Honor and Morality vs. Trump

One way to think about what we are witnessing as the public impeachment hears unfold is to think of a mix between the movie "The Godfather" and sleazy real estate investors/developers who skirt the laws and often rely on bribes and treats to push their projects along.  Donald Trump - and sadly most of those who have signed on to his administration - embody this combination of criminality and moral haziness, if not out right moral bankruptcy.  As the hearings unfold in contrast to this corruption and lawlessness, one is witnessing individuals cut from the cloth of old school career diplomats who, unlike Trump, put honor, professionalism, and country ahead of squalid personal gain.  An op-ed in the Washington Post co-authored by a law school classmate, Evan Thomas, who has written numerous historical works looks at this stark contrast between Trump world and what ought to be the standard for government service.  If Trump avoids removal from office, it will be a sad day for America.  It will also be a sign that morality has been kicked into the gutter by someone little better than a mob boss and that immorality is now the hallmark of the Republican Party.  Here are column highlights: 

Geography, Napoleon is reputed to have remarked, is destiny, and this axiom came to our minds this week as we watched two very different but neighboring universes collide before the House Intelligence Committee. The ramrod-straight William B. Taylor Jr. and the bow-tied George Kent, two diplomats from the largely WASP ethos of the post-World War II foreign policy establishment, one headquartered at places such as the Council on Foreign Relations’ imposing Harold Pratt House at 68th Street and Park Avenue, found themselves bearing noble witness amid an impeachment imbroglio that may be best understood by an appreciation of the wilder mores of midtown Manhattan. 

Only a few blocks away from the portrait-lined walls and genteel cocktails of the Council lies the real center of gravity in the politics of 2019: the gilded Trump Tower, built on the fluid morals and cutthroat deal-making of New York real estate. The Tower sits cheek-by-jowl (the image is chosen purposely) with the Grand Havana Room, a cigar club frequented by Rudy Giuliani, atop a Fifth Avenue building owned by the family of Jared Kushner. Walk a bit farther south — you don’t even need a Town Car — and you reach Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., home of Fox News and the New York Post.

To Trump supporters, the testimony Wednesday was the “deep state” surfacing briefly from the depths of white papers, institutional knowledge and a facility with U.S. military and diplomatic history. (Kent’s evocation of von Steuben and Lafayette was straight out of a Ward Just novel.)

To Trump’s critics and defenders of constitutional norms, the Republican narrative that the president’s threats to deny security assistance to Ukraine was just the kind of thing tough guys do (and, after getting caught, he didn’t do it!), suggested that tabloid hyperbole, Fox News arcana and New York hardball had replaced the real world.

The story of upended conventions and of a president who careens between self-parody and serious lawlessness is by now familiar, as old as the Age of Trump itself. The distinction is that the impeachment hearings have given us perhaps the clearest example yet of the triumph of political demimonde wise guys such as Trump, Giuliani and the Rogers Stone and Ailes over the latter-day Robert Lovetts and Dean Achesons. And it’s not just Wise Men, of course: Jeane Kirkpatrick, Madeleine Albright and Condoleezza Rice hailed from the establishment world, as do Marie Yovanovitch and Fiona Hill. The moment of decision between the Wise Men and the wise guys on Wednesday was subtle but nevertheless clear. It came when Rep. Michael R. Turner, a Republican, noted that diplomats such as Taylor and Kent “deal in words of understanding. Words of beliefs and feelings, because in your profession, that’s what you work with to try to pull together policy.” Theirs, the lawmaker was implying, was almost a touchingly naive way of life in which one trusted what one was told, assumed the fundamental truthfulness of, say, a presidentially appointed ambassador, and believed that a president himself meant what he said.

No longer: The midtown game of wheeling and dealing, often done over a cigar at the Grand Havana or perhaps an overpriced steak at 21, has now gone global as the denizens of Trump’s neighborhood run shadow foreign policy ops seeking 2020 election help and good paydays.

Had any other president, Taylor was asked, linked official aid in the American interest to private or political benefit? With a stoicism and brevity that would’ve made George Marshall quietly proud, Taylor replied, “No.”

