Skip to content

Month: October 2016

He never thought it would come to this #rattled #unprepared

He never thought it would come to this

by digby

Other people’s money has always dug him out of it before, but that won’t help him now. This piece by the New York Times’ Maggie Haberman about Trump’s isolation in his golden tower reveals how rattled he really is:

Mr. Trump was asked to stay away from a party gathering Saturday afternoon in Wisconsin, where Speaker Paul D. Ryan and other state luminaries took the stage, a striking rebuke that left the Republican nominee for president with no place to go on a Saturday 31 days before the election.

So he remained inside his enormous penthouse apartment on the 66th floor, and his corporate suite 40 stories below, for almost all of Friday and Saturday.

At times he was joined by his small circle of loyalists, who arrived to prepare him for Sunday night’s debate against Hillary Clinton but instead spent much of the time trying to figure out how to undo the damage wrought by the surfacing of an 11-year-old video recording on which he can be heard gleefully describing pushing himself on women and sexually assaulting them.

At other times, Mr. Trump retreated to Twitter, where he retweeted posts from an account that says it belongs to a woman who had long ago accused Bill Clinton of rape.

Mr. Trump called a few reporters but lacked his usual gusto.

And he kept returning to watching coverage on CNN, the cable outlet he derides as biased against him but still tunes in to most often, and becoming more upset as he saw Republican officials condemn him one by one.

Mr. Trump has been rattled by the release of the 2005 video recording, according to two people with direct knowledge of his mood who were granted anonymity to candidly describe the situation.

He was urged to be humble, and he felt that he had been, in an apology video that his campaign released early Saturday. But he was criticized for ending his statement with a dig at the Clintons and for not apologizing to his wife, Melania, in his remarks. To him, the criticism was an affirmation that “nothing he can say or do” would reduce the hostility directed his way, according to one of the people with knowledge of how he feels.

Inside the tower on Saturday, different plans of action were discussed. Mr. Trump and his advisers considered a joint television interview that he and Ms. Trump would give to a major network, an echo of the 1992 appearance by the Clintons on “60 Minutes” after Gennifer Flowers claimed that she had had an affair with Mr. Clinton.

The deliberations over a possible interview were moving ahead despite Ms. Trump’s lack of interest in appearing on camera. But then Nancy O’Dell, the former “Access Hollywood” host whom Mr. Trump had lewdly described in the recording, issued a statement denouncing his comments. And then more tapes of Mr. Trump speaking crudely about women, this time on “The Howard Stern Show,” turned up on television.

The discussions about the interview were quickly dropped.

Mr. Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, an observant Jew who normally does not work on the Sabbath, was among those who gathered with him on Saturday, although the candidate’s oldest daughter, Ivanka, was not. Mr. Trump’s oldest son, Donald Jr., was there. Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey and Rudolph W. Giuliani also showed up, as did the Republican National Committee chairman, Reince Priebus.

Mr. Christie and Mr. Priebus told Mr. Trump that the situation with other Republicans was becoming dire. Other advisers assured Mr. Trump that attacking Mrs. Clinton over her husband’s behavior with women, and over reports that she had defended his behavior, would help rally Republicans again.

