Your generous
donations help keep
this site running.
Visa/MC/PayPal accepted.
Robert Mueller broke his two-year silence this week, as he strode boldly to the podium and loudly announced: "ITMFA!" and then withdrew. 'This caused the term to spike in Google searches to a level never seen before on any subject, ever.
Well, no. That's not what happened. Many now think that's what should have happened, but unfortunately it did not.
I generally try to avoid writing more than one article per week on any given subject, and although official Democratic debate rules is a wonky thing to write about to begin with, it is going to be critical to how the 2020 presidential nominating contest plays out. So I thought it was worth a second look, because the debate surrounding the Democratic debates just got a little more intense.
Robert Mueller spoke in public today. This was a newsworthy event because it is the first time he has done so since the start of his tenure as the special counsel investigating the 2016 election, Russian interference, and Donald Trump's obstruction of justice. If Mueller has his way about it, it will also be the last public statement he makes on any of these subjects. However, Mueller also announced his office was closing and he was ending his status as a Justice Department employee, meaning that as a private citizen there will now be nothing stopping him from testifying before any congressional committees which want to speak with him. Mueller all but begged not to be called by any of these committees, stating as plainly as he could that his written report should be considered as his whole testimony, and that he won't be going beyond its bounds should he appear in person.
Last week, the Democratic National Committee quietly instituted a new rule for their first debate, which was created to avoid having a "kiddie table" debate on either of the two scheduled nights. This was a smart move, given that the entire random selection scheme was set up in the first place to avoid lumping all the leading candidates together in one debate, leaving all the struggling candidates to compete with each other in the other debate. It will still be a random selection process, but there will now be two tiers.
What do you do with a president who wants to be impeached? That's a surreal question, but then again we live in surreal times. Donald Trump seems more and more like a man begging the House Democrats to impeach him. It's like every political decision he makes is designed to be so outrageous that it'll surely goad Democrats into starting an impeachment committee.
That headline can, of course, be read two ways. One is very serious, since America has experienced multiple natural disasters over the course of the past year which have not yet been adequately addressed by Congress. And the other is, well, ironic. As we all lurch to the end of another "Infrastructure [...]
You just know it's going to be entertaining when the White House announces an upcoming "Infrastructure Week," because the end result is always a fiery trainwreck of epic proportions. In one of the first instances of this recurring phenomenon, Donald Trump hijacked (there's simply no better word for it) what was supposed to be a press announcement rolling out a plan to reduce regulations to get road projects built faster. With Elaine Chao helplessly looking on from the sidelines, Trump instead let fly his unhinged "very fine people on both sides" rant in response to the racist riots in Charlottesville, Virginia. That was the biggest and most spectacular Trumpian trainwreck during a planned Infrastructure Week, to date. But now we've got President Man-Baby's latest temper tantrum to compare it to. Because Infrastructure Week always means "never a dull moment" in the Trump White House.
President Donald Trump is stonewalling Congress. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is not convinced that the time has yet come to open impeachment hearings. If this dynamic doesn't change, then the battles over access to Trump, Trump's advisors, and Trump's business records (including his taxes) will likely play out in the federal courts. Trump is convinced that this is either a winning strategy for him, or at the very least a way to stall the entire fight until after next year's election. If either of those are true, he will avoid any negative consequences for his actions at least until he knows whether he's going to get a second term or not. But he may have miscalculated, because his "big stall" tactic may just backfire on him in a big way.
It's always amusing when the inside-the-Beltway pundits realize with astonishment that they've been wrong about something. What happens is that one of them decides they know "what the American voter is thinking" and then all the rest of them stampede to the conclusion that this is really what's going on out in the heartland. They write articles and make television appearances corroborating each others' opinions, and it soon becomes virtually accepted fact among the cognoscenti. Then, reality interjects itself and their house of cards collapses -- leaving them to construct yet another false narrative to run with (which they almost always immediately do).
It's been yet another week of life so bizarre it'd be hard to even imagine it as satirical art. Who would best be able to capture the lunacy and doublethink emanating from Trump's White House? Joseph Heller? George Orwell? Douglas Adams? Or perhaps Dr. Seuss? In other words, just another glorious week in Trumpland, folks.