To be sure, the establishment has been far from perfect, its fall from preeminence more than partly self-inflicted. Elite education and conventional expertise don’t guarantee good results, and America has been shaped by the battle between the privileged and the populist since long before Andrew Jackson. Such establishment condescension also fueled the rise of Joe McCarthy and of McCarthy’s chief counsel, Roy Cohn, who served as lawyer and mentor in the 1970s and ’80s to a young developer from Queens who was looking to make it big in Manhattan. And Donald Trump never forgot a thing Cohn taught him. In midtown Manhattan, Trump learned to dominate the news — in his rise, that meant the New York Post, with its screaming, one-sourced stories, an early harbinger of the presidential Twitter strategy. He learned the power of TV. And he learned that tough guys — or “killers,” in a favorite approbation of Trump’s — like Ailes, who presided over this stew of often-abusive power, money and misinformation, were the kinds of guys he could count on.

For one thing was certain: The Wise Men of 68th Street or the United Nations or any of the traditional institutions of expertise weren’t his guys. The question America now faces in impeachment and, should Trump prevail, in the 2020 election, is whose New York will serve us best in the long run — the wise guys’ or the Wise Men’s?

Be very, very afraid.

Today's Republicans: They Have No Sense of Decency

In his remarkable inaugural address yesterday Virginia Governor Ralph Northam addressed what may be one of the biggest domestic threats to America today:  the utter loss of decency and morality among the nation's politicians, particularly Republicans who continue to refuse to counter or rein in the toxicity flowing daily from the White House.  Northam said in part as follows:

My dad’s advice stayed with me when I reached the Virginia Military Institute and was given a different kind of compass, in the simple words of the VMI honor code: “A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal, nor tolerate those who do.” Those words have stuck with me all these years because they’re so clear. They have become a kind of moral compass for me. They always call me back home safely.

Virginia and this country need that more than ever these days. It can be hard to find our way in a time when there’s so much shouting, when nasty, shallow tweets take the place of honest debate, and when scoring political points gets in the way of dealing with real problems.

If you’ve felt that way, I want you to listen to me right now: We are bigger than this.We all have a moral compass deep in our hearts. And it’s time to summon it again, because we have a lot of work to do.

Sadly, as noted, these concepts appear to be lost or non-existence among today's congressional Republicans who could, if they wanted to, counter Trump or even remove him from office.  Yet it seems Republicans no longer have any sense of decency.  A piece in The Atlantic looks at this threat and the question that moral people need to loudly ask Republicans.  Here are column excerpts:

“Have you no sense of decency?” It’s the question that the members of the Republican majority in the Congress—51 senators, 239 representatives—might bear in mind, in the “shithole” era.

If only two of those senators would stand up against Donald Trump, with their votes rather than just their tweets or concerned statements, they would constitute an effective majority.

With the 49 Democratic and independent senators, these two would make 51 votes, which in turn would be enough to authorize real investigations. They could pass a formal resolution of censure. They could call for tax returns and financial disclosure. They could begin hearings, on the model of the nationally televised Watergate hearings of 45 years ago.

They could behave as if they took seriously their duties to hold the executive branch accountable. They could make a choice they know will be to their credit when this era enters history — as did the Republicans who finally turned against their own party’s President Nixon during the Watergate drama, as did the Democrats who finally turned against their own party’s President Johnson over the Vietnam war, as did the Republicans who finally turned against their own poisonous Senator McCarthy in the episode that gave rise to “Have you no sense of decency?” more than 60 years ago. They could spare themselves the shame that history attaches to people who did the wrong thing, or nothing, or kept looking the other way during those decisive periods.

If any of these two, or some other pair from the thirty-plus remaining Republicans, decided to take a stand, they would not change everything about  this perilous moment in politics. But they would do something, about the open secret of a destructive presidency that nearly all of their colleagues are aware of and virtually none is doing anything about.

They could remind their colleagues of the Senate’s appropriate check-and-balance function.

And they could spare themselves, in history’s perspective, the question Joseph Welch so memorably asked the rampaging Senator Joe McCarthy, during the Army-McCarthy hearings of 1954.

