The Commentariat -- November 4, 2019
Late Morning/Afternoon Update:
Brian Stelter of CNN: "The Justice Department is going on the offensive against the anonymous author of 'A Warning,' telling them in a letter obtained by CNN Business that he or she may be violating 'one or more nondisclosure agreements' by writing the anti-Trump book. The author's publisher is rejecting the argument and saying the book will be released as scheduled. And the author's agents are accusing the government of trying to unmask the author.... A Justice Department official said that the letter, from the head of the agency's civil division, was part of a fact-gathering process and that other similar requests had gone out to authors who'd worked for the government. The letter was not necessarily indicative of a looming lawsuit, the official said, just one step in a routine procedure." ~~~
~~~ Maggie Haberman of the New York Times: "The Justice Department is trying to unearth the identity of the Trump administration official who denounced the president in a New York Times Op-Ed last year under the byline Anonymous, according to a letter from a senior law enforcement official on Monday. In the letter, Assistant Attorney General Joseph H. Hunt asked the publisher of a forthcoming book by the writer and the author's book agents for proof that the official never signed a nondisclosure agreement and had no access to classified information or, absent that, for information about where the person worked in the government, and when..... Mr. Trump, people close to him said, has long been troubled by the existence of Anonymous, whose Op-Ed condemned him as essentially unfit for office and described a 'resistance' within the administration trying to keep the government on course.... Mr. Trump said last year that he wanted the Justice Department to investigate the essay, declaring its writing an act of treason. Prosecutors said at the time that such an inquiry would be inappropriate because it was likely that no laws were broken." ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: Huh. When Trump became president* & started demanding White House employees sign nondisclosure agreements, various expert attorneys said the NDAs were unenforceable against federal employees. If so, how come the so-called Justice Department is trying to determine whether or not Anonymous signed one? If those experts were right, then DOJ is continuing to act as Trump's private attorney rather than as ours.
Harper Neidig of the Hill: "A federal appeals court on Monday ruled that President Trump can't block the Manhattan district attorney's office from subpoenaing his accounting firm for financial records. A three-judge panel on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals said that 'presidential immunity does not bar the enforcement of a state grand jury subpoena directing a third party to produce non-privileged material, even when the subject matter under investigation pertains to the President.' But the court noted they were not ruling on all of the sweeping claims of immunity that the president's lawyers claim. Developing..." Mrs. McC: That's all there is to the story, except that it also includes a Scribd of the ruling. ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: NBC News reports that Jay Sekulow, one of Trump's lawyers, says they will take the case to the Supreme Court. Pete Williams of NBC News feels the deck is stacked against Trump, and that the Supremes could decline to take the case, letting the appellate court ruling stand. ~~~
~~~ Update: The New York Times story, by Benjamin Weiser, is here. "A federal appeals panel said on Monday that President Trump's accounting firm must turn over eight years of his personal and corporate tax returns to Manhattan prosecutors, a setback for the president's attempt to keep his financial records private. The three-judge appeals panel did not take a position on the president's biggest argument -- that he was immune from all criminal investigations. A lower court had called that argument 'repugnant to the nation's governmental structure and constitutional values.' Instead, the appeals court said the president's accounting firm, not Mr. Trump himself, was subpoenaed for the documents, so it did not matter whether presidents have immunity."
