I have a bet with an old friend and mentor. Both of us believe that Donald Trump will not serve his full four year term. We differ, however, on how long he will survive. My friend thinks he will have been impeached by he House by Labor Day. While I don't dismiss that as an possibility, I'm betting he will get to 2018 but become so toxic by then that Republicans will abandon him in droves. The winner of this bet buys the other dinner at s fine restaurant in Washington, DC.
The agitprop designed to destroy Trump is alive and well and more Republicans appear to be signing on with anti-Trump memes pushed by the Democrats. But this is not a one-sided affair in terms of the effort to take Trump down. Donald Trump himself is busy shooting his own foot off with his uncontrollable mouth.
I think a good number of voters chose Trump over Hillary in the hopes that he was actually a businessman who had the organizational skill and vision to get things done. Those voters are starting to turn on Trump. Instead of good organization the nation is being treated to a petulant display of boorish immaturity. What manager in their right mind fires the head of the FBI in such a cavalier, reckless fashion. Please understand--I believe that Comey needed to go. He needed to be fired. But there is a right way and a wrong way.
What did Trump do? He chose the wrong way and further damaged his image.
Instead of calling Comey in for a meeting and giving him a chance to resign, Trump opted to blindside him. In doing so Trump gave the Democrats ammunition for attacking him as someone who was trying to interfere with an on-going investigation. Trump compounded the chaos by issuing a veiled threat against Comey by raising the specter that Comey's previous conversations with the President had been recorded. That has piqued the interest of Congress and we now have a bipartisan request for such tapes (if they exist).
I personally am sick and tired of listening to the whining of people like Kelly Anne Conway, who was on Howard Kurtz's show today (Sunday) kvetching about the media's failure to focus on the trade deal with China or health care. Sorry Kelly Anne, but the media did not fire Comey and the media did not produce competing explanations about why Trump did what he did.
There is simply no excuse for this kind of impromptu decision making. Unfortunately, Trump has made a habit of this during the campaign. It did not prove fatal then. That is not likely to be the case going forward. Trump will not run for a second term. Trump will not finish his first term. The only question is when will he be forced out or call it quits. The only winners from this sad affair will be my friend and me--but we will share a great meal together. PT
Thanks pantaraxia. IMO, these might have been the real reason why Comey was fired. Could it be that Trump felt the investigation is getting too close to these shady deals?
Posted by: TonyL | 15 May 2017 at 11:29 AM
BNW,
Which TV show was this where Trump said "he did it to shut down the Russia Investigation" or is that just your own made up quote?
Posted by: Fred | 15 May 2017 at 12:09 PM
Colonel,
Off topic and old news to your readers no doubt, but this direct confirmation of Western support for the Jihadis is unusual.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/01/trial-swedish-man-accused-terrorism-offences-collapse-bherlin-gildo
(Via MOA)
Posted by: English outsider | 15 May 2017 at 12:10 PM
TV,
The federal bureaucracy is full of manager who put great weight on administrative busywork. Trump needs to eliminate about half of those positions across the Republic and it would be of great benefit to move most of what is left out of metropolitan D. C..
Posted by: Fred | 15 May 2017 at 12:15 PM
O'Bryan,
What paperwork for confirmation is required by the Constitution? I don't recall reading any in that document. Only one foreign ambassador was confirmed? You mean the ones in place need to be fired or that unlike most of his predecessors he isn't filling the positions with political donors? If he needs a volunteer I'd be happy to be nominated.
Posted by: Fred | 15 May 2017 at 12:22 PM
Spot on, Valissa.
Trump Derangement Syndrome has addled even some normally clear-headed analysts. I hear it all the time by many of my friends and family who are so caught up in the shiny objects of Trump's latest tweet or gaffe. They pine for the slickness and smooth talking of Obama while not recognizing that beneath that veneer was someone as Borgist as they come.
