Category Archives: politics

Biden Meets the Press

Posted on by Leave a comment

For weeks the right-wing bobble heads on cable complained that President Joe Biden had not yet held a news conference. As if he didn’t have a few other things on his plate as he worked to clean up the mess his predecessor had left behind. This week he did face the press in a formal setting and, of course, the bobble heads complained about his performance.

I’m old enough to remember when reporters asked presidents questions and filed stories based on the answers they received. Today reporters ask questions and the stories are made up of the opinions of people I have never heard of speaking with great authority about things which have nothing to do with the answers.

Over on Fox, where the ratings have been slipping ever since their champion Donald Trump slithered out of Washington, pundits complained that Biden:

  • Paused to think before he answered.
  • Consulted his notes before reeling off a series of statistics or a position which had clear foreign policy implications.
  • Used a list to select which reporters to call on and did not call on Peter Doocey, the Fox reporter in the room.

Give me a break.

The bobble heads at Fox may think the president is in office for their convenience. I do not. And I for one am much more interested in what Joe Biden does than in how he answers reporter’s questions.

I do recognize that public perception is important and, for good or bad, the unelected, unqualified, and unfair cable personalities have an impact on that perception far beyond their worth. In spite of the Fox complaints, I am glad Biden pauses to put his thoughts in order before launching into his answer. To paraphrase what a wise person once said, he engages his mind before putting his mouth in gear. In addition, we all know Biden has overcome a stammer. About three million Americans share that problem. Speaking slowly and deliberately is a key part of the solution.

Where his predecessor was quick to answer but rarely presented information that was anywhere near the truth, I am glad Biden refers to his notes to make sure the statistics he reads are accurate. And I am likewise happy to see that he states positions on public and foreign policy that have been vetted, discussed, and agreed to within the White House. It gives me assurance that the administration is working together and carefully creating and voicing consistent strategies. Under Trump all we had was a volatile chief executive making policy up on the fly.

As far as not calling on the Fox reporter is concerned. If you want to be taken seriously you should act the part. Fox does not. By the way, after criticizing Biden for using notes, Fox observed that Doocey had written down in a binder a list of questions he was ready to ask if called upon.

I am, all that said, disappointed about this first Biden news conference. Disappointed not in the president but in the news reporters. The most important issue on our minds at the moment is the pandemic. It was the subject of Biden’s opening remarks. But through dozens of questions asked by ten different reporters, not a single question dealt with the virus, the vaccination program, or the rush by many states to relax mask and other containment requirements. In a tweet, Sheryl Gay Stolberg of The New York Times said the questions “suggest that coronavirus is no longer Topic A.” The polls show she’s wrong. The polls say the virus is still “Topic A” with the people. It is the reporters who are out of touch.

So what did make it on the reporter’s list of questions during the debate? There were three questions on the senate’s filibuster rule. And four questions about immigration policy. Both issues are contentious and certain to present conflict when the reporters seek out Republican reaction. The immigration situation on the southern border is being pushed hard by Fox and Republican politicians. It is not at the top of most American’s list of concerns.

It should not surprise any of us to see the reporters focus on the most controversial topics. It makes for more drama. And the reporters are starved for drama. While Trump could be counted on to insult and argue with reporters during every meeting, Biden somehow managed to get through a one hour news conference without any. The reporters must have been disappointed.

It would have been nice to hear more about the economy. The impact of the pandemic on the economy of America and the world is far from over and is still being assessed. The latest Covid relief bill makes a significant investment in the lower and middle classes. But it is the long term infrastructure bill which faces an uphill battle in the Senate which would have the greatest impact, reversing a trend in American economic policy which has seen the shrinking of the middle class over the decade since Ronald Reagan was in office. How about a question on that?

The stupid question of the night goes to CBS’s Nancy Cordes. “Yes,” Biden, who has been in office for just over 60 days, told her, he does plan to seek reelection in 2024. And he expects Vice-President Kamala Harris to be his running mate.

Glad we got that settled.

#####

Trump Trial #2 – sine die

Posted on by One comment
US Senate

And so it is over. The second trial of Donald J. Trump, the only president to have been impeached twice, has adjourned. And Trump is now also the only president to have been found not guilty twice by the U.S. Senate. In the final tally, 57 senators, including 7 Republicans, found Trump guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors for inciting the mob that went on to breach and vandalize the Capitol, and to injure and kill law enforcement personnel. Forty-three senators found Trump not guilty. A supermajority of 67 being constitutionally required for conviction, the result was not guilty.

