring his intention to run again. 

Why the rush when other presidents waited years to formally register? Follow the money, as we learned from Watergate. According to Huffington Post, “Trump’s paperwork renewing his campaign committee allowed him to collect donations and spend money for an election three years and 10 months away. It also permitted him to continue diverting some of those donations into his own private businesses, which he still controls and from which he still profits.

“In that same time period, the Republican National Committee, which Trump effectively took over at his nominating convention in 2016, spent $690,181 at Trump’s golf resort in Doral, Florida; $403,259 at his hotel in Washington, D.C.; and $289,335 at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach.

“In all, the Trump campaign and the RNC together have funneled $4,341,083 to Trump businesses since Trump took office, with some of that going directly into the president’s own pocket.”

There were some who held out hope Trump would tire of the demands of office. Ha! They didn’t compute Trump’s creative use of “executive time.” Nor did they appreciate how he could turn golfing into a government paid job. He clearly has shown Barack Obama was an amateur when it came to leisure world activity while the world heats up from man-made climate change and assorted tension spots. 

Some had hoped the Mueller Report and a Democratic House of Representatives would shame him into early retirement. How little they know the bully. He relishes combat, or should I say, verbal haranguing. He has debased our modern modes of political decorum (for the record, numerous presidential contests were much more rancorous in the 1800s). 

Trump has fashioned an extreme presidency that some, including myself, fear could result in the ultimate constitutional crisis. Should he lose the election he may well invoke emergency powers to challenge the legitimacy of the vote. After all, before the 2016 ballot he said he might not accept its validity if he lost. He has since repeatedly questioned the tally and has done nothing to protect the sanctity of the election process from interference. 

Prior to his Tuesday night rally, as I drove to one of my errands, I heard a Floridian interviewed by CBS News exult in Trump’s accomplishments. He is “looking out for the common people,” the man explained. 

I wondered, how does undermining Obamacare help the common people? Trump claims he has a great replacement with more coverage at less expense, but like snake oil salesmen who plied the country in the last two centuries he won’t reveal what’s in his elixir. 

I wondered how the common family was helped by a tax reform bill that gave the lion’s share of benefits to the one percenters and just crumbs to common working folks, especially those who relied on mortgage, state income tax and charitable contributions to reduce their tax burden. 

I wondered how common people would benefit from a change in the way the federal poverty line is computed. According to ThinkProgress, a progressive news site, “The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, a progressive think tank, has released its analysis of a government proposal for updating the inflation rate that determines the federal poverty line. The study suggests that if authorities adopt a “chained Consumer Price Index” — which calculates the cost of living at a slower pace than the current method — millions of low-income Americans will lose health and food benefits within 10 years.

“Who would suffer most? The technical change would disqualify 300,000 kids and pregnant women from receiving health coverage under the Children’s Health Insurance Program.”

I wondered for how long the American people will remain gullible and susceptible to re-education according to the Trump-is-great doctrine. Trump and his propagandists erase all mention of the positive economic performance under his predecessor. They only tout the rise in the stock market since Trump took office.

To put some perspective onto what has transpired economically, Fortune magazine recently compared how Wall Street fared during Obama’s and Trump’s respective first 28 months in office:

“So, how do the two presidents measure up in terms of growth in major indexes, measured between their inauguration and May 31 of their third year in office?

“The short answer is that Trump has quite a way to go. Under Obama, the S&P 500 grew by 56.4%. The Dow Jones Industrials Average was up 50.6% and the Nasdaq, 92.9%.

“The numbers under Trump were 21.4% for the S&P 500, 25.2% for the Dow, and 34.2% for Nasdaq.”

I wondered how common people would do better with dirtier air and water from Trump’s push for more fossil fuel use and lower pollution standards, how deregulation of health and labor safeguards would make their lives better.  

I wondered about a lot more before reaching my destination. I pondered the idea of a consecutive term for Trump before settling onto a variation of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s comment, “I don’t want to see him impeached, I want to see him in prison.” For me, “consecutive terms” would refer to consecutive prison terms.

Flynn Debacle Reveals There's No Security Without a Confirmation Process

The country is nearing completion of a mostly bruising confirmation hearing process for Donald Trump’s cabinet, a prelude to what no doubt will be an even more debilitating and exhaustive fight over the Supreme Court nomination of Neil Gorsuch.