While I don't begrudge the Obamas all the benefits of joining the oligarch club, I want to gag when his kool-aid drinkers compare him to Trump and note the suave vs boorish. The whole lobbying industry is all about laundering money and favors and the Russians are competing with the Saudis and Israeli Firsters, who have had a lock on things for a while. Of course there's also the huge flows of funds from domestic sources from the unions to big pharma & finance.
Posted by: Jack | 15 May 2017 at 01:03 PM
Valissa,
In regard to the "lynch mob mentality", yes, some people can get pulled into it, but surprisingly enough, not necessarily because they agree with the reasons advanced by the "lynch mob". Rather, these people may just get exasperated by the gridlock, despair of attaining a resolution, and getting on to pressing business, so they go along with the "lynch mob" just to break through to the other side; throw the guy to the wolves even if it is not justifiable on the basis of evidence, merely get past the immediate, apparently unresolvable screeching. I see many of the Republican party apparatchiks in Congress as being susceptible to this; Trump is, after all not one of the Tribe. Look at how he blew hu-u-uge holes through Jeb!, Cruz, and the beat-down he administered to the other odious dwarves that their party establishment threw up for consideration for the nomination.
How dare he threaten the smooth operation of the soft machine? Get him out in favor of an Inner Party operative like Pence.
Only at the cost of your party, buckos, 'cause if you do that, many of your potential voters will drop you like a stone.
Posted by: JerseyJeffersonian | 15 May 2017 at 01:52 PM
Love the overlay point-of-fact! It should have been deployed to argue against the catastrophic (to the health of the deplorables,) Trumpcare.
Trump doesn't trust people easily. This is consistent with his mental problems. Originally, it seemed that this would fit in with a significant paring down of the government, its agencies and bureaucracies and regulatory functionality and research functionality. At the time, this seemed to be a perfect fit: Trump's natural distrust of people not right next to him, and, Bannon's deconstruction of the so-called administrative state.
The continuing budget he signed has mostly delayed this radical contraction of the state.
But, the question remains, how much paranoia is it healthy for a leader of the free world to indulge in?
Posted by: Dr.Puck | 15 May 2017 at 02:05 PM
Annoying as it is to be slapped in the face with the Trump Derangement Syndrome every damn morning on the front page of my local Newz Ragg, the Philadelphia Inquirer (now a Mini-Me to the Washington Post...how they have fallen from the honorable days as a McClatchy paper), I am thoroughly enjoying the foam-flecked invective, and rumor-mongering to which they are reduced.
And yes, I too see some hopeful signs that beneath the roiled surface of public non-discourse, some important initiatives are forging slowly forward. Tillerson's Dutch Uncle speech concerning the past petulant, and astonishingly arrogant insistence on so-called "American Values" being adopted by counter-parties before international relations can be fruitfully prosecuted was particularly gratifying to me. Why, it's almost as if something or other from Washington's Farewell Address was dimly recalled as wise counsel in this regard. Huh.
Enough with the Obama (and, to be fair, Bush) State Department's NeoConservative/Trotskyite Continual Revolution BS. Time to put on the Big Boy Pants for a - very welcome - change.
Posted by: JerseyJeffersonian | 15 May 2017 at 02:15 PM
Fred, if I may speak for BraveNewWorld, it's the interview Trump did with Lester Holt of NBC News, where he admitted he was thinking of the Russian investigation when he fired Comey. Very easy to find and very widely noted.
Posted by: Stephanie | 15 May 2017 at 02:20 PM
Also, the State Department would not be in this position if Trump had not summarily dismissed the ambassadors in place at the time of his inauguration. It is of course customary to replace ambassadors nominated by the previous administration, particularly that of a rival party, but it is most irregular to do so as this administration did it, ordering people home immediately without regard to their individual circumstances and without having so much as a list drawn up of potential replacements.
Posted by: Stephanie | 15 May 2017 at 02:22 PM
anon,
Back from your stroll in the woods, Hillary? Think you must have ingested some psychoactive fungi while out there.
