STAY TUNED
This is getting interesting. Trump's hysterical attack on Obama strikes me as a desperation effort to distract attention from what is a worsening scandal. I remember Watergate. It took months for that one to ripen. we are still only six weeks into the new presidency.
I think the drama, "The Fall of Trump" is in the first act or maybe even the second. Our protagonist, Trump, still has the possibility of saving his presidency (from a rightwing point of view), but given his character, it seems quite unlikely that he'll be able to reverse events leading to his fall. By the 3rd act his fall will be both evident to all spectators (although not to Trump) and inevitable.
ReplyDeleteTrump has given up cheating small businessmen out of thousands and has been laundering money for Russian oligarchs. This will bring in millions. His tax returns will show his involvement with these Russian crooks, but we may never see them.
ReplyDeleteAccording the New York Times. Trump left for Florida in a rage because Sessions had recused himself from any investigation into links between the Trump campaign and the Russians. Now this could just be because Trump hates to admit himself, and he does not like anybody close to him admitting, that anything he or they might have done could be wrong. Despite his long history of fuckups he likes to see himself and to be recognised by others as infallible. But if we make the assumption that this outburst is something more than a criticism-induced tantrum, it suggests that there really is some kind dirt of which he is dimly aware and that he was counting on Sessions to block or deflect any investigation that might have come too close to digging it up. Of course this inference relies on the assumption that Trump is slightly more at the mental level than an overindulged two-year-old, which is pretty dubious, but these ninnies seem to have had so many compromising chit-chat's with the Russians that it is highly likely that at least one of them did or said something illegal.
ReplyDeleteIt is fortunate for America that when a President fits the bill of an aspiring Tyrant of the kind that the Founders would've read about in Plutarch and other classical authors, he turns out to be a complete idiot.
Charles,
ReplyDeleteYou are being too kind with the Framers. It behooves us to be clear-eyed about the founding and founding values. If we begin and end our history with just the first president, we would note that he enslaved 300 human beings and that he thought he was "laying the foundation of a great empire." Surely those people who were owned might have thought GW was a tyrant. Are we to discount their voices?
It is too easy to be against tyranny when it serves larger strategic and profitable interests but when has any president been against tyranny when it such a value collides with strategic interests and profit making?