Trump-Kim Bromance; Cohen - Liar, liar

AROUND THE BLOCK

I learned today…

I learned a couple of things today.

First, I learned that bromances go just so far.

The highly touted, much vaunted, “only I can do this” summit between Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un broke down without any agreements. This, despite Trump’s claims that he and Kim “fell in love,” that Kim wrote him “beautiful letters,” and that Kim is “very honorable.” 

Not surprising given the complete lack of preparation on Trump’s part and the fact that there were no real goals set for the summit beyond the vague “complete de-nuclearization of the Korean Peninsula." I mean Trump traveled half-way around the world without a plan.

 What was achieved? 

Well, Kim has now had two one-on-one meetings with the “leader of the free world" (?!?!) on the biggest possible stage imaginable. Great work Mr. Kim, you’re now legitimately a “Great Leader.” And Trump, as reported by the New York Times, “leaves the unusual rapprochement between the United States and North Korea that has unfolded for most of a year at a deadlock, with the North retaining both its nuclear arsenal and facilities believed to be producing additional fissile material for warheads.” 

But, with “a warmth that we have and I hope that stays.”

Trump, in a last-gasp attempt to save that bromance and warmth, did give Kim a pass on the Otto Warmbier tragedy (Warmbier was the American student held in captivity by North Korea for 17 months who died shortly after his release).

 "Some really bad things happened to Otto — some really really bad things. But he tells me that he didn't know about it and I will take him at his word," Trump said, referring to the North Korean dictator. The president added that Kim told him that he "felt very badly about it."

To his credit however, Trump did say in a news conference following the breakdown of the talks, “sometimes you have to walk.” And, in doing so, he defied experts who predicted that Trump would do anything to reach some kind of agreement.

Bye, bye Nobel Peace Prize!

But seriously, maybe Trump just wasn’t comfortable negotiating with Kim in those silly short chairs. 

I also learned that Republican congressional defenders of Donald Trump will stoop to new lows, not to defend the president, but to cast aspersions at his accusers.

At Michael Cohen’s hearing before the House Oversight and Reform Committee, Republican members spent their entire time attacking Mr. Cohen.

The two best (actually worst) moments?

When Rep. Mark Meadows of North Carolina, in an attempt to refute Cohen’s claim that Trump was a racist, brought Lynne Patton, a black official at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, whom he said he had invited to the hearing to show that Trump hired a black person and, because of that, could not possibly be a racist. In essence, he brought a black prop.

  

“She says that as a daughter of a man born in Birmingham, Alabama, that there is no way that she would work for an individual who was racist,” Meadows said.

The poised and effective Cohen replied, “Neither should I, as the son of a Holocaust survivor.” 

But the prize goes to Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) who, in an attempt to visualize the fact that Cohen was a “pathological liar” brought a sign with a picture of Mr. Cohen superimposed on flames, emblazoned with the words “LIAR, LIAR, PANTS ON FIRE!” Really? 

Cohen is a liar. He plead guilty to lying to Congress. He’s going to prison for at least three years because he’s a liar. But there is another “pathological liar” in the public eye. I wonder if Congressman Gosar has a second “LIAR, LIAR, PANTS ON FIRE!” sign with Trump’s picture on it?

Lindsey Graham - Wingman or Wing-nut?

AROUND THE BLOCK

I learned today…

I learned today that South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham has been misrepresenting his relationship with late Senator John McCain. Graham called himself “the Great Man’s mascot, his funny little buddy — his “wingman.”

Based on his recent behavior, Graham is clearly not a “wingman;” he’s actually a “wing-nut,” or simply “nut” for short. (Sorry, no short jokes when we’re talking about Lindsey Graham).

While there are dozens of reasons why Graham has earned the wing-nut sobriquet (including his angrily explosive defense of then Supreme Court nominee Brett Cavanaugh and today’s disclosure of his expletive-laced confrontation with acting defense secretary Patrick Shanahan), clearly the most telling reason is his evolving relationship with Donald Trump.

 So, what is the evidence that has turned Graham from a “wingman” to a “wing-nut?” Let's take a look at the “old Lindsey” vs. the “new Lindsey."

Old Lindsey          

• “You know how you make America great again? Tell Donald Trump to go to hell,” Graham said on CNN in December 2015.
• “I think he’s a kook. I think he’s crazy. I think he’s unfit for office,” Graham said. “I’m a Republican, and he’s not. He’s not a conservative Republican, he’s an opportunist. He’s not fit to be president of the United States,” he told CNN in February 2016.
• “It’s like [choosing between] being shot or poisoned” (talking about voting for Trump or Ted Cruz on February 21, 2016).
• “Embracing Donald Trump is embracing demographic death” (commenting on Trump's unpopularity among Hispanic American voters on May 6, 2016).
• In voting for independent conservative candidate Evan McMullin for president in 2016, Graham said, “As a party, we are better to risk losing without Donald Trump than trying to win with him. Enough already with Mister Trump.”
• "If Jeff Sessions is fired, there will be holy hell to pay.”