Even before we get to that high drama, we will be engaged in the possible resignation or dismissal dance of Trump’s national security advisor. The choice of retired general Michael Flynn was controversial from the get-go, but it could not be stopped as the position did not require congressional vetting or confirmation. 

But Flynn, whose reputation as a loose cannon preceded his selection, has apparently provided an audible example of his undisciplined howitzer-like disposition. Secret tapes of his conversations with the Russian ambassador prior to Trump taking office reportedly reveal he talked about the possibility of lifting the sanctions President Obama imposed on Russia. It would have been a violation of the Logan Act for a then private citizen Flynn to have done so. Moreover, he denied such conversations to Vice President-elect Mike Pence who proceeded to tell the American public no such dialogue occurred. 

Washington is a city where politics is a blood sport. Any hint of impropriety can, and usually does, mortally damage an official (just ask Hillary Clinton about her email server or Benghazi experience), especially someone entrusted with the nation’s security.

Of course, we’re dealing with Donald Trump here, a man who never likes to retreat, so he may well excuse Flynn’s misconduct as he did last week with Kellyanne Conway’s shilling of his daughter Ivanka’s apparel line on Fox News, a violation of federal law.

Back to the confirmation process. Mostly, so far it has been what might indelicately be called a “circle jerk.” Even Betsy DeVos, who provided eminent evidence that she lacked essential knowledge of the department she would oversee, passed the low hurdle Republicans have set for the people to whom they are willing to commend our nation’s future.

Chalk it up to politics. Get used to it, at least for the next two years, probably four and, god forbid, six or eight.

But as disheartening as the process has been in having a cabinet chosen and consented to by the Senate, at least there was some vetting, some disclosure of the thinking that informs and propels the men and women who will have the president’s trust and ear.

Nothing of that confidence and assurance has been afforded the public for the individual who has Trump’s most immediate access (and I’m not referring to Melania). What do we really know about Stephen K. Bannon, Trump’s chief strategist, other than his employment history at Goldman Sachs and most recently the alt-right media site, Breitbart News?

For sheer terror-of-an-answer read the following Huffington Post analysis of Bannon’s apocalyptic thinking. Read it and wonder how it is possible that our laws do not require public inspection of the chief strategist to a president and to anyone named to a president’s National Security Council, as Bannon most recently was. Read it and cower under your blanket: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5898f02ee4b040613138a951?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Steve+Bannon+Believes+The+Apocalypse+Is+Coming+And+War+Is+Inevitable&utm_content=Steve+Bannon+Believes+The+Apocalypse+Is+Coming+And+War+Is+Inevitable+CID_df955470d3be4aaf6b5fb08f4740df70&utm_source=Email+marketing+software&utm_term=Read+More&

Bernie Intercepts Pope, Hillary Smiles, Walmart Supplanted

News reports said Bernie Sanders met with the pope during his whirlwind trip to Vatican City. But I’m wondering if a more apt description would have been “Bernie intercepts Pope Francis.”

“This morning when I was leaving, Senator Sanders was there,” Francis told reporters onboard his papal airliner. “He knew I was leaving at that time and he had the courtesy to greet me. I greeted him, his wife and another couple.” The other couple were Jeffrey Sachs, an economics adviser to Sanders, and Mrs. Sachs.  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/us/politics/bernie-sanders-pope-francis-vatican.html?ref=politics&_r=0

Staying on the same floor at the Vatican City residence where the pontiff lives, Sanders and his wife Jane were said to meet the pope in the foyer of the Domus of Santa Marta as Francis was about to embark to Greece to meet with Syrian refugees. No pictures of their encounter were taken but I could envision a Saturday Night Live-like skit wherein Sanders is pacing the hallway agonizing over the pope’s delay in exiting his room while Jane nudges him they have to get to the airport so they won’t miss their flight back to New York. Sanders is acting like a teenager waiting for a rock star to emerge after a concert. His wife is like a parent who only wants to get away from the long haired, tattooed scrum of young fans.

But let’s be serious for a moment. The trip to Rome was an intelligent move. It linked Sanders to a popular pope and could help him secure votes in the Catholic and Latino communities of New York and California. 

Now for some Hillary time: Did anyone else notice during Thursday night’s debate that almost every answer Hillary Clinton gave was preceded by a smile or a giggle and a “Well, …” She really has to work on being less robotic.

The longer Hillary delays in releasing transcripts of her speeches to Goldman Sachs and other financial institutions the more credibility she is giving to allegations she played it soft with Wall Street and would continue to do so as president. 

