Day 7 of National Emergency: Does a Wartime President Have the Power to Delay Elections?

Our fearless, fearful, fear-mongering draft-dodger leader now embraces a self-proclaimed title of “wartime president.” 

As comically absurd as that moniker sounds, it is true, to the extent that we and the world are at war against the coronavirus. So let’s consider what qualities we might want our president to have.

According to UShistory.org, the website of the Independence Hall Association, some common leadership qualities that good presidents appear to have include: 

*A strong vision for the country’s future

*An ability to put their own times in the perspective of history

*Effective communication skills
*The courage to make unpopular decisions
*Crisis management skills

*Character and integrity

*Wise appointments

*An ability to work with Congress

We want someone with character and integrity who can instill in us trust and confidence. Sadly, from day one of his presidency Trump has spouted falsehoods (let’s call his pre-election humdingers as campaign rhetoric) that undermine any hope we might believe him when it matters. 

Wednesday he promised big news from the Food and Drug Administration. Thursday he said the FDA greenlighted a malaria drug for treatment of COVID-19. But shortly thereafter the head of the FDA had to correct him. The drug had been approved for limited usage and further study as it has severe, sometimes fatal, side effects (https://mol.im/a/8131613).

We’d want a leader who can inspire us with calming, motivating oratory, much like Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill did during World War II. Or how Obama comforted the nation after several mass shootings. Trump’s communication skills when he isn’t riffing on his standard rally speech are pathetic. He has a hard time reading prepared text, which in itself is anything but inspirational. At the beginning of his presidency Trump made a big to-do about installing Churchill’s bust in the Oval Office. Inspiration is not transferable from a slab or marble. All the more reason to be disappointed by his failure to express compassion for those ill or now unemployed. He is heartless.   

In a crisis we want a leader who recognizes his or her limitations, who can acknowledge his/her imperfections, who can accept the advice of experts, be they generals, scientists or doctors. Trump rated his pandemic response performance a “10,” rejecting his earlier dismissal of the coronavirus as anything more troublesome than the flu. He has repeatedly undercut expert advice. Here are several comments he made about the viral outbreak over the last several months:

“There’s nothing to worry about”

“It’s a Democratic Hoax”

“It'll be over by April”

“It’s a pandemic”

“I take no responsibility”

“I always knew it was a pandemic”

“This snuck up on us” (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-coronavirus-snuck-up-on-us_n_5e731e27c5b6eab779424d52)

Hail Caesar: Of all the deaths to be lamented from the pandemic, the most tragic may well be to our democratic republic.

I do not mean to be histrionic. But Trump may as president be able to postpone or cancel next November’s election as part of his emergency powers.

I, along with other commentators, have long opined that Trump would not go lightly from the Oval Office if he loses the election. It doesn’t take a genius to reason out his possible move to negate the election if his polling numbers plummet and he and his hard-core advisors believe he has no way of winning November 3.

The COVID-19 disaster provides the “perfect” shield for a power-grabbing play. Though The New York Times last week said it would be near impossible to postpone the election (https://nyti.ms/2U6p3n5 ), it might easily pass constitutional review given the composition of the Supreme Court.

In the midst of wars and economic depressions no president has invoked emergency powers to deny the American people the right choose their leader every four years. But no president has been like Trump. He has upended norms both domestically and internationally. Moreover, he has cowed the Republican Party into such deep submission that it is doubtful any but a handful of elected GOP officials would object to his postponing an election that might very well cost them control of the Senate and with that future federal court nominations. A sign of their anxiety was Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s overture to elderly Republican federal judges to retire so Trump would have the chance to fill their seats with conservative judges. 

Around the world we have seen juntas and strongmen dissolve duly elected governments, proclaiming they did so in the interests of national security and even of democracy, couching their treachery with a vague promise of conducting elections when the emergency has passed. Of course they define when that time arrived, if ever.

Trump has acted like a banana republic president. He has teased about serving beyond the constitutionally mandated two terms. A national emergency declaration abolishing the November election would enable his dream to become a reality.     

The rise of an American autocrat would not occur in a vacuum. Trump has witnessed, envied and even lauded Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, India’s Narendra Damodardas Modi, China’s Xi Jinping, North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, The Philippines’ Rodrigo Duterte and Saudi Arabia’s Prince Mohammad Bin Salman.

He feels more comfortable with foreign strongmen than with any of his recent predecessors who valued America’s leadership and moral standing throughout the world.

How ironic that an acknowledged germaphobe might achieve his ultimate coronation because of a pandemic. 