Oh, and regarding the Panama Papers "leaks", isn't it just so odd that they never seem to concern our Noble Leaders in the west? Seeings how all of the tax havens are units of the west to one degree or another, I can't conceive of how people like, oh, the Clintons, or the Blairs, or ilk are not up to their necks in it after their assiduous cultivation of trans-national grifting for lo these many years, if not for decades. Strange how their boil-covered bums are never exposed to the light. Right, Hillary?
Posted by: JerseyJeffersonian | 15 May 2017 at 02:26 PM
Specifically, that since Democrats had been calling for Comey's head. DJT's proffered reason was Comey's unprofessional July presser ripping into HRC. He bizarrely expected at least some Democrats to support the firing. But it stretches credibility beyond the breaking point to believe DJT fired Comey because of the unprofessional, public treatment of HRC.
Posted by: doug | 15 May 2017 at 02:32 PM
Should this turn out to be the thrust of the FBI investigation and the reason for firing Comey it then becomes a criminal non-partisan issue. Keeping a lid on this would to be extremely difficult and may prove to be impossible. Even Sen. Linsey Graham recently stated he wanted to know more about Trump’s business dealings in relation to Russia. The deals referenced in the videos and article did, in fact, take place, This is not a matter of speculation or conjecture. The key issues then becomes Trump’s level of culpability and whether the murky world of off-shore financing has been sufficiently effective in obfuscating the trail from the FBI and FinCEN.
As to the Democrat/Republican dynamic, all I can say is a pox on both parties. Your points about the lack of political will are unfortunately all too true. This may yet become an issue too big to bury and force the politicians to be seen as responding. (Should your conjecture about this evolving into something that drags down the Clintons prove to be correct, well that’s just an added bonus.)
Regarding the term Russo-jewish mafia, should you watch the videos and read the article you will find the players involved are almost exclusively of a certain ‘tribal’ persuasion. (A number have direct links to the infamous Mogilevich crime syndicate (top 10 FBI’s most wanted list) and one of the principals of Bayrock was named as a major Israeli organized crime figure by the Turkish media following his arrest there.)
Posted by: pantaraxia | 15 May 2017 at 02:47 PM
Still have my apple newton message pad.as to context.wikileaks.
Posted by: Anonymous | 15 May 2017 at 03:37 PM
Down the ditch or landing on a tree is wishful hopes, this is a cliff edge ride. 911 happened when this country nominally made enemy with one Sunni extrimist group who came to end of her usefulness. One can only imagine, in this last 16 years, this country's continued policy of bombing and waring muslims all over ME, (with exception her own approved regional "democratic" dictators) has managed to make street level Sunni muslims her and her allies enemy for life, all over the globe, even with the "civilaized" european muslims. I say we already have at least couple of wheels hanging over the cliff while the rest of non-middle eastern or western European world is watching and laughing.
Posted by: Kooshy | 15 May 2017 at 05:09 PM
Well, maybe by getting rid of the political appointees all too commonly found warming the ambassadors' chairs abroad, one might be able to fall back onto the professional diplomatic corps present in each of these nations to ride out the period wherein there are no appointed ambassadors. Why, who knows, maybe if we took our diplomatic presences more seriously (like some other nations do, perhaps like those devious Rooskies, say), we might not get our asses stuck in so many cracks; having technically unqualified toy ambassadors in place only increases the temptation to the Mandarins to unhelpfully micromanage affairs from the Imperial Capital without the benefit of informed feedback from expert observers on the ground.
Posted by: JerseyJeffersonian | 15 May 2017 at 06:24 PM
Stephanie,
Words have specific meaning. "Shut down" is not "thinking about". That's why Comey's words "extremely careless" were used regarding Hilary's handling of the emails rather than "grossly negligent" as the later would have gotten her indicted.
Posted by: Fred | 15 May 2017 at 07:25 PM
"Why do people think a businessman could run government?" - The government (politicians) evidently can't run the government, so surely it's worth a shot.