From the Senate’s own historical  site:  As an amazed television audience looked on, Welch responded with the immortal lines that ultimately ended McCarthy's career:

"Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness." When McCarthy tried to continue his attack, Welch angrily interrupted, "Let us not assassinate this lad further, senator. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?"

Have you no sense of decency? It is a question worth pondering, in the shithole era.

If You Work for/Supported Trump, It’s Time to Quit/Stop

One thing that baffled me during the 2016 presidential campaign was how decent, moral individuals could support Donald Trump, a narcissistic pathological liar, sleazy businessman, and serial sexual predator.  True, Hillary Clinton left much to be desired in the minds of some, but one would think that the tape of Trump boasting about molesting women and grabbing them in their genitals seemingly should have outweighed reservations with Clinton.  I like to think that Trump's calls to racism and bigotry were not the determinative factor with Trump voters who in other ways seem decent.  Now, with a special prosecutor in place and literally daily breaking news revealing yet more Trump transgressions and efforts to obstruct justice, isn't it time to walk away form Trump and regain integrity and arguably patriotism as well?  A column by a 30 year Republican political consultant in the Washington Post addressed to White House staff and even Cabinet members would seem to apply to Trump voters as well.  Here are column excerpts:

I’ve been a Republican political consultant for almost 30 years, and I’ve dispensed a lot of private advice. But now it’s time for me to reach out publicly to my fellow Republicans working in the Trump administration.

We really need to talk.

Whether you’re a 20-something fresh off the campaign trail, or a seasoned Washington insider serving in the Cabinet, by now you’re painfully aware that you’re not making America great again; you’re barely making it to the end of the daily news cycle before your verbally incontinent boss, the putative leader of the free world, once again steers the proverbial car into a ditch. On every front, you’re faced with legal, political and moral hazards. The president’s job, and yours, is a lot harder than it looked, and you know the problem originates in the Oval Office.

I know: Many of you serving in Cabinet, sub-Cabinet and White House roles joined Team Trump in good faith, believing you could help steady the ship, smooth the rough edges and, just maybe, put some conservative policy wins up on the board. You could see that President Trump’s undisciplined style was risky, but you hoped the big show playing over at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. would provide you with cover to work steadily and enthusiastically on the administration’s legislative priorities. Some of you even bought into the ‘Merica First new nationalism. Many of you quietly assured friends in the Washington ecosystem that Trump would settle into his job . . . .

Sure, you knew you’d have to feed Trump’s ego and let him take a victory lap after every success, but you also thought you might claim a smidgen of credit for a popular infrastructure bill, a big tax cut, repeal of Obamacare or a host of other “easy” lifts. Because we’re all ambitious, right? It’s okay to admit it. . . . . Instead, your president botched Trumpcare 1.0 and contributed little as Speaker Paul Ryan managed to ram public-relations nightmare, Trumpcare 2.0, through the House at the cost of much political blood and treasure. Instead, Trump’s fumbles have left many members of Congress ducking town hall meetings like they’re in the witness protection program. The tax bill and the rest of Trump’s agenda are deader and more pungent than six-day-old fish.

Now, you see the daily train wreck; you see a White House in turmoil and a president drawing an ever-tighter circle of family and corporate vassals around himself. You worry that the scandals and legal troubles, which have been rumbling on the horizon like a summer thunderstorm, are drawing nearer. You should worry. . . . Soon (and by soon, I mean now) you’ll have to make a choice. You’ll have to decide whether I’m here to help has morphed into I’m helping this president dismantle the republic. In D.C., principle is as rare as hen’s teeth, but, GOP friends, I’m here to help you.

Sticking with Trump to the bitter end and pretending the unfolding chaos is just “fake news” won’t save your reputation as the walls close in. It won’t ease the judgment of history. It won’t do anything to polish up your future Wikipedia entry.

Cutting ties with a man who is destructive to our values, profoundly divisive, contemptuous of the rule of law and incontrovertibly unfit to serve in the highest office in the land just might. Do it now.