But only a handful of Trump’s most loyal supporters rushed to the cameras to proclaim that their leader had been exonerated by what goes down as the most bipartisan impeachment in history. The senators, and the world, saw the video of senators and members of the House fleeing for their lives during the attack on January 6th. They saw the Vice-President, Mike Pence, and his family being ushered away from the senate chamber by the Secret Service. They viewed Trump’s tweet of rage following Pence’s refusal to attempt an unconstitutional coup by rejecting of the voter’s will saying, “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution.” They heard testimony that Trump had sent that tweet moments after receiving word that the Vice-President’s life was at risk.

Poor Mitch

It was too much even for Mitch McConnell, the Kentucky senator who, as Republican leader, had been solidly behind Trump for four years. Following the vote, McConnell took the the floor to declare that Trump was “practically and morally responsible” for provoking the Capitol riot. He added: Trump “did not do his job. He did not take steps so federal law could be faithfully executed and order restored.”

I felt a momentary pang of sympathy for poor old Mitch. But after a second, two at the most, it passed. For unlike the seven Republicans who voted to impeach, Mitch voted “not guilty.” And he did so with his usual display of hyprocracy, stating that it was unconstitutional to try a president after his term of office had ended.

I have discussed before why this argument is without merit. But just to point out the latest addition to that list of arguments consider that before beginning the formal trial, on Tuesday, the Senate spent the entire day debating this very issue. It finally voted, 55-45, that the proceeding was constitutional and should proceed. So the Senate itself made the decision in the manner determined by its own rules. And the hypocrite McConnell, who claims he is the guardian of the Senate’s rules and traditions, proved once again that he will ignore procedure and precedent when it suits him.

McConnell complained that the House, which impeached Trump which he was still in office, had failed to deliver the impeachment to the Senate in time for a trial. But in fact, the secretary of the Senate had informed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that the Senate was on recess and would not return until January and, while on recess, would not accept the House’s papers. McConnell was in effect saying ‘the only time we could have convicted Donald Trump is when I prevented it.’ So McConnell delayed the trial until Trump was out of office and then said he couldn’t vote to convict because Trump was out of office. Talk about trying to have his cake and eat it too. I suppose it keeps some of the big Republican contributors from fleeing completely.

As for the trial, it was obvious that Senators’ minds had been made up. Several obnoxiously ignored Senate rules by ignoring or even boycotting the proceedings. Trump’s third string lawyers, several more prominent attorneys having resigned prior to the trial, argued the big lie that Trump had really won the election. It is a lie Trump, the liar in chief, will be telling for the rest of his days.

A Little History

Just a little history. Six (later) senators impeached Clinton in the House but acquitted Trump: Blunt, Portman, Thune, Crapo, Moran, and Wicker. Five senators voted to convict Clinton but they acquitted Trump: McConnell, Graham, Grassley, Inhofe and Shelby. Consider, is lying about oral sex is worse than insurrection?

McConnell did suggest the Trump could still face criminal charges as a result of the riot. There is some support for such a move. I have mixed emotions on the wisdom of what would be seen by many as an unprecedented partisan action. It will be interesting to see if Attorney General Merrick Garland, who Mitch McConnell so famously snubbed, pursues the matter.


And About Trump

In the end, McConnell did not do any better with Trump than Pence did. Trump issued a statement responding to McConnell, “Mitch is a dour, sullen, and unsmiling political hack, and if Republican Senators are going to stay with him, they will not win again,” Trump wrote in a statement released by his political action committee. He later added: “The Republican Party can never again be respected or strong with political ‘leaders’ like Sen. Mitch McConnell at its helm.”

First Pence, then McConnell. And of course the seven Republicans who voted guilty. And don’t forget the ten Republicans in the House who voted to impeach. There will be very little room left under the bus once Trump is finished throwing Republicans under it.

#####

The Second Trial of Donald Trump

Posted on by One comment
Been there. Done that.

It seems like just yesterday the Senate tried Donald J. Trump for High Crimes and Misdemeanors. It was in January, 2020. He was acquitted.

This time it is different. The House of Representatives sent over only a single charge, accusing Trump of inciting insurrection in a speech to supporters before the deadly attack on the Capitol. They voted for impeachment without hearings or witnesses, using only the former president’s own words against him. And unlike the first time, where the impeachment was passed on a party-line vote, this time ten Republican members of the House stood with their Democratic collogues.

Another difference is that there was little in the way of defense. About the best Trump’s congressional supporters could do was argue that Trump hadn’t actually told people to stage a riot and kill policemen. That is true. But he did say “we’re going to walk down … to the Capitol…. Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong.” Death and destruction followed.