"Business and government are two different kinds of things" Yes, the latter is currently a very badly broken and dysfunctional institution. The former trains results-oriented people who build great institutions.
"Business makes a profit, government takes care of needs that don't make profit" - The government will be able to take care of squat unless the economy is sound - i.e. it turns a profit. The stock markets certainly think that prospect looks much more likely so far under this President.
As for noble pursuits - I give you a man who has willingly given up minding his billion dollar business empire to enter public service, at the age of 70. Another pertinent fact is that brand Trump's fortunes (previously not at high risk) are now wedded to his personal success in office. That could be mistaken for pretty noble behaviour.
Posted by: Account Deleted | 15 May 2017 at 07:25 PM
English,
That would make a great episode of Rumpole of the Bailey.
Posted by: Fred | 15 May 2017 at 07:38 PM
Nope, you do not get fired in the Big business world this way unless you have been caught stealing. You get fired when you aren't making money, or worse, losing it. When you have pissed off the board. Even then you usually get a nice, quiet golden parachute and leave w/o a lot of fuss. The big corps go out of their way to avoid public scandal. Besides which this is basically akin to the CEO being accused of embezzling and then firing the accountant who was investigating that claim. No Board of Directors would put up with that.
Steve
Posted by: steve | 15 May 2017 at 07:56 PM
Trump is not being impeached. He won't quit. Maybe, he won't run for a second term. The GOP controls Congress. Not happening. He has hired a bunch of lackeys who don't want to tell him the truth. If he doesn't like themm he will just hire more after firing the current bunch. I hope people don't think he cares that much about his legacy. By the time he leaves his business interests will have doubled, the kids will be richer than ever and he will have passed laws making it easier to keep that money. Whatever happens he will declare victory and move on.
Steve
Posted by: steve | 15 May 2017 at 08:03 PM
I am not sure that anyone in D.C. knows how to get organized to carry out an impeachment. It's like a clown show on television every time I think I will watch what used to be called the news channels. But if they do find a way, I think your prediction will come true.
But there are some who know me well, and they know how very upset I was about the Trump presence in politics from the first Republican debate. I was a Never Trump person from the beginning. However, I did try to give him a chance, and I keep hoping for a respite from his absolutely boorish behavior. I will also say that I would like to have a respite from the Democratic Party and its many followers who go about shouting and screaming and destroying things in the name of protest. I didn't like it much in 1968 at the Democratic Convention. I didn't like it much when Billy Ayers' friends were also doing their "politics" through vandalism and criminal behavior. So, all I can sayt is that I am happy that HRC was not elected.
We really did have a Devil or the Deep Blue Sea choice, didn't we?
We did really need a mature, intelligent POTUS to deal with the mess our country is in and the mess that the world situation is.
I can do nothing but put it all in God's hands and try not to think about it much, while always praying for His will to be done on Earth.
Posted by: DianaLC | 15 May 2017 at 10:05 PM
Yes -- Trump admitted that he was considering the Russian investigation when he canned Comey. That in itself is really more than enough, but to be more specific, he said that as he was deciding to fire Comey he had the Russian investigation in mind and that he believes "it's a made up story." The suggestion that he got rid of Comey to try to make it go away is clear.
As for the gratuitous Clinton reference - nice try, but by me it's not a patch on the Mar-a-Lago Situation Patio, never mind the latest developments from the White House.
Posted by: Stephanie | 15 May 2017 at 11:57 PM
thanks, doug.
Getting odder and odder with the recent WAPO coup: Trump passing on highly classified information to Lavrov.
So we have a sublayer connection now, classified matters circulated via Hillary's private email account, Trump passing on even more sensitive information from a non-named partner. GB?
*******
Has the early post 9/11 expert opinion that messages and code could be embedded in image files ever come true? They no doubt are bigger then text files. ;)
Posted by: LeaNder | 16 May 2017 at 06:27 AM