Why Trump’s Vengeful Tweeting Matters

He’s crass, vicious, and petty.

.. It’s a sad symbol of our times that one feels compelled to actually make an argument why the president is wrong here. The pitiful reality is that there are people who feel like the man who sits in the seat once occupied by George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Dwight Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan should use his bully pulpit for schoolyard insults and vicious personal attacks. But this is what we’re reduced to. So, here goes. –

.. First, it is simply and clearly morally wrong to attack another person like this. I’m tired of hearing people say things like, “This is not normal.” Normality isn’t the concern here. Morality is. It doesn’t matter if Mika has been “mean” to Trump. Nor does it matter that we can point to any number of angry personal attacks on Trump from others. We have to get past the idea that another person’s bad acts somehow justify “our” side’s misconduct. Morality is not so situational. Trump is under a moral obligation to treat others the way he’d like to be treated, to love his neighbor as he would love himself. Yes, he can engage in ideological and political battles, but to attack another person in such vicious terms is to cross a bright line.

.. Second, it’s not classist or elitist to make this moral argument. It’s no justification to argue that Trump simply speaks the way “real Americans” do, or that he’s brought into public the language that “everyone knows” people use behind closed doors. People of every social class and economic standing have the same moral responsibilities, and our society suffers when we relax those responsibilities, whether for a steelworker in a mill outside Pittsburgh or the real-estate developer in the Oval Office.

.. Third, even if your ethics are entirely situational and tribal, Trump’s tweets are still destructive. Attacking Mika like this doesn’t silence her or anyone at MSNBC. It doesn’t move the ball downfield on repealing Obamacare. It does, however, make more people dislike Donald Trump. It’s a misuse and abuse of the bully pulpit, all the more galling because it comes at a time when the positive parts of his agenda truly do need public champions.

.. Fourth, please stop with the ridiculous lie that this is the only way to beat the Left. Stop with any argument that this kind of pettiness is somehow preferable to the alleged weakness of other Republicans. There are thousands of GOP office-holders who’ve won their races (including by margins that dwarf Trump’s, even in the toughest districts and states) without resorting to Trump-like behavior. In fact, at the state level many of these same honorable and moral people are currently busy enacting reforms that the national GOP can only dream about.

.. The election is over. Trump isn’t running against Hillary Clinton anymore. Americans are no longer faced with the awful choice of either pulling the lever for an unfit candidate or voting for someone who has no chance of winning. If there were ever a time for Republicans to show some backbone, to tell their president that some conduct is out of bounds, it’s now, early in his first term, when he has time to turn the page and put his past misconduct in the rear-view mirror.

.. while also condemning Trump’s vile tweets and criticizing his impulsiveness and lack of discipline. A good conservative can even step back and take a longer view, resolving to fight for the cultural values that tribalism degrades. Presidents matter not just because of their policies but also because of their impact on the character of the people they govern. Conservatives knew that once. Do they still?

The Justice Department Is Killing Trump

It is, in addition, a scandal born of Trump’s desperation to publicize information that is true and that a president is fully entitled to publicize — such as the facts that the president had been assured by the FBI director on multiple occasions that he is not a criminal suspect

.. True, his media-Democrat enemies cast every story in the worst possible light. But there’s always a story, isn’t there?

.. That is largely Trump’s doing. The tweet-tirades about phantom wiretaps (which undermined his credibility

.. The multiple conflicting explanations for Comey’s removal. The bizarre decision to meet Russian diplomats the day after Comey’s dismissal and, shamefully, to berate the former director in their presence. And, of course, more tweets, such as the self-destructive suggestion of a Watergate-resonant White House taping system (that almost certainly does not exist).

.. Four key decisions, three of them made after the president was inaugurated and the Justice Department came under his control, at least nominally, have done immense damage to his administration — in conjunction with Trump’s belief that fires are best doused with gasoline.

.. After his (self-induced) nightmare over the Hillary Clinton e-mails investigation, Comey was reluctant to announce that Trump was not a suspect; he feared that if Trump’s status later changed, he would have to correct his announcement

.. during congressional testimony, he made an unnecessary announcement about the Russia investigation that led the media to report, and much of the public to believe, that Trump was a suspect in possible crimes. Once he did that, it was unreasonable to refuse to correct this misimpression by publicly acknowledging that Trump was not a suspect.

.. It is all well and good to agitate over a “duty to correct,” but Comey glides past the more basic duty not to make gratuitous prejudicial statements in the first place.

1. The Flynn Investigation and Interrogation

because Kislyak, as an operative of a hostile foreign power, was under FBI surveillance, the bureau knew (and informed what the New York Times furtively described as “Obama advisers”) that Flynn had done nothing improper in these discussions — i.e., no quid pro quo involving a lifting of Obama-imposed sanctions

.. the Justice Department had the FBI interrogate him about the Kislyak conversations even though it had recordings of them and thus did not need Flynn’s input.