 New Lindsey

• “What concerns me about the American press is this endless, endless attempt to label the guy as some kind of kook not fit to be president,” Graham told CNN on November 30, invoking his own words from 2016.
• Two years after calling Trump’s policy proposals “bad for the country,” Graham suggested that Trump should “win the Nobel Prize for his efforts on the Korean Peninsula.” (Pretty popular, this Nobel thing).
• Minutes after Jeff Sessions was fired, not only did no one pay "holy hell," Graham told the press, “I look forward to working with President Donald Trump to find a confirmable, worthy successor [to Sessions] so that we can start a new chapter at the Department of Justice and deal with both the opportunities and challenges our nation faces.”
• Following Trump’s Oval Office address on security, Graham said, ‘This is the most presidential I have seen President Trump. It was compelling and everything he said was true.” This despite most fact-checkers finding 4-8 false or misleading statements in the 9-minute speech.
• Graham has claimed, the investigation of the Trump campaign was “biased,” the FISA process “needs to be looked at” and there may be a “deep state” working against the president, He also said, “It’s long past time for a Special Counsel to investigate the Clinton email scandal, Uranium One, role of Fusion GPS, and FBI and DOJ bias during 2016 campaign,” all statements that virtually mirror Trump’s positions on these issues.
• Regarding Trump’s sexual scandals and payoffs to cover them up, Graham admitted that he “didn't think President Donald Trump was always telling the truth, but that, ultimately, it didn't bother him too much, particularly regarding sex because he thought, "most people" would.
• And, Graham’s point of view on the controversy over building the wall on the southern border (in contrast to many of his GOP colleagues): "It is time for President Trump to use emergency powers to fund the construction of a border wall/barrier." 

So, is Graham, the self-described “wingman” to “maverick” John McCain, or the nutty “wing-nut?”

What do the pundits say?

Kathleen Parker of the Washington Post: “What did they do with Graham, one might reasonably ask? If you posed this question to random people on Capitol Hill, you might hear them say, Aw, that’s just Lindsey. He’s in cycle. If this sounds vaguely endocrinal, well, suit yourself. What it means, of course, is that Graham is up for reelection in 2020. When you’re in one of the redder states in the union, you’d best cheer for the Man from MAGA or risk fading into local history.

Dana Milbank, also of the Post: on Graham's rationale for courting Trump: “To be relevant…[but] it seems more likely Graham’s friendship with Trump has to do with Graham’s reelection in 2020.” Milbank, quoting Graham about his relationship with McCain, “I mean all of the big stuff, campaign finance, climate change, Iraq, you name it. I was by John’s side. I was his wingman,” concludes that Graham is still a wingman “but now he’s serving in that role as wingman to a president who takes the opposite view on each of those issues.”

Maybe Parker and Milbank are correct – Graham is acting this way because he’s up for reelection and is simply protecting his position in a Trump-loving state. Perhaps. But I to me he’s a nut…and a disingenuous, spineless one at that.

  

Trump, Nobel, Korea, Obama

AROUND THE BLOCK

I learned today…

I learned two things today – first, as reported by the Washington Post, according to President Donald Trump, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe had nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize; and second, according to Peter Baker of the New York Times, “President Trump has been telling audiences lately that his predecessor, Barack Obama, was on the precipice of an all-out confrontation with the nuclear-armed maverick state. The way Mr. Trump tells the story, the jets were practically scrambling in the hangars.”

Really?!?!

Regarding the Nobel Peace Prize, Adam Taylor of the Post reports that Trump claimed, “Prime Minister Abe of Japan gave me the most beautiful copy of a letter that he sent to the people who give out a thing called the Nobel Prize,” Trump said. “I have nominated you, respectfully on behalf of Japan, I am asking them to give you the Nobel Peace Prize.” Taylor went on to report that “Trump said he then thanked Abe but added that he did not expect to win the prize.”

Needless to say, the president’s comments caught many observers by surprise. 

According to Taylor, a Japanese nomination for a Nobel Peace Prize was not announced, and though Abe has formed a personal bond with Trump, the two leaders have often been at odds over Trump’s outreach to North Korea’s Kim Jong Un. 

And, neither the White House nor the Japanese Embassy in Washington responded to a request for more information about Trump’s comments. 

It is true that South Korean President Moon Jae-in has spoken in the past of how he felt Trump should win a Nobel for his negotiations with North Korea’s Kim. 