House Intelligence Committee: Today, Rep. Adam Schiff, Chair of the House Intel Committee, Rep. Eliot Engel, Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Rep. Carolyn Maloney, Acting Chair of the House Oversight Committee, "released the transcripts of former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie 'Masha' Yovanovitch and former Senior Advisor to the Secretary of State Ambassador P. Michael McKinley.... The testimony of former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie 'Masha' Yovanovitch from October 11, 2019 can be found here. Key excerpts from Yovanovitch's testimony can be found here. The testimony of former Senior Advisor to the Secretary of State Ambassador P. Michael McKinley from October 16, 2019 can be found here. Key excerpts from McKinley's testimony can be found here.” ~~~
~~~ Kiss Ass or Kiss Ukraine Goodbye. Adam Edelman, et al., of NBC News: "Marie Yovanovitch, the ousted U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, told House impeachment investigators last month that U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland told her she should tweet out support or praise for ... Donald Trump if she wanted to save her job, according to a transcript of her testimony made public Monday.... According to the transcript, Yovanovitch [said] she asked Sondland for advice on how to handle an onslaught of criticism from conservative media and Donald Trump Jr. 'He said, "You know, you need to go big or go home. You need to, you know, tweet out there that you support the president, and that all these are lies and everything else,'" she told the committees. 'It was advice that I did not see how I could implement in my role as an ambassador, and as a Foreign Service officer.'... Yovanovitch testified to House investigators Oct. 11 that Trump had personally pressured the State Department to remove her, even though a top department official [John Sullivan] assured her that she had 'done nothing wrong.'"
Michael Schmidt & Nicholas Fandos of the New York Times: "The White House's top national security lawyer declined to appear for a scheduled deposition on Monday morning, saying he would wait to hear what a federal judge ruled on whether President Trump's closest advisers have to answer questions from congressional investigators. The lawyer, John A. Eisenberg, played a central role in dealing with the fallout at the White House from a July call between President Trump and the Ukrainian president.... The committee subpoenaed Mr. Eisenberg to appear on Monday morning for questioning, but the White House informed Mr. Eisenberg's lawyer in recent days that Mr. Trump would block his testimony by invoking 'constitutional immunity,' a sweeping form of executive privilege it has been claiming for officials who have the closest interactions with the president. Mr. Eisenberg's decision heightens the importance of an unusual lawsuit filed by Mr. Trump's former deputy national security adviser, Charles M. Kupperman, who faced the same situation as Mr. Eisenberg: a subpoena from the House and an instruction from Mr. Trump not to comply with it."
Allan Smith of NBC News: "... Donald Trump said Monday that written answers from the whistleblower to Congress would be unacceptable -- although such answers were fine for the president when dealing with former special counsel Robert Mueller. 'The Whistleblower gave false information & dealt with corrupt politician Schiff,' Trump tweeted. 'He must be brought forward to testify. Written answers not acceptable! Where is the 2nd Whistleblower? He disappeared after I released the transcript. Does he even exist? Where is the informant? Con!'"
Anita Kumar of Politico: "In 2006, Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump traveled to Ukraine to meet with government officials about building a multimillion dollar hotel and golf course in the country. Two years later, Trump Jr. was back to meet with developers. The Trumps were looking to erect luxury resorts across the former Soviet republics.... But doing so meant navigating a landscape that had long struggled with corruption.... Now, a decade after his company's efforts floundered..., Donald Trump is arguing that it's the son of his political rival Joe Biden, not him, who wanted to benefit from what he calls a 'very corrupt' Ukraine. The president's critics say it's a now-familiar Trumpian contradiction, one that raises further doubts about the president's claim he merely wanted to root out corruption when he pressured Ukrainian officials to investigate the Biden.... The overtures [the Trumps made in Ukraine] offer another example of the complications of a businessman-turned-president making foreign policy decisions in places where he has had -- or tried to have -- significant financial interests.... House and Senate committees appear to be unaware of the Trump Organization's prior Ukraine connections, according to more than half a dozen lawmakers and staffers." ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie: Kumar's reporting helps explain this WashPo story by Greg Jaffe & Josh Dawsey (Nov. 2): "'They are horrible, corrupt people,' Trump [said of Ukrainians to top advisors].... One theme that runs through almost all [House witness] accounts is Trump's unyielding loathing of Ukraine, which dates to his earliest days in the White House. 'We could never quite understand it,' a former senior White House official said of Trump's view of the former Soviet republic, also saying that much of it stemmed from the president's embrace of conspiracy theories. 'There were accusations that they had somehow worked with the Clinton campaign. There were accusations they'd hurt him. He just hated Ukraine.'... Trump's animosity to Ukraine ran so deep and was so resistant to the typical foreign policy entreaties about the need to stand by allies that senior officials involved in Ukraine policy concluded that the only way to overcome it was to set up an Oval Office meeting with Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky." My guess is that what irks Trump is not corruption per se, but that he failed to cut a deal with (former) officials to build his resort. It's all about Trump, Trump, Trump. ~~~
~~~ Mark Mazzetti, et al., of the New York Times: "Long before a telephone call with Ukraine's president that prompted an impeachment inquiry, President Trump was exchanging political favors with a different Ukrainian leader, who desperately sought American help for his country's struggle against Russian aggression. Petro O. Poroshenko, Ukraine's president until May, waged an elaborate campaign to win over Mr. Trump at a time when advisers had convinced Mr. Trump that Ukraine was a nest of Hillary Clinton supporters. Mr. Poroshenko' campaign included trade deals that were politically expedient for Mr. Trump, meetings with Rudolph W. Giuliani, the freezing of potentially damaging criminal cases and attempts to use the former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort as a back channel.... Now, impeachment investigators are examining the two years of interactions between Mr. Trump and Mr. Poroshenko, according to a congressional Democrat."
~~~~~~~~~~
So this is the best Team Trump has today: stonewall, lie and/or plead ignorance, redefine terms like "quid pro quo" & "high crimes & misdemeanors":
Jacqueline Alemany, et al., of the Washington Post: "An attorney for the whistleblower who filed a complaint about President Trump's apparent efforts to pressure Ukraine for information he could use against political rivals said Sunday that Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee could submit questions directly to his client instead of going through the panel's Democratic majority. Mark Zaid confirmed his client's offer to the top Republican on the Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes (Calif.), to answer written questions under oath and with penalty of perjury, while also protecting the individual's identity. In recent days, Trump and his allies have ramped up efforts to expose the whistleblower's identity, amplifying theories regarding the person's motives.... By offering a direct channel to Republicans, the whistleblower's team has sought to quell grumbling by GOP leadership -- and the president -- that the impeachment process has been secretive and unfair." CBS News' story is here. ~~~
~~~ Rishika Dugyala of CNN: "... Donald Trump on Sunday reiterated his calls to reveal the name of the whistleblower behind the complaint that led to the House's formal impeachment inquiry, mentioning unconfirmed reports about the person's identity and possible ties to the previous administration. Trump sought to discredit the whistleblower, linking the individual to his Democratic predecessor, President Barack Obama, as well as former CIA director John Brennan and former national security adviser Susan Rice -- Obama's top aides. 'There have have been stories written about a certain individual, a male, and they say he's the whistleblower,' Trump told reporters outside the White House. If he's the whistleblower, he has no credibility because he's a Brennan guy, he's a Susan Rice guy, he's an Obama guy. And he hates Trump. Now, maybe it's not him. But if it's him, you guys ought to release the information,' the president added.... Some Republican lawmakers and conservative publications have named a purported whistleblower or asserted theories about the person's identity."