The other argument was that with only days left in Trump’s term in office, a proceeding designed to remove him from office was a waste of time. In fact it now appears this will be a principal argument at the Senate trial, defenders saying with Trump now out of office, an impeachment trial doesn’t matter and is therefore unconstitutional. That theory has been pushed with great vigor by Rand Paul, the “other” nutcase foisted upon the Senate by the people of Kentucky.

Why It Matters

The Constitution is a wonderful thing. Written in 1787, it was the first written specification for a representative form of government enacted by the governed themselves. To find even an unwritten representative government you would have to go back to the Roman Republic. But as remarkable as it was then it was not perfect. It contained omissions and ambiguities and made compromises which haunt us to this day.

The authors made it clear they saw the Constitution as a work in progress, allowing for amendments to its text and creating a judiciary to help interpret its meaning. On the procedure for trying an impeached officer of the United States they wrote:

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Article I Section 3

There is nothing here that addresses the factual situation we currently face, with a president impeached during his term of office but coming to trial after that term has expired. There is nothing in the scant notes of the debate or in other writings on the Constitution itself that the framers considered this question. But I would argue that common sense alone is sufficient to defeat the notion that a president could commit as heinous a crime as one could imagine in his last few days in office and be immune from prosecution by Congress. That would be one hell of a get out of jail free card.

Obviously one cannot remove from office a president who is no longer in office. And while it is true that the impeachment process is a political function, not as judicial one, judicial bodies are not inclined to render verdicts in cases where the verdict will have no effect. Courts tend to dismiss such cases as “moot”. But that is not the case here. There is a second part to the judgment clause, the disqualification of the convicted from holding federal office in the future. It is doubtful Trump’s accusers are comfortable at the thought that he could seek a second term. For that reason alone, the trial is not without consequence and is clearly Constitutional. Not only that, this situation has been faced as far back as 1797, when the Senate tried one of its own members on an impeachment after he had been expelled.

What’s With John Roberts?

And now, with a great deal of pain, I admit I find myself in some agreement with one of the arguments of Senator Paul and others. It has been announced the John Roberts, the Chief Justice of the United States, will not preside at the second trial of Donald Trump as he did over the first. Senator Patrick Leahy, the president pro tempore of the Senate, will be in the chair.

Why?

Leahy’s office put out a statement indicating this was not Leahy’s choice. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell apparently made the decision. Leahy would normally preside over the trial of any other federal officer. In an interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, Schumer said:

The Constitution says the Chief Justice presides for a sitting president. So that is not going to be—so it was up to John Roberts whether he wanted to preside with a president who’s no longer sitting, Trump. And he doesn’t want to do it. So, traditionally, what has happened is then the next in line is the Senate Pro Tem. That’s the most senior Senator on the Majority side and that’s Senator Leahy, who is a very experienced man and a very fair man.

Yes but. In the first place, Schumer is misquoting. the word “sitting” does not appear in the Constitution. It just says, “President of the United States.” Trump is no longer president. But he was president when he was impeached. One of those pesky little ambiguities I mentioned earlier. In the second place, I’m not sure where this situation made it Robert’s choice to preside or not “preside with a president who’s not longer sitting….” I would think that is a decision for the Senate to make.

No matter how experienced and fair a man Leahy is, he is also a juror and it just doesn’t look right for him to be presiding over the trial. This is a most solemn business. The Chief Justice of the United States owes the people the value of his expertise in presiding over the trial. To do any less delegitimizes the proceedings and in so doing Roberts shirks his responsibilities. These are delineated in his own oath to, “faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.” (Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5124.)

Roberts should be in that chair, like it or not.

#####

Joe Biden’s Day

Posted on by Leave a comment

There is much to say about all the players who participated in the Inauguration of Joseph R. Biden as the 46th President of the United States. But we’ll save that for another day. For this was Joe Biden’s Day. And I want to let him speak in his own words.

“This is America’s day,” Biden said. “This is democracy’s day.” What struck me first and foremost was how normal it all seemed. A new President. A new administration. Words meant to soothe a bruised nation. Words meant to call us to arms to face the challenges ahead. And above all, words not about him, but words about us.

Today, we celebrate the triumph not of a candidate, but of a cause, the cause of democracy. The people, the will of the people, has been heard and the will of the people has been heeded. We’ve learned again that democracy is precious. Democracy is fragile. At this hour, my friends, democracy has prevailed.

After four plus years of having every White House utterance a statement of, by, and for Donald Trump, this was a breath of fresh air. Coming two weeks to the day when a mob of insurrectionists stormed the very same platform in front of the Capitol in an attempt to nullify the voters will this was remarkable.

From now, on this hallowed ground, where just a few days ago, violence sought to shake the Capitol’s very foundation, we come together as one nation, under God, indivisible, to carry out the peaceful transfer of power, as we have for more than two centuries.