Ralph Northam - The Best Choice for Governor on June 13, 2017

Your's truly with Ralph Northam and his wife, Pam Northam

With the news that Robert S. Mueller III, a former prosecutor who served as the FBI director from 2001 to 2013, has been appointed as special prosecutor  to investigate Trump campaign/Russia ties and seemingly Trump's efforts to thwart the FBI investigations of the possible collusion with Russian agents and/or Vladimir Putin, it should be glaringly obvious that the character of a candidate matters immensely,  That includes a candidates' integrity when it comes to being true to past positions rather than masquerading as something new simply to attract votes.  The following is a cross post of my May, 2017, column in VEER Magazine which makes the argument that Lt. Governor Ralph Northam is the best choice for the Democrat gubernatorial nomination and why people need to vote for Ralph Northam on June 13th  (read the entire piece at VEER):

I grew up in a family that was politically involved.  For roughly 25 years I have been in the political trenches, first as a Republican where I was a city committee member for the Republican Party of Virginia Beach and a precinct captain, and then as an independent with strong Democrat leanings after the Republican Party became something akin to a reprehensible sectarian party.  I even ran for Virginia Beach school board in 1994 only to be labeled "Christian Right" by the Virginia Beach Education Association.  I guess I've had the last laugh on that fabricated story line.

 

Through all my years of political involvement, one thing that I learned is that it is critical to research candidates and make sure that they are what they claim to be in campaign ads and to verify their claimed political positions on issues. Many are not what they claim and will change their supposed stances if they deem it politically expedient for their own benefit.  Never mind that their past voting records and positions are readily available for those willing to take a few minutes to do some homework and/or check out campaign web pages.  Too many people simply do not take the time. Indeed, many of my "friends" who voted for Donald Trump and who have since feigned shock over his anti-LGBT agenda as evidenced by rescission of many Obama era protections and his new and falsely named "religious freedom" executive order that allows tax-exempt anti-gay churches to engage in political activity, never took the requisite time to see who/what they were actually voting for.  The "religious freedom" executive order makes every citizen, including LGBT individuals, indirectly underwrite churches that peddle hatred as they stock in trade.   Now, these "friends" want me to "forgive and forget" - something that will not happen.

 

While we cannot undo the results of the 2016 presidential election, we do have an opportunity to make sure that similar mistakes do not occur this November when Virginia will elect new statewide officials, including the governor and attorney general, and all of the members of the House of Delegates.  With the Trump/Pence regime and a Republican controlled Congress posing an ongoing threat to Virginia's economy and the civil rights of all of its citizens - not just angry whites and or Christian extremists - electing a Democrat to Virginia's governor's mansion in November 2017, is more important than ever.  Indeed, a Democrat in the governor's mansion may be one of the few firewalls available to guard against the worse agendas coming out of the White House and the GOP controlled Congress.

 

For me, the man best suited for the position is Lt. Governor Ralph Northam, a man who I have known since he launched his first campaign for the Virginia Senate and who has held fast to his principles and ideals.  Yet, seemingly out of nowhere a possible wrench has been thrown into Virginia Democrats' plan for an orderly, uncontested race to nominate Ralph Northam for the party's 2017 gubernatorial nomination.  That wrench is one term Congressman Tom Perriello, who only served from 2009 to 2011 before losing to a right wing tea party candidate.  Perriello has challenged Lt. Governor Ralph Northam for the party nomination and is parading himself around Virginia as the "progressive" candidate in the contest and holding himself out as the best choice for forward looking Virginians.  Based on my research to date, Perriello's claims simply are not true.

 

Worse yet, in my view, Perriello's entrance into the contest is serving only three purposes: (i) to divide the party in Democrat Virginia - much as Bernie Sanders did in the 2016 presidential race, (ii) to divert funds that would be better spent on the general election against the eventual Republican opponent, and (ii) fan the vanities of Perriello and his out of state endorsers such as Sanders and Elizabeth Warren who seemingly have not done their homework when it comes to Perriello.  What is most disturbing is that, if the Republicans should win the governor's mansion in November, 2017, the consequences for many Virginians will be horrific.  LGBT rights, women's rights and minority rights will have no firewall to stop the ugliest efforts of the currently Republican controlled House of Delegates or to push back against the most egregious Trump/Pence initiatives.  Look no farther than North Carolina to see what GOP control of the governor's mansion could mean. All so that Perriello, Sanders and Warren can satisfy their egos?