Rachel Bade, et al., of the Washington Post: "Russell Vought, a [Mick] Mulvaney protege who leads the White House Office of Management and Budget, intends a concerted defiance of congressional subpoenas in coming days, and two of his subordinates will follow suit -- simultaneously proving their loyalty to the president and a creating a potentially critical firewall regarding the alleged use of foreign aid to elicit political favors from a U.S. ally. The OMB is at the nexus of the impeachment inquiry because Democrats are pressing for details about why the White House budget office effectively froze the Ukraine funds that Congress had already appropriated. Congressional Republicans are also predicting that Mulvaney's deputy, Robert Blair, will refuse to show for his scheduled Monday appearance before impeachment investigators -- though a White House spokesman and Blair's attorney, Whit Ellerman, did not respond to questions about his plans. Blair was on the July 25 phone call when Trump asked Ukraine's president for a 'favor' investigating former vice president Joe Biden...." ~~~
~~~ Update. Jeremy Diamond of CNN: "A top aide to White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, Robert Blair, has refused to testify in the House impeachment inquiry of ... Donald Trump after the White House directed him not to appear for his scheduled deposition, his attorney told CNN. The House committees investigating Trump had scheduled Blair's deposition for Monday. 'Mr. Blair is caught between the assertions of legal duty by two coequal branches of government, a conflict which he cannot resolve,' Blair's attorney Whit Ellerman told CNN on Saturday. 'I light of the clear direction he has been given by the executive branch, Mr. Blair has respectfully declined to appear and testify. Nevertheless, he will fulfill all his legal duties once that conflict is appropriately resolved.'" ~~~
~~~ Update 2. Katherine Faulders & John Santucci of ABC News: "Four White House officials slated for closed-door depositions Monday are not expected to show up on Capitol Hill despite the threat of subpoena from the committees leading the growing impeachment inquiry.... On Monday, Democrats had hoped to hear from four current White House officials, including John Eisenberg, deputy counsel to the president for National Security Affairs; Michael Ellis, senior associate counsel to the president; Robert Blair, a top aide to the chief of staff; and Brian McCormack, an official with the office of management and budget. Two of those officials, Eisenberg and McCormack, have already been subpoenaed for their respective depositions. Ellis and Blair have only been requested to appear at this time."
Daniel Politi of Slate: "Counselor to the president Kellyanne Conway went on a tour of Sunday morning news shows in which she was repeatedly pressed on matters related to the impeachment inquiry.... While talking to CNN ... Conway said she didn't know whether ... Donald Trump ever withheld military aid to Ukraine as a way to pressure the country to investigate the Bidens. During the interview with CNN's Dana Bash, Conway at first tried to dismiss the suggestion Trump did anything wrong saying there was 'no quid pro quo in this call in terms of the president.' But when Bash pressed Conway about what was said in the call between Trump and Ukraine's president, she refused to give a definite answer. 'Was there a time when military aid was held up because the President wanted Ukraine to look into the Bidens?' Bash asked. 'I don't know. But I know they've got their aid,' Conway said.... Conway also sparred with Chris Wallace..., insisting there was no evidence of a quid pro quo as the Fox anchor pointed out that numerous high level officials had said otherwise.... Conway also insisted that even if Trump put conditions on the military aid, it wouldn't be an impeachable offense. 'Is it a high crime and misdemeanor? I wouldn't think so,' Conway said."
Mary Papenfuss of the Huffington Post: "Donald Trump's former personal attorney Michael Cohen was told that if he stuck to his account of Trump's relationship with Moscow, the president 'loves you,' according to a bombshell document from the Robert Mueller investigation obtained by BuzzFeed.... Cohen ... told investigators the White House expected him to 'keep Trump out of the messaging related to Russia' and 'keep Trump out of the Russia conversation' in his testimony to Congress about Trump Organization plans to build a Trump Tower in Moscow, according to one of the summaries. Cohen was told if 'he stayed on message, the president has your back, the president loves you,' according to the document. The summary did not reveal who conveyed that message to Cohen. Cohen also told investigators that it was 'not his idea' to write a statement to Congress that included lies about Trump Tower Moscow. The redacted summary did not reveal whose idea it was. But he told the House Intelligence Committee last year that he believed it was Trump who 'indirectly' told him to lie.&"