Biden pulled no punches in listing the challenges; the Covid pandemic, the climate crisis, political extremism, white supremacy and domestic terrorism. And then he hit his main theme, a call for unity.

I know speaking of unity can sound to some like a foolish fantasy these days. I know the forces that divide us are deep and they are real, but I also know they are not new. Our history has been a constant struggle between the American ideal that we’re all created equal and the harsh, ugly reality that racism, nativism, fear, demonization have long torn us apart. The battle is perennial and victory is never assured.

This is our historic moment of crisis and challenge. And unity is the path forward. And we must meet this moment as the United States of America. If we do that, I guarantee you we will not fail. We have never, ever, ever, ever failed in America when we’ve acted together.

As I read those words it is tough to keep the cynic in me down. So many times we have heard these calls for unity and cooperation only to see the hopes dashed on the rocks of bipartisanship. But this is Biden’s Day so let’s give him his due and hope he can pull it off.

We must end this uncivil war that pits red against blue, rural vs. urban, conservative vs. liberal. We can do this if we open our souls instead of hardening our hearts. If we show a little tolerance and humility, and if we’re willing to stand in the other person’s shoes, as my mom would say, just for a moment, stand in their shoes. Because here’s the thing about life: There’s no accounting for what fate will deal you. Some days when you need a hand. There are other days when we’re called to lend a hand. That’s how it has to be. That’s what we do for one another. And if we are this way, our country will be stronger, more prosperous, more ready for the future. And we can still disagree.

I hope the naysayers and obstructionists will take heed and just give it a try. Bipartisanship does not mean you get your way. It means you compromise. You horse-trade. You win some and lose some. But you move forward and get things done. For decades we have for the most part failed to do this. If anyone can get us moving again, it will be Joe Biden, a man of faith, a man with empathy for others, a man who sees the difference between the truth and the lies, a man who has been in the Senate and worked with representatives of both parties for longer than most of us have been alive.

Folks, this is a time of testing. We face an attack on our democracy and on truth, a raging virus, growing inequity, the sting of systemic racism, a climate in crisis, America’s role in the world. Any one of these will be enough to challenge us in profound ways. But the fact is, we face them all at once, presenting this nation with one of the gravest responsibilities we’ve had. Now we’re going to be tested. Are we going to step up? All of us? It’s time for boldness, for there is so much to do. And this is certain, I promise you: We will be judged, you and I, by how we resolve these cascading crises of our era.

Now we all face the test. How will we respond to Biden’s call?

#####

Twice Impeached

Posted on by 2 comments

Another record for the man who is everything. Donald Trump is now the only person to have been impeached twice by the House of Representatives. Whether or not he is found guilty when tried by the Senate, he also has the distinction of being a president of the United States accused by a bipartisan coalition. Ten Republican House members voted to impeach the titular head of their party. Four others abstained from the vote.

It is not difficult to see why. The impeachment came one week after a violent mob, encouraged by Trump, came to Washington and attacked Congress in an attempt to keep it from counting the certified election results sent in by all fifty states and the District of Columbia. Trump, leader of the executive branch of government, was demanding the mob stop the legislative branch from performing its constitutional and statutory function and instead disenfranchise millions of voters and install Trump as a literal dictator.

Read more

trump’s attempted coup – THAT WAS the week that was

Posted on by Leave a comment
The Week is Over

The cliché says that journalism is the first draft of history. We shall have to wait the verdict of historians several years down the road to craft a title for the tumultuous events of the last week and put them into perspective. For now it shall suffice to note that the FBI is calling on citizens to help identify members of the violent mob of Donald Trump supporters who attacked the United States Capitol on Wednesday in an attempt to stop Congress from tallying the Electoral College votes declaring Joseph Biden and Kamala Harris the next president and vice-president.

It was the first time since the Constitution was ratified on June 21, 1788, that a President of the United States attempted to overturn the results of an election and remain in office after the election of his successor had been certified by the states and the District of Columbia.

Read more

trump’s attempted coup – Day 5

Posted on by Leave a comment
January 7 – Insurrection

A violent mob of Donald Trump supporters, urged to action by Trump himself, Wednesday attacked the United States Capitol in an attempt to stop Congress from tallying the certified Electoral College votes declaring Joseph Biden and Kamala Harris the next president and vice-president of the United States.

In that, they failed.

But for hours they laid siege to the seat of the American government, marauding through the halls, vandalizing offices, occupying the chambers of the Senate and the House of Representatives, and preventing the members from attending to the business of the day. Before the insurrection was quelled, shots had been fired inside the Capitol and on the grounds, tear gas and flash bangs had been utilized, and four people had died.

Read more
« Older Entries