Anger Over Trump Is Misdirected; To Paraphrase, It's the Stupid People, Stupid

I didn’t sleep well Wednesday night. Perhaps because we didn’t turn the air conditioner on until 4 am. The air was sticky until then. So when I woke up at 2:30 I found it difficult to resume sleep. Which resulted in the second, more dominant, factor that denied me a contented slumber.

I read from several news sites. My eyes kept getting wider and wider with consternation. Could Mr.- and Mrs.- and Miss- and Ms. America really be so angry, scared, bigoted and, most importantly, ignorant that they would vote for Donald Trump to be the beacon of leadership of the free world for the next four years? Could they really want to roll back progress in equality, in environmental protection, in equal opportunity, in race relations (no matter how frayed they may appear these days), in a host of other areas where we are so much better today than we were decades ago?

Yes, Hillary Clinton is a flawed candidate. But do they really think she favors her cronies more than Trump favors his fellow billionaires (assuming, of course, he really is a billionaire)? She professes a desire to put checks on the investment community. But don’t Wall Streeters and bankers realize they made gazillions during the last two Democratic presidents and almost lost it all during the last two Republican presidencies.

Republicans like to point out President Obama didn’t keep his word when Syria’s Assad crossed a red line and dropped chemical weapons on his people. No one would believe in our word anymore, they say. Yet they would support a man who openly acknowledged he would rip up treaties and agreements he didn’t like. Nothing the United States has signed would be meaningful any longer. And Trump has advocated for torture more extreme than waterboarding.

As he has for virtually all other issues, Donald Trump’s response to the killings of blacks by police and the assassination of five Dallas policemen is that we have to get “better, sharper and smarter.” No details, just get better, smarter and sharper.

As he has no political record to check, it might be instructive to look at how he has handled his business relations and how outside experts evaluate his plans. 

“Under Trump’s trade plans, we would see higher prices, fewer jobs, and a weaker economy,” says the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, an organization that cannot be mistaken for a pro-Democratic sympathizer. The Chamber also believes Trump’s proposed tariffs “would strip us of at least 3.5 million jobs.” http://nyti.ms/29t2QaT

Trump’s modus operandi in business appears to be to often unilaterally renegotiate agreed upon terms of service. Contractors who helped him build his casino empire say he reneged on full payments. http://usat.ly/28o6snv 

Such a tactic might fatten his pockets while undercutting the profits of, and even bankrupting, his providers, but it is hardly a way to manage the U.S. economy.

Trump’s allies in securing the nomination of his party are the crazed Islamic terrorists who sow fear throughout the world. Isolated terrorists, even bands of two or three, are almost impossible to stop. Police states like Russia and Saudi Arabia can’t thwart dedicated, demented terrorists, much less so countries that cherish freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and even freedom to bear arms. 

The absence of a wall across the Mexican border hasn’t left America vulnerable to Islamic terrorists. As the only publicized “invasion” came from Canada in 1999, would a president Trump demand Canada pay for a wall across our more than 5,500-mile shared border?

As the coronation of the presumptive Republican presidential candidate nears, Republican thinkers not enamored with Trump are trying to forge a post-election comeback strategy for a party that has veered so far to the right even iconic presidents like Ronald Reagan and Theodore Roosevelt would not pass muster with the rabidly doctrinaire primary-voting fringe of discontents and non-compromisers.

David Brooks, the conservative Op-Ed columnist of The New York Times advises Republicans can be saved by harking back to progressive programs like those of Teddy Roosevelt.

“New sorts of political leaders emerged. In city after city, progressive reformers cleaned up politics and professionalized the civil service. Theodore Roosevelt went into elective politics at a time when few Ivy League types thought it was decent to do so. He bound the country around a New Nationalism and helped pass legislation that ensured capitalism would remain open, fair and competitive.” (http://nyti.ms/29uHQ2J) 

If there is one word conservatives have mocked in years past (aside from “liberal”) it is “progressive.” Roosevelt, according to us-presidents.insideGov.com, initiated the following progressive policies:

*He developed the “Square Deal,” a domestic program formed around three C’s—conservation of natural resources, control of corporations, and consumer protection; 

*He promoted the conservation movement and placed millions of acres of land under federal protection to preserve America’s natural resources; 

*He dissolved 44 monopolistic corporations and regulated railroad rates to protect the middle and working class; 

*He passed the Meat Inspection Act and Pure Food and Drug Act to better regulate food production and labeling.

http://us-presidents.insidegov.com/q/16/9699/What-were-President-Theodore-Roosevelt-s-accomplishments?utm_source=email&utm_medium=share

Think, how many present-day conservatives would endorse any, much less all, of those programs?