Carla Marinucci of Politico: "Just days after Gov. Gavin Newsom praised the federal government for its response to catastrophic wildfires and power outages affecting millions..., Donald Trump on Sunday slammed the California Democrat -- and threatened to cut off future federal funding to the fire-battered state. Trump, in a spate of postings on Twitter, lambasted what he called Newsom's 'terrible job' regarding the state's forest management practices, saying that the governor should stop listening to environmentalist 'bosses' and 'clean' the forest floors. And he also slammed Newsom for state water-management practices, suggesting that California must open up what he called 'ridiculously closed water lanes.'... [Newsom's] pushed back hard against Trump, noting that the governor's fire prevention and management projects included an investment of $225.8 million to help streamline programs specifically aimed at 'reducing fuels in the forest, increasing forest health, and defensible space around homes." The governor's office in addition said that there were currently 35 priority projects in addition to the redeployment of National Guard personnel to assist the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection in controlling the fires.... Scott McLean, a spokesman for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, cited the governor's leadership in directing the agency to pursue 35 priority projects to reduce wildfire risk in vulnerable communities." ~~~
~~~ Madison Pauly of Mother Jones: "... Donald Trump just threatened to cut off federal funding to California over Gov. Gavin Newsom's 'forest management,' which the president blamed for the wildfires that have ripped through wide swaths of the state over the past few weeks. 'I told him from the first day we met that he must "clean" his forest floors,' Trump tweeted bright and early on Sunday morning. 'Must also do burns and cut fire stoppers.' 'Every year, as the fire's [sic] rage & California burns, it is the same thing- and then he comes to the Federal Government for $$$ help. No more.'... Nevermind that only about 2 percent of California forests are managed by the state government, compared to the 57 percent of California forests run by the federal government...."
Everything about Trump Is Phony. Jonathan Swan & Alexi McCammond of Axios: "Sources familiar with the president's iPhone told Axios that the president maintains a digital portal to the two newspapers he recently banished from the West Wing: the Washington Post and the New York Times.... Trump has not deleted the NYT and WaPo apps."
Presidential Race 2020. Nate Cohn of the New York Times: "Despite low national approval ratings and the specter of impeachment, President Trump remains highly competitive in the battleground states likeliest to decide his re-election, according to a set of new surveys from The New York Times Upshot and Siena College. Across the six closest states [-- Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida, Arizona, North Carolina -- ] that went Republican in 2016, he trails Joe Biden by an average of two points among registered voters but stays within the margin of error. Mr. Trump leads Elizabeth Warren by two points among registered voters, the same margin as his win over Hillary Clinton in these states three years ago. The poll showed Bernie Sanders deadlocked with the president among registered voters, but trailing among likely voters." ~~~
~~~ Mrs. McCrabbie's Honest & Fair Voter Eligibility Test: If you're stupid enough to vote for Donald Trump, you're too stupid to vote.
Vasco Cotovio of CNN: "Norwegian authorities have arrested a high-profile American white supremacist, hours before he was due to give a speech at a far-right conference in Oslo on Saturday. The detained American, Greg Johnson, is editor-in-chief of the white nationalist Counter-Currents Publishing group. He had been scheduled to speak at the Scandza Forum, a network known for its anti-Semitic and racist views. Norway's intelligence service considered Johnson 'to be a threat, not because of what he could do but because of his hate speech and his previously expressed support for [mass murderer] Anders Breivik,' spokesman Martin Bernsen told CNN.... Johnson was arrested under the country's immigration act and Norwegian authorities are now working 'as quickly as possible to get him out of the country,' said Bernsen."
John Bowden of the Hill: "McDonald's announced Sunday it had fired CEO Steve Easterbrook, citing his 'poor judgment' over a consensual relationship he had with an employee. The company's board of directors said it had named Chris Kempczinski, most recently president of McDonald's USA, to succeed him." The New York Times story is here.
Share Article
Reader Comments (12)
The Fat one’s brain has not gotten any better. He is still making the ridiculous and risible demand that California, in the midst of another rash of fires, forget about environmental considerations and just “Clean the Forest floors”.
Can someone really be this stupid? Oh, I’m sure there are plenty of people who might even be stupider, but none of them live in the White House. And even at that, they probably only beat Trump by hair.
There are 33 million acres of forest land in California. Think of sweeping an acre. Now think of doing that 33 million times. Ridiculous. But once Fatty gets a bone, like a dog, he refuses to let go.