“President Trump should win the Nobel Peace Prize,” Moon said last April. 

Based on Moon’s comments, some analysts speculated that Trump had mistaken Abe for Moon, Taylor reported.

Now, given that we’re talking about Trump, it makes absolute sense that he confused Abe and Moon. I mean, gimme a break – how many of you can tell the difference between a Japanese and a Korean. They’re both Orientals after all. 

But Trump’s Nobel prize speculation is really just another example of his narcissistic puffery. Really not important.

His claim that Obama was on the verge of starting a war with North Korea however, is important and a clear signal that we have a president that will say anything to boost, and boast about, his alleged foreign policy successes.

“I believe he would have gone to war with North Korea,” Mr. Trump said in the White House Rose Garden on Friday. “I think he (Obama) was ready to go to war. In fact, he told me he was so close to starting a big war with North Korea.” 

And remember, in his so-called State of the Union Address last week, Trump said, “If I had not been elected president of the United States, we would right now, in my opinion, be in a major war with North Korea with potentially millions of people killed.” 

Needless to say, former Obama administration officials have disputed Trump’s characterization.

“We were not on the brink of war with North Korea in 2016,” Benjamin J. Rhodes, Mr. Obama’s deputy national security adviser, wrote on Twitter. 

John Brennan, Mr. Obama’s C.I.A. director, told NBC News, “President Obama was never on the verge of starting any war with North Korea, large or small.” 

According to reporting by the Times' Baker, 

“Mr. Trump bases his argument on the single extended conversation he has ever had with Mr. Obama. In November 2016, Mr. Obama invited the man elected to succeed him to the White House for a 90-minute discussion of the issues awaiting him. 

Mr. Trump’s account of that conversation has evolved over time. At first, he said that Mr. Obama told him that North Korea would be the new administration’s toughest foreign policy challenge, which seems plausible enough. Only later did Mr. Trump add the supposed war discussion.” 

While there was no comment from Obama’s office, guess what? – there should be! 

There is an unwritten rule that former presidents should speak respectfully of their successors, or at least with some measure of restraint.

That rule has been broken on occasion – in fact, Obama did so twice.

In July 2018 when Obama criticized Trump’s policies, but not Trump directly, when he railed against what he called “strongman politics,” whereby “those in power seek to undermine every institution or norm that gives democracy meaning.” He also criticized “far-right parties” with a platform of “protectionism and closed borders” as well as “barely-hidden racial nationalism.”

And then in September 2018, Obama criticized Trump by name, saying he was a “symptom, not a cause” of an effort by powerful elites to engender fear and division in the face of social change and progress.

Well Mr. Obama, no more pussy-footing. It’s time to set the record straight. In the unlikely event that you did indeed tell Trump he was so close to starting a big war with North Korea, say so. If not, take the gloves off. Tell America what the truth is. Tell America that you never said what Trump is claiming you said. Let America and the world know that you were succeeded by a delusional liar whose self-aggrandizement should no longer be tolerated.

Last week in two meetings of world leaders in Europe, Mike Pence, the sycophantic vice-president of the United States gave two speeches in which he anticipated applause when he mentioned Trump policies or Trump himself. In both instances there was deathly silence where the applause should have occurred. At the very least, Mr. Obama, give our allies some cover for their appropriate silence. Call him out for the fraud he is. 

Gov. Northam, Rev. Barber, and Silver Linings

AROUND THE BLOCK

I learned today…

I learned today that there could be a silver lining coming out of the Ralph Northam debacle.

As Around the Block readers know, I haven’t been particularly easy on Virginia Democratic governor Ralph Northam, calling him "more clueless than he appears." But, despite the drumbeat for his resignation from both Democrats and Republicans, he’s still in office.

So, what’s the silver lining?

Well, it comes from the Reverend William J. Barber II, president of Repairers of the Breach, co-chair of the Poor People’s Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival and former president of the NAACP's North Carolina chapter.

In a Washington Post Op-Ed and a subsequent appearance on MSNBC's Morning Joe, Dr. Barber related the Bible story of Zacchaeus, "a tax collector who participated in the systemic exploitation of people in Palestine. When he met Jesus, he repented of his wrongdoing by committing to pay back the people he had harmed. Whether we are talking about Northam or President Trump — Democrats or Republicans — restitution that addresses systemic harm must be the fruit of true repentance.”

Barber believes simply apologizing is not enough, writing, “Scapegoating politicians who are caught in the act of interpersonal racism will not address the fundamental issue of systemic racism,” they "have to talk about policy". He goes on to say, “To confess past mistakes while continuing to insist that you are still best suited to lead because of your experience is itself a subtle form of white supremacy.”