Ross Douthat and Reihan Salami, co-authors of Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream, offered in The Times a re-imagined conservative platform that included assurances on Social Security and even healthcare benefits granted by Obamacare. Their vision is an admittedly Hail Mary option. http://nyti.ms/29DaNcD

The prospect of a Trump presidency has unshackled long-cherished norms of decorum among interested poll watchers. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg tripped mightily when publicly voicing her strong antipathy toward life under Trump (http://nyti.ms/29rq7tH). She regretted her outspokenness, but did not retract any of her comments (http://nyti.ms/29AWs0l).

Scholars, as well, have joined the anti-Trump crusade (http://nyti.ms/29G1EUZ). Enlisted by historian David McCullough and documentarian Ken Burns, they have posted videos to a Facebook page, Historians on Donald Trump (https://www.facebook.com/historiansondonaldtrump/).

“For the first time in my life, I’m actually afraid that we Americans can forget who we are as a people and succumb to historical amnesia,” says Ron Chernow, Pulitzer Prize winning biographer and author of Alexander Hamilton. When that happens, when the historical record is scrubbed clean, Trump or any demagogue can come along and write upon it whatever he wants, says Chernow.

Don’t look now but even white male college graduates have embraced Trump (http://nyti.ms/29GpqPd). It’s as damning a report card on the state of education in this country as any I have seen.

Trump’s implausible coalition includes the Religious Right. We need look no further than the evangelical community to see how expediency trumps (pun intended) values. “Nearly four-fifths of white evangelical voters plan to cast their ballots for Donald J. Trump despite his multiple marriages, lack of piety and inconsistency on the issues they care about most,” according to a Pew Research survey reported by The Times (http://nyti.ms/29F2ct3).  

I’m not angry at Trump. I’m angry at the electorate, at the stupid, self-centered, uninformed, xenophobic, even racist, ignorant, personality-driven voters willing to turn this country over to a man who, as McCullough points out, lacks any of the four key qualities President Dwight D. Eisenhower said a leader must possess: character, ability, responsibility and experience. 

It’s a wonder I get any sleep at all.

Brady and Hillary Share Deleted E-Message Legacies

Tom Brady is the Hillary Clinton of the National Football League. Hillary Clinton is the Tom Brady of politics.

Regardless of what you think about them, both have stellar resumes. Millions adore them. Yet both have sizable portions of the population that abhor and despise them. Their detractors won’t believe a word they say. And they now share legacies of deep-sixing sought-after electronic messages that could implicate them, or vindicate them, in scandal. 

Politics in the United States has been steeped in conspiracy theories, probably going back at least to Aaron Burr and the unsuccessful attempt to convict the former vice president of the United States of treason in the early 1800s. There indeed was a conspiracy, a partially successful conspiracy, to assassinate President Abraham Lincoln and members of his cabinet. Never proven were innuendos that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt knew in advance about Japan’s plans to attack Pearl Harbor but let it proceed as a pretext to enter World War II against Japan and Germany. Nor were conspiracy theories proven for the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. 

Richard Nixon’s Watergate conspiracy engendered numerous other “-gate” investigations, two of which involved two more Republican presidents—Ronald Reagan’s Iran-Contra affair and George W. Bush’s weapons of mass destruction in Iraq hoax. Lots of investigations into Bill Clinton’s presidency produced no tangible conspiracy. Hillary’s actions before, during and after the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi remain an open festering wound Republicans continue to investigate as a means to derail her presidential bid.

So what do I think about Hillary and Brady? Nothing so far has swayed my belief she is the best announced Democratic candidate. Yes, she showed hasty judgment in deleting all of her emails. But aside from fostering more conspiracy theories, many of which have been dispelled by Republican-led Congressional inquiries, Hillary’s main challenge is weathering the years-long assault on her character the GOP has waged. Such is the life of a frontrunner.  

With four Super Bowl rings, Brady, as well, is a leader. His image is now tarnished. But I will say that tinkering with equipment, as Brady is alleged to have done in Deflategate, is not unusual in almost all sports. Jerry Rice, considered the best receiver in football history, admitted to putting stickum on his gloves to aid in catching passes. Hockey goalies have been known to dress in leg pads wider than permitted, while their teammates try to bend the rules by curving their stick blades beyond the legal limit. Returning to football, linemen swab their uniforms with Vaseline so their opponents can’t grab them easily. Vaseline also was a favored tool of baseball pitchers hoping to influence the flight of a ball, while batters corked their bats to hit it further. 