Oh well, but here’s another thing. Well over half of those 33 million acres are owned by the federal government. Know what that means, Fatty?
Grab a broom and start sweeping, you moron.
@Akhilleus: To make matters worse, Trump claims he got the idea of "raking & cleaning the forest floors" from the President of Finland. But President Sauli Niinistö said he never told Trump any such thing.
This is Trump's modus operandi: make up something (and in this case, attribute it to authority), then when that something proves wrong, double down on it. If that doubling down requires threatening countless Americans -- as it does here -- so be it. (Who cares? California will vote Democratic.) What a horrible person. If you're stupid enough to vote for Donald Trump, you're too stupid to vote.
Beyond stupid, Trump is vindictive and vengeful. The singular reason for his obsession about the identity of the whistleblower, is vengeance. He is a small, vindictive little prick. He doesn’t care about “facing his accuser” or whatever the confederate lie of the week is now. Plenty of people from his own administration have confirmed Trump’s quod pro quo demands. Trump wants revenge. He wants a name he can add to his litany of enemies to be spat upon at one his Bund rallies to whip up the droolers.
Any layperson can see that Trump has serious trouble with "letting go" of various, thoughts, emotions, activities - to the point where almost anyone can say, "What's WITH that guy?" He is not at all good with "the give and take" part of his life either. He cannot make and keep friends. He has no empathy. These characteristics are definitely part of a normal 2 year old's lifestyle. There's a whole lotta teaching and behavioral modification that goes on in order to get the child to be ready for his own "prime time:" school.
Trump shows such obvious deficits in these areas that one must really consider specific kinds of dementia, moderately advanced. I keep trying to bring back this idea, especially after consideration of thought disorder as a diagnosis. One can have Alzheimer's, the most common dementia, without necessarily having word and memory issues being the first symptoms. (consider lewy body dementia as well).
A dementing illness is far more common in the older individual than the onset of a thought disorder (common diseases are common, rare diseases are rare). As one gets more demented, one is less able to reality test, something in common with a thought disorder, but not a formal thought disorder.
He keeps going with baloney ideas or hurtful plans, because he is NOT ABLE to let go. This is a national security issue in Trump, but only annoying to the family of a demented person who perseverates on various crackpot ideas or plans.
I'm stuck on this because it's so dangerous, in addition to all the other things. I wish people would address this more directly and more frequently on national media.
I'm also stuck on having a requirement that everyone running for higher office should have some sort of test for dementia, like a MOCA. Are you listening Joe Biden?
@Akhilleus: While I hope no one reveals the whistleblower's name -- apparently there's already possibly-accurate speculation on right-wing Websites -- if the whistleblower's name does come out, I hope it's Trump who blows the whistle, so to speak, because that could be another article of impeachment.
Someone should send Fatty some nifty brooms with the message: START SWEEPING MISTER!
As to the subject of stupidity: Obviously there is no one who can curtail Fatty's fatuous folderols and because he is acting as an entertainer rather than a REAL president his "people" rally round, nodding their heads, cheering his lies cuz they be having so much fun. Have we ever had a president that has given us such a circus? And maybe because they feel maligned they identify with this guy who is their pied piper on steroids.
Have been reading about Nelson Algren, the novelist and screen writer, who, more than most American writers of his time, revealed the essential loneliness of the serious writer, never fooling himself with baubles and status, but staying with his subjects: the forgotten in society and his own alien self. His biographer, Colin Asher, tells us that by the winter of 1933 Algren had become convinced the meritocratic ideal was a fraud, that everyone who placed their faith in it had been fooled and he was obliged to reveal that deception.
"Everything I'd been gold was wrong. I'd been assured that it was a strive and succeed world...But this was not what America was. America was not socialized and I resented very deeply that I'd been lied to."
and so it goes~~~~~~~~
I hope to god the name does not come out-- he or she will get death threats and I don't know what-all.