But heeding calls for Northam’s resignation will not help the situation, according to Barber. “At the same time, we cannot allow political enemies of Virginia’s governor to call for his resignation over a photo when they continue themselves to vote for the policies of white supremacy. If anyone wants to call for the governor’s resignation, they should also call for the resignation of anyone who has supported racist voter suppression or policies that have a disparate impact on communities of color.”

Now, just to be clear, Reverend, it's not just "political enemies" of Northam who are calling for his resignation. But putting aside that bit of partisan rhetoric, what, according to Barber, should Northam do? 

Don’t resign but give a major speech on what racism really is. And then follow up that speech by using his position and power as governor of Virginia to, among other things, commit to supporting policies that expand voting rights, that stand with immigrant neighbors, and that provide health care and living wages for all people. 

And there, if Northam heeds Barber's advice, is the silver lining. 

Barber's admonition to Northam: Don't resign, repent. And use that repentance to ask the question, “How are the people who have been harmed by my actions asking to change the policies and practices of our society?”

Amen!

Clueless in Virginia

 

AROUND THE BLOCK

I learned today…

I learned today that Virginia Governor Ralph Northam is actually more clueless than he appears.

Gayle King of CBS News interviewed Northam on Sunday, beginning by asking, “I know this has been a very difficult week for you in the state of Virginia. So where would you like to begin?

Northam replied, “Well it has been a difficult week. And you know if you look at Virginia's history, we are now at the 400-year anniversary, just 90 miles from here in 1619. The first indentured servants from Africa landed on our shores in Old Point Comfort what we call now Fort Monroe…”

Yes, the governor of Virginia referred to slaves as “indentured servants!” 

Now, based on some reading of history, he might be technically correct. According to Encyclopedia Virginia, “Indentured servants were men and women who signed a contract by which they agreed to work for a certain number of years in exchange for transportation to Virginia and, once they arrived, food, clothing, and shelter. Adults usually served for four to seven years and children sometimes for much longer, with most working in the colony's tobacco fields.” 

In 1619, when, as the governor pointed out, these first black Africans came to Virginia, there were no slave laws in place. Some historians believe that some of the first blacks who arrived in Virginia were already slaves, while others say they were taken into the colony as indentured servants. 

So, what about these first black Africans? 

According to Encyclopedia Virginia they had been captured in a Spanish-controlled area of West Central Africa and transported aboard the Portuguese ship São João Bautista bound for Mexico. But before they got to Mexico they were stolen by two English ships and brought to Virginia to be sold. The fact that they were “captured,” "stolen" and "sold" pretty says it all; they clearly were slaves. And, I’m pretty sure they didn’t sign a work contract in exchange for this trip.

But wait, there’s more from the clueless governor. 

Talking about the progress Virginia has made regarding race he said, “…we have made a lot of progress in Virginia, slavery has ended, schools have been desegregated, we have ended the Jim Crow laws, provided easier access to voting...” 

Whoa Dixie! Just to be clear, governor: 

• Slavery ended in Virginia not because of something Virginia did but when Lincoln issued the  Emancipation Proclamation declaring, "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebellious states "are, and henceforward shall be free," and finally after the 13^th Amendment which abolished slavery in the U.S.;

• Brown v. Board of Education was the Supreme Court case that outlawed segregation in schools in 1954;

• The passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, abolished the Jim Crow laws. by outlawing discrimination in any type of public accommodation;

• The Voting Rights Act of 1965, protected black people’s right to vote by barring discriminatory voting laws.

And what specifically of Virginia’s progress on these issues?

According to the University of Virginia’s Digital Resources for American History, “The leading white politicians and public men of Virginia resisted the change and fought to maintain Virginia's system of segregated education by closing down several public schools. The struggle to find a workable path towards school desegregation in Virginia would continue for more than a decade after the Brown decision.”

By 1964, only 5 percent of black students in Virginia were attending integrated schools. It took the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which denied federal funds to schools determined to be resisting integration, to result in a bit more compliance by Virginia schools reports the Virginia Museum of History & Culture. 

And with the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision to alter the Voting Rights Act, Virginia put in place photo-identification laws that work to suppress the black vote.

Despite Northam’s appalling lack of knowledge of Virginia’s history and his equivocation on the black face/KKK medical school yearbook photo, he told King he’s, “not going anywhere," going on to say, "I have thought about resigning, but I've also thought about what Virginia needs right now. And I really think that I'm in a position where I can take Virginia to the next level."

If he's not going away, there is a way Northam, as governor, can help bring Virginia to the next level: require every student in the state to take a class in the history of slavery, segregation and discrimination in Virginia. And take the class himself before he disgraces himself further. But I can't help but think, even if he "smartens up" on his history, this guy is only part way through his ignominy.