.. Reportedly, Flynn misled the FBI agents about whether sanctions had been discussed (just as he misled Vice President Mike Pence — which led to Flynn’s dismissal).

.. Still, there appears to have been no justification for considering him a suspect and interrogating him as such.

That is what led Trump, in the immediate aftermath of the painful decision to fire Flynn, to lean on Comey to drop the investigation. That, in turn, is the spark that lit the obstruction fire.

2. The Sessions Recusal

.. in overreaction to false allegations that he had perjured himself at the Senate hearing, Sessions bowed to media-Democrat demands and announced a recusal more sweeping than it needed to be.

.. Sessions was not consulted on Comey’s March 20 testimony. He was thus unable to direct the FBI director not to make a misleading announcement that suggested Trump was a suspect

3. Comey’s March 20 Testimony

(a) the FBI was conducting a counterintelligence investigation of the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the election;

(b) this probe included “investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government, and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts”; and

(c) the FBI would further assess whether any crimes were committed.

.. The then-director began his statement by asserting that he had been “authorized by the Department of Justice” to make this announcement. As noted above, Sessions had by then recused himself, but Rosenstein was not yet confirmed — that would take another month. On March 20, the acting DAG was Dana Boente, a longtime prosecutor whom President Obama and his attorney general, Eric Holder, had appointed

.. It is hard to imagine that Sessions would have authorized Comey’s March 20 announcement – certainly not unless it acknowledged that Trump was not a suspect.

.. had the Justice Department refused to authorize this unnecessary and misleading announcement, Comey would probably still be FBI director, there would be no obstruction investigation, and the Russia counterintelligence probe might be winding down toward a finding that there had been no Trump campaign collusion.

4. Rosenstein’s Appointment of a Special Counsel

.. Rosenstein saw that he was being made the fall-guy for a decision

.. Having cultivated good relations on both sides of the aisle, Rosenstein had been confirmed by the Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support (94–6); suffice it to say, he is not the type to let Democratic hyperbole roll off his back.

.. making a counterintelligence probe the linchpin of a special-counsel investigation sets no practical limitations on the special counsel’s jurisdiction. Counterintelligence is an information-gathering exercise; it does not have the definitive parameters of a criminal investigation, which focuses on concrete factual scenarios in which indictable crimes have been committed.

.. Rosenstein’s flouting of the regulations means Mueller’s investigation is a fishing expedition. It is already straying far afield from suspicions about Trump collusion in Russia’s election-meddling — which, we need to remind ourselves, is the purported rationale for the probe

.. The probe’s focus has morphed from collusion to obstruction

.. Mueller has also broadened his scope to include the scrutinizing of financial activities of Trump associates, reportedly based on hunches about possible bribery and money-laundering. These, in turn, are based on the assumption that there was collusion

.. there are conflicts of interest that are apt to discredit the investigation, regardless of whether they technically require disqualification.

.. Rosenstein selected Mueller despite the latter’s close friendship with and professional ties to Comey. Now that obstruction is suddenly the focal point of the probe, Comey is clearly a central witness.

.. Mueller promptly made tin-eared hires: lawyers who, despite their impressive prosecutorial credentials, are Obama and Clinton donors. One of them, Andrew Weissmann, is also plagued by the scorched-earth reputation he developed as special prosecutor in the Enron investigation, particularly the infamous prosecution that destroyed the Arthur Andersen accounting firm — which Weissmann indicted on very thin proof for, yes, obstruction of justice . . . only to have the conviction thrown out by the Supreme Court.

.. the staffing decisions make it inevitable that much of the public will suspect prosecutorial bias even if all the lawyers perform responsibly.

.. President Trump can be an erratic and intemperate client

.. If the president has learned nothing else, it should be the importance of filling the Justice Department, and the rest of his administration, with his own appointees. To say the prior administration laid traps for him, and that he has blundered his way into them, is putting it mildly.

The guardrails can’t contain Trump

Donald Trump’s character — volatile, impulsive, often self-destructive — had not changed since the campaign. But it seemed as if the guardrails of our democracy— Congress, the courts, the states, the media, the Cabinet — were keeping things within bounds.

Then came the past 10 days. The country is now caught in the internal maelstrom that is the mind of Donald Trump. We are in the realm of the id. Chaos reigns. No guardrails can hold.

.. Layers of falsehoods giving the impression of an elaborate coverup — in the absence of a crime.

.. Trump insists there’s no there there, but acts as if the there is everywhere.

.. Trump had three top officials come out and declare the disclosure story false. The next morning, Trump tweeted he was entirely within his rights to reveal what he revealed, thereby verifying the truth of the story.

.. The White House hurriedly issued a statement denying the story. The statement was unsigned.

.. this would be seen by millions as an establishment usurpation to get rid of a disruptive outsider. It would be the most destabilizing event in American political history

Sheryl Sandberg: How to Build Resilient Kids, Even After a Loss

After my husband’s death, I set out to learn everything
I could about how kids persevere through adversity.