 

I will be blunt.  I do not believe that Perriello can win against someone like the heavily funded GOP gubernatorial front runner, Ed Gillespie and, if that happens, the outcome will harm Virginians and Virginia's economy for years to come.  Tom Perriello claims that he has broad grassroots support, yet nearly 60% of Perriello's campaign funds raised to date has come from sources outside of Virginia as have all of his major endorsements. 

 

In sharp contrast, virtually all of Virginia's major domestic Democrats have endorsed Lt. Governor Ralph Northam in the coming Democrat primary. Why? Several reasons, in my view. First, because Northam is a steady candidate with years of experience unlike Perriello, a two year flash in the pan, despite Warren's efforts to fluff his resume.  Second, Northam has been in the trenches for years and has helped other Democrat candidates and worked with the party's grassroots, if you will.  My husband and I have been in those trenches for years (I confess I've turned him into an activist), have been on host committees and given money over and over again. Perriello has been nowhere to be seen in Virginia or in Virginia politics.  Third, Northam is right on the issues - including LGBT rights which Perriello barely mentions in passing on his campaign website - and brings the much needed perspective of a physician into play.  

 

Most disturbing, however, is the fact that Perriello is not being honest with primary voters about his actual record.  While arguably progressive on a few economic issues, the rest of his stances and voting record are anything but progressive.  Here's a sampling of what Slate.com had to say earlier in the year about Perriello's less than truthful storyline (emphasis mine):

 

But this narrative isn’t quite right. Northam may have crafted a moderate image, but in reality he is a fierce advocate for liberal causes who hews closely to the Democratic platform. And Perriello, for all his progressive bona fides, has a voting record that clashes with the party’s current support for gun safety measures and, more importantly, reproductive rights.  During his unsuccessful 2010 re-election campaign, Perriello boasted of his A rating from the National Rifle Association, which was a result of his opposition to an assault weapons ban.

 

When then–Attorney General Eric Holder proposed reinstating the ban, Perriello wrote a letter to Obama asserting that “to even consider reinstating an ‘assault weapon’ ban is an affront to our Founding Fathers, who so clearly understood the importance of the ordinary citizens' right to keep and bear arms.”

 

Perriello’s anti-abortion record will be harder to explain. In 2009, Perriello voted for the odious Stupak amendment, a dramatic extension of the infamous Hyde amendment. The Stupak amendment would’ve prohibited insurance companies that participate in the Affordable Care Act’s exchanges from covering abortion.

 

Five Thirty Eight blog hasn't been much kinder to Perriello and has looked at Perriello's recent gyrations to disavow - and distract voters from - his past positions:

 

This desire to win over activists might account for a number of position shifts Perriello has made of late. In January, he pilloried the NRA as “nut-job extremist organization” in the post-Sandy Hook era, but during his time in Congress, he received campaign funds and an “A” rating from the organization. In January, Virginia GOP chairman John Whitbeck made a sneering prediction about Perriello’s stance on offshore drilling, which he had supported while in Congress: “I look forward to yet another heart-felt, tear filled Jimmy Swaggart-style Facebook post in which Tom Perriello repents for his previous sins.

 

On offshore drilling, Perriello also voted against increasing safety standards at offshore drilling rigs after the BP oil spill.  On immigration, Perriello is equally duplicitous and must be channeling Donald Trump as his model.  America Rising had this to say (emphasis mine):

 

During his short gubernatorial campaign, Perriello has already flip-flopped on off-shore drilling, government funding of abortions, and Second Amendment rights. Now Perriello has added immigration to that already voluminous list of flip-flops. According to Politico, Perriello now supports immigration reform and the DREAM Act, but when he ran for Congress Perriello was a supporter of undocumented immigrants “self-deporting.”

 

Yes, you read that correctly.  Perriello said immigrants should self-deport themselves.  He is equally disingenuous when it comes to the issue of gay rights.  In his 2008 congressional campaign, Perriello said that marriage should be defined between a man and a woman.  In contrast Lt. Governor Northam  supported marriage equality in his 2013 campaign.  In addition, he cast a tiebreaking vote in 2015 to advance legislation barring discrimination in state hiring on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Compare Northam's campaign web page with its entire section on LGBT rights and civil rights with Perriello's slim sentence on the entire issue of civil rights and the difference is glaring.