Did Brady have his minions on the New England Patriots take the air out of balls used in the team’s 45-7 victory in the AFC Championship game? Who knows? What we do know is that in the second half, in driving rain, after the referees inserted properly inflated balls, Brady scorched the Indianapolis Colts with 28 points compared to scoring 17 points in the first half using under-inflated balls. 

Perhaps a better question to ask is why Brady would think he needed the supposed advantage of under-inflated balls. Probably for the same reason Nixon had the Democratic Party offices bugged in the Watergate Apartments. Because they could and they thought they could get away with it. And no matter how sure you think victory is, they think it’s never wrong to take steps to make sure of that victory. Until, that is, you’re caught. When that happens, it’s wise to remember, it’s not the crime but the coverup that trips you up. 

McChrystal Light in 2016

Twice in the last three days I have seen on TV the next Republican Party candidate for president. He is tall, slim, articulate, a young-looking 59, a man with vision, accomplishment and dedication. He commands, instills, inspires and practices loyalty.

He's a retired U.S. Army general, forced to resign for imprudent comments his staff made to a Rolling Stone reporter about their civilian leaders. But in the bizarro world of politics we operate under today, insulting Vice President Joseph Biden or President Barack Obama would be listed as an accomplishment on his résumé when read by the Republican elite. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the next Republican candidate for president, General Stanley McChrystal.

As a nation we have a long history of electing generals and other war heroes to lead our country. Washington. Jackson. Tippacanoe’s William Henry Harrison. Taylor. Grant. Teddy Roosevelt. Eisenhower. Kennedy. Bush 1. McChrystal would slide in quite nicely with that list.

McChrystal is making a publicity tour to promote his book, My Share of the Task: A Memoir. He's a darling of corporate America. Executives pay top dollar to soak up his leadership mantra as they sweat together jogging around the capital, stopping at various monuments so McChrystal can impart some leadership lore. 

I'm not sure he's fully on board with the main GOP planks. Heck, I don’t even know if McChrystal is a Republican. He actually has come out for limiting public access to military style weapons. That would be a novel position for any Republican standard bearer. Perhaps he would offer a more common sense alternative to the crazies who have crushed the mainstream of the party during the last two presidential elections. 

Perhaps he’s not as dogmatic when it comes to GOP platform planks. Who knows if he is anti abortion? Anti taxes? Pro debt reduction? Anti social services spending? Pro big defense spending? Blindly reveres Ronald Reagan? As a military strategist, he’s had to maneuver assets based on resources and capabilities. He’d figure out quickly what are electable positions. We might actually get a Republican candidate not so intimated to admit science proves global warming, science proves the earth is more than 6,000 years old, Creationism is bunk, evolution should be embraced, infrastructure is important to the military and our economy and money should be invested to upgrade it.  

I can't foresee any right-minded Republican presidential hopeful man enough to challenge him in the primaries. Sure, they might be correct in saying he has no government experience, but that might be appealing to Tea Party faithful and independents who consider normal politicians to be most of the problem in Washington. Let him pick a vice president with congressional experience, someone like senator Marco Rubio, and we might be looking at the ticket that restores the Grand Old Party to the White House, with perhaps strong enough coattails to sweep majorities along in the House and Senate.

McChrystal believes all Americans should engage in national service, not just military service. Having commanded troops most recently in Iraq and Afghanistan, he's fulfilled his military obligations. Now he's primed for public service at the highest level. There's no way Republican poobahs are not salivating at the prospect. There's no way Democratic strategists are not shivering at the possibility. Democrats will need a really strong counter-candidate, someone who can keep together the Obama coalition of women, minorities, East and West Coast liberals and independents. Are you up to the challenge, Hillary?

A Different Point of View

My Sunday post about Glenn Beck, Islamaphobia and demagoguery brought the following comment from one of my LinkedIn readers. Though she would like to remain anonymous, she has granted permission to reproduce her thoughts. I deeply respect her beliefs and greatly appreciate her contribution to a national dialogue that is so very much needed. Your thoughts and feedback are always welcome.

Hi Murray,

I followed the hyperlink on your LinkedIn posting and read your write- up regarding the Mosque and Glenn Beck. Since the issue involves both politics and religion, I considered not responding . . . then I reconsidered. I hope you don’t mind me sharing my thoughts with you.