Here’s what Seth Abramson, an assistant professor of English at University of New Hampshire, had to say on Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/release-of-clintons-wall-street-speeches_b_9698632.html?utm_hp_ref=politics. It makes you wonder … 

Who’s Number 1? If you’re like me and spend Sundays filling in boxes for The New York Times Magazine crossword puzzle, you might have been puzzled by the answer to 16 Down in the April 3, 2016, issue. The clue: six letters identifying the  “company that passed Walmart in 2015 as the world’s largest retailer.”

Now, I spent more than three decades following Walmart as the editor and publisher of Chain Store Age, a retail industry magazine, Internet site and producer of trade conferences. So I was more than a little surprised to read in a crossword puzzle some pretty earth-shattering news, at least as far as the retail industry was concerned. I was further caught off guard after I filled in the blanks and found the answer to be Internet retail pioneer Amazon.

You see, Amazon had worldwide sales in 2015 of $107 billion. That’s quite a tidy sum, but it was less than one-quarter of Walmart’s $482.1 billion!

Ah, but Walmart’s perch at the top of the retailing pyramid, a spot it has enjoyed since 1990, has been supplanted by another Internet upstart—Alibaba Group, China’s gargantuan company that accounts for 10% of the country’s retail sales. Alibaba announced this week its 2015 sales will total $490 billion.

Following Sandy

Gilda and I dodged another bullet. Our home was not affected by Hurricane Sandy. We did not lose power, Internet, cable or phone service. I still think I should have bought that small generator just in case we needed it to run our sump pumps. Perhaps next time I’ll be more aggressive. 

I haven’t become a storm-zombie, watching or listening to Hurricane Sandy 24-hour coverage. But from the little time I did spend pre- and post-landfall, here are some observations:

Prior to Sandy hitting the New York area, CBS-2 weatherman John Elliott, when describing the dangers expected from the storm, said, “We’re not trying to scare you.” Whoa! Of course he was trying to scare his viewers. He was trying to scare everyone into doing the right thing, such as evacuating from low-lying areas. Anyone who didn’t heed his warnings and had the capacity to vacate before Sandy hit but didn’t should be required to pay for any emergency help provided to rescue them.

I found it rather incongruous watching in-studio newscasters nattily dressed and coiffed while telling us about the storm and flooding. I’d have preferred a little more grunge, in the spirit of what their reporters in the field were experiencing. 

Bridges, roadways, tunnels, mass transit were closed. Ferry service was suspended, as well. Ferries? I couldn’t understand that at first. Aren’t ferries supposed to float, even over troubled waters? Gilda and her brother Carl reasoned the ferry terminals probably were damaged. Makes sense.

With Noah and the Flood a recent blog topic, Carl also reminded me Russell Crowe is filming part of a movie titled Noah on Long Island which, according to a noon report, has 90% of its residents without power. The biblical-based film is being directed by Darren Aronofsky (Black Swan and The Wrestler), a boyhood and long-time friend of our nephew, Andrew, Gilda’s sister’s oldest offspring.

President Obama swiftly declared parts of New York and New Jersey disaster areas and eligible for emergency federal relief funds through FEMA. Ever wonder what Mitt Romney’s position is on FEMA assistance? Here’s an article from The Huffington Post:

During a CNN debate at the height of the GOP primary, Mitt Romney was asked, in the context of the Joplin disaster and FEMA's cash crunch, whether the agency should be shuttered so that states can individually take over responsibility for disaster response.

"Absolutely," he said. "Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that's the right direction. And if you can go even further, and send it back to the private sector, that's even better. Instead of thinking, in the federal budget, what we should cut, we should ask the opposite question, what should we keep?"

"Including disaster relief, though?" debate moderator John King asked Romney.

"We cannot -- we cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids," Romney replied. "It is simply immoral, in my view, for us to continue to rack up larger and larger debts and pass them on to our kids, knowing full well that we'll all be dead and gone before it's paid off. It makes no sense at all."

On Sunday, according to HuffPost, “a Romney official reaffirmed the former governor's position Sunday evening in an email.

"'Gov. Romney wants to ensure states, who are the first responders and are in the best position to aid impacted individuals and communities, have the resources and assistance they need to cope with natural disasters,'” the Romney official said."