Suffice it to say, of the two, Ralph Northam - who as noted above I have known from the beginning of his state senate career - is the true progressive and the true LGBT ally and the right person to move Virginia forward as Governor of Virginia.  I urge you to go to the polls on June 13, 2017 in the Democrat primary and vote for Ralph Northam.  The 2016 presidential election should be a stark reminder of the consequences of staying home and not voting.  Ralph Northam will not disappoint you.

Elections, including primaries matter and directly impact our lives.  PLEASE get out and vote for Ralph Northam on June 13, 2017!

Salt Lake Tribune Endorses Hillary Clinton

OMG!  Get me some smelling salts!  I never thought I'd see the day where the Salt Lake Tribune would endorse a Democrat, much less than Hillary Clinton.  The fact that the Salt Lake Tribune in Mormon heavy Utah is endorsing Clinton speaks volumes about the toxicity of Donald Trump and the danger he poses for America - and the world at large.  Simply put, Trump is unfit for elected office - any political office.  Here are highlights from the Tribune's endorsement:

It has been amusing, to a degree, to watch the circus that was the Republican primary process struggle and fuss and finally produce such a disappointment to be its presidential nominee.

And there is no question that there are many Americans who feel lost and confused about a world that, in their eyes, has left them behind. Significant numbers of people have expressed a desire to blow up the system and start over. Or, more accurately, to pull America back to a day that was special only in that it placed white males alone at the top of the power pyramid.

But now the ballots have been printed and are arriving in Utah mailboxes. It is time to make a reasonable, considerate, realistic vote for president of the United States.

This election presents the two most unpopular candidates in recent history. One has developed a reputation for secrecy and dishonesty. The other built a campaign on insults and bigoted statements, finally losing any right to be taken seriously with the recent release of a video in which he was heard to brag about his ability to get away with sexually assaulting women.

There is certainly not a perfect choice but, at this point, the only candidate who comes close to being qualified and fit for the post is Hillary Clinton.

She has shown that she is tough, yet able and willing to reach out to politicians to her left and her right in order to get things done.

Her secret plan to reform health care in America during her husband's administration fell incompetently apart. But she learned from that experience and later worked across party lines to extend health insurance to millions of children.

Clinton's devotion to making the world a better place for the less fortunate, especially children, has been the core of her whole career. She sees the threats of terror abroad, gun violence at home and climate change globally and has plans to address all of that, and more.

She would make tax policy more equitable and work to help the poor climb out of their misery.

She has stood up for religious freedom around the world, even in dealing with regimes such as China, where it was a risky position to take.

The fact that she would be the first woman to hold that post is a bonus. It would be a signal to young women in this nation, and around the world, that the toughest glass ceiling there is has finally been shattered.

Yes, there are flaws and concerns, as there would be with anyone who has danced in the minefield of public life for 40 years. Clinton can be disturbingly secretive and has made a few big errors . . . . FBI says it has cleared her of any criminal wrongdoing and she has repeatedly admitted that she was wrong to leave all that sensitive information in such a vulnerable spot.

[A]s it played out, his [Trump's] entire campaign was based on divisive, bigoted and insulting rhetoric. On lies about how bad things are. On a promise to fix things by basically being a dictator. It was all designed to inflame a vocal minority of us who haven't adjusted to the fact that the America where white males brought home the bacon from secure factory jobs — and didn't have to deal with a globe of different ethnic backgrounds — is gone for good.

[A] President Clinton and the leaders of Congress, even if it remains in Republican hands, can get past eight years of gridlock and work together to make the hard choices that lie ahead.

Utah Republicans were perceptive enough to reject Trump in their March presidential caucus voting. Were they to support Clinton now, even by the narrowest of pluralities, it would send a strong message to the Republican Party to turn their backs on Trumpism and to work with Clinton where they can, rather than devote themselves to blocking her every move.

Wow! To quote an old song from my younger days, I felt the earth move under my feet.  Remarkable. It would seem that Mormons in Utah have far more moral decency and integrity than the professional Christian set and the hard core Christofascists.