My personal opinion doesn't matter, however I think it's important for you to realize that this is a highly sensitive issue for many people and it involves multiple layers and varied degrees of intensity. By your writing, it's clear that you are in favor of the mosque, however there are probably more people against it than for it and the argument on both sides is somewhat compelling.

As you know, we are currently at war. I'm not talking about the war with Iraq or Afghanistan; rather I am referring to the war against the global Islamic Muslim extremists who are fixed on destroying the USA and our way of life.

When at war, the enemy looks to find your weaknesses. Since we are a country with open and free borders that protects the religious freedom as well as the civil rights of our citizens—and even our non-citizens—we are left in an extremely vulnerable position. As a result, the enemy is free to use these rights and protections to move in, take up residence, recruit and train and plan their attacks. Whenever they are questioned, they simply cry racism and/or discrimination and they make demands for their rights and freedoms! The rest of us proceed to argue and debate among ourselves—which further breaks down our country. Unfortunately, even though the majority of Muslims in the USA are peaceful Americans, they have extremists among them and people of this country are scared.

Among the Muslim community in the U.S., you could say there are a few bad eggs that are ruining it for the rest. The larger problem is, people know about the Islamic Muslim extremist threat and when it comes to situations that may increase the risk, they would rather not take any chances.

Let's face it, if you knew that salmonella was found in some eggs but nobody is sure which eggs, where they came from or whether there are any more bad eggs out there, what would you do? Would you take your chances and order some sunny side up? Or would you pass on the eggs until the situation is cleared up? There are always some people who will take a chance, just as there are still people driving without seat belts and smoking cigarettes . . . but most people would give it a second thought . . . and many would pass on the eggs altogether. The idea of taking unnecessary risks is frightening to many people.

Unfortunately we are not dealing with bad eggs —we are dealing with bad human beings that are hiding among the good ones. The fact is that there is a very real threat, not a perceived one. Attacks have occurred in the past and continue to occur each week around the world. Several planned attacks in the U.S. have been averted and the threat continues. I would not call this "paranoia" since the thought process is not irrational. The unfortunate truth about this situation is, that the enemy is not only hiding among the innocent; he is taking root and growing his army there. To believe that is not the case would be irrational.

This is key to the mosque issue near ground zero. Other than respect for the thousands who perished at that site at the hands of the Islamic Muslim extremists, one of the biggest reasons people are against it is that mosques are used worldwide by the Islamic Muslim extremists to train and recruit terrorists.

Since 9/11 there have been tens of thousands of Islamic Muslim terrorist attacks worldwide resulting in six times as many deaths. Many people disclaim this issue and speak about the history of other religions and the number of people who have been killed in conflicts. We cannot even compare this to other religions in terms of who is more violent. The Islamic Muslim extremists are killing in the name of their God and training their children to do it as well. For example, in Lebanon, they are virtually repeating the process for teaching hatred toward Israel that was used by Hitler—spouting and distributing false propaganda, lies, manipulation, etc.. They are starting their teachings with small children who grow up being praised for their hatred. These anti-Semitic and anti-American teachings are so deeply rooted in some of these people that they know nothing else.

So, when people are concerned about a mosque opening near the location of the largest terrorist attack in history—I do not believe it should be discounted or ignored. We should question it thoroughly.

I would also caution against looking at Fox News like they are the evil empire protecting Glenn Beck. Glenn Beck is just a guy with an opinion that he is willing to share. He is very passionate about his opinions and his opinions are very conservative and very Christian. In his case, it just so happens that there are masses of people who can relate to what he is saying (approximately 750,000 attended his rally in Washington. As a matter of fact, Dr. Aveda King—the niece of the later Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.—also spoke at his rally.

Additionally, I'm not sure that I have ever looked at The Daily Show or John Stewart as a reliable news source —the show is on Comedy Central. Al Sharpton was simply looking for another reason to complain, and while I am not a Glenn Beck follower . . . I do not see anything wrong with what he did.

I also think you have to be careful not to "cherry-pick" the "Freedoms" you support based on how closely they mold to what you agree with. I will admit that I was concerned by your comment regarding how Roosevelt dealt with Coughlin in the 30's and comparing it to Glenn Beck—I guess I am hoping that you were not suggesting that the government step in and try and limit his airtime simply because you do not like what he is saying.

I think this country is divided enough and we need to band together and fix what is wrong. Too many people drank the Kool-Aid during the last Presidential election . . . and we are in worse shape now than we were before. We went from the far right to the far left . . . it’s time to move to the center and away from extremists on all fronts.