One has to wonder how any state would be able to afford the billions and billions of dollars it will require to rebuild after Hurricane Sandy. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo already has said states do not have such funds, given their constitutional requirement to balance their budgets. Washington, on the other hand, can supply financing, even if it means adding to the national debt. 

As for Romney’s suggestion to privatize disaster relief, it would open a Pandora’s Box of  troubles including the possibility help would be doled out quicker to more affluent areas than poor neighborhoods. If government did that, voters could react at the next election. But there’s no recourse if private enterprise fails or shows favorites.  

There is a silver lining to all the destruction—replacement purchases by municipalities and individuals for capital goods, home furnishings and apparel will stimulate the economy. Lots of jobs may be created filling the new demand for goods and services. Contractors and related construction industry workers have reason to smile, assuming they didn’t suffer from Sandy. Romney, of course, would see these jobs as a plus, given that in his nominating acceptance speech he mocked Obama for promising “to begin to slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet.” Obama’s idea doesn’t sound too crazy now, does it?

I guess we’re lucky Sandy hit this week and not a week later when the election might have been affected by more than just the campaigns suspending events. Had Sandy come next week, we might have had to extend voting beyond Tuesday in the states affected, most of which lean Blue. Then again, in places like Pennsylvania where Republicans now control the state government, there might have been some thought not to as a way of keeping Obama’s vote total low. (Yeah, I'm being cynical, but not too unrealistic.)

Gilda had the best comment—just let Ohio vote. Whomever wins the Buckeye State wins the presidency.

I wasn’t the only one to focus on the World Series ending on a called third strike. Here’s a link to an article from The NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/sports/baseball/called-third-strike-is-rare-way-to-end-world-series.html

  

Royal Wedding Edition, Plus a Court Jester

Contrary to what you might have heard, contrary to what Matt Lauer said on The Today Show, the royal wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton did not go off without a hitch.

It hit a snag, specifically at Kate’s second knuckle, as Wills tried to deftly slip the wedding band onto his bride’s left ring finger. Only in a televised and Internet age would such a dramatic, inopportune nudge by a future king be forever recorded in British history. Though no one could say the bride was reluctant, to anyone watching the broadcast it was painfully obvious Kate’s knuckle was not as dainty as the rest of her.

In case any of you missed the ceremony, here’s a 3:16 minute replay. The slip-on-turned-to-shove-on of the ring is at the 1:59 mark: http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/prince-william-marries-kate-middleton/2011/04/29/AFmyHICF_video.html

For the record, Princess Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, looked beautiful in her Sarah Burton designed gown. Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, looked dashing in his bold red Irish Guard military uniform.

Also for the record, 4th-hour Today co-hosts Kathie Lee Gifford and Hoda Kotb pointed out when Queen Elizabeth entered Westminster Abbey she did not formally greet Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, second wife of her son, Prince Charles, and stepmother of the groom. On closer inspection of the tape, however, while the Queen does at first skip over Camilla to greet Prince Charles, she does wind up shaking Camilla's hand.

And Now on to the Court Jester: By whom I mean Donald Trump.

He wasn’t at the wedding, but he’s almost as colorful. And definitely more profane, lacing a speech in Las Vegas last night with F-bombs about our government and its leaders.

I understand why some people are attracted to his brand of populism. Anyone with a high profile who is media savvy and speaks like a foul-mouthed gunslinger is bound to generate whoops and hollers, even a few hosannas. But I would like someone, anyone, to explain how rank and file Republicans, even conservative Tea Partiers, can square Trump’s positions with their doctrinaire approach to government. To wit:

Trump lambastes President Obama for failing to stem the rising tide of oil and gasoline prices. But aren’t Republicans supposed to believe in a free market, even if it means higher prices?

Trump decries the state of our infrastructure, our roadways and airports. Yet Republicans are cutting back funds for essential services.

As Jason Linkins noted on The Huffington Post, Trump’s past positions don’t line up with those he is courting: “Some highlights include Trump's support of the ‘banking and auto bailouts,’ his previous description of President Ronald Reagan as a con artist, his affection for Canada's single-payer health care system, and his donations to Obama White House insiders Rahm Emanuel and Bill Daley.”

Trump hasn’t told us if he will seek the GOP presidential nomination. Comedians like Jon Stewart hope he runs. Seeking elective office, however, is not like hosting a reality TV show competition. The highest office in the land demands someone with qualifications, not someone who will serve an apprenticeship in government.