And I think Victoria is completely right about the idiot-in-chief being demented-- have thought that for a looooong time, as have others. Anyone listening to those weird stream-of-consciousness bits of blather he engages in at the rallies would know it-- they choose not to. He goes off into the heavens at the drop of a hat, and it's not just the phraseology-- it's his tone. That sing-songy thing with strange hesitations when he forgets where he is going and his repetitions and his way of never actually making eye contact with anyone-- VERY weird. He is a mess. AND it's scary because of things he has the power to do and no one stops him, like give Turkey permission to slaughter the Kurds. AND it's scary because he has let Putin into our country as a shadow ruler and no one in this so-called administration seems to care. Kellyanne ConJob is a prime example. She is equally to blame for dangerous, toxic clouds of horribleness being emitted into our public life. And the reprehensibles in Congress.
Quoted in "Independent:"
The Pretender says about Schiff, "He is a proven liar, leaker & freak who is really the one who should be impeached!”
Speaking of liars and freaks, there's more projection going on here than at all the nation's movie festivals put together...
@Victoria: Yes! But––no one appears to be zeroing in on this although it certainly has been addressed. As Akhilleus says:
"Beyond stupid, Trump is vindictive and vengeful. The singular reason for his obsession about the identity of the whistleblower, is vengeance. He is a small, vindictive little prick."
So perhaps that's enough to go on without delving into his tangled taus. But thank you –-it's pretty depressing, isn't it?
And what about this idea that if a federal employee is not an abject servant of the dear leader, professing undying loyalty to a feckless dickhead who can’t even spell the word, they must, ipso facto, be a traitor to the country (read: little donnie). Plenty of people even within the Obama administration were not huge Obama fans or even Democrats (Jim Comey, anyone?), but they were still able to go to work and do their jobs without preconditions or prejudice (well, okay, most of them; once again, Jim Comey).
But to listen to Trump and his horde of soulless lemmings, unless total fealty to the little king can be proven, a person is not only not to be trusted, but completely lacking in patriotism and immediately under suspicion of treason.
One can still be a Never Trumper or even a Not So Hot on Trumper and still do their jobs. It’s only insecure authoritarians like Fatty who are unable to accommodate this concept. Seriously, if every working woman and man in America had to pass a love and loyalty test regarding their boss, unemployment would be cracking 75% or more.
But hey, I’m talking logic. A black hole for Fatty.
Masha Gessen writes about the language of liberal democracies and its inadequacy to properly explain Trump's actions. (fiewalled, but you get some free reads)
"...we—academics, journalists, and laypeople—applied the language of liberal democracy to the societies emerging from the collapse of the Soviet Bloc. This happened both because we expected that they would become liberal democracies and because we had no other language. As a result, when some of these societies developed in unexpected ways, language impaired our ability to understand the process. We talked about, for example, whether they had a free press, or free and fair elections. But saying that they did not, as Magyar told me in an interview, is akin to saying that the elephant cannot swim or fly: it doesn’t tell us much about what the elephant is. The same thing happens when we use the language of political disagreement, judicial procedure, or partisan discussion to describe something that breaks out of the system that such terminology was invented to describe. When we talk about “shadow foreign policy” when discussing Ukraine, for example, we misuse the term: a President, who is the chief foreign-policy official in the United States, cannot run a “shadow” foreign policy, by definition. What he can do, though, is destroy the institutions and traditions of foreign policy in the course of his war on government."
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-trump-administrations-war-on-the-government-is-an-autocratic-attempt
The 2nd piece discusses the experience of Russian Jews fleeing from the USSR, Gessen uses her experiences and those of the Vindman family. It adds to an understanding of the nature of Vindman's patriotism.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/how-trumps-supporters-distort-alexander-vindmans-very-american-origin-story
Looks like the lawyerly wall the Pretender has erected might be as breachable as the beautiful wall he's raising at our southern border.
So many permeable walls for the pusillanimous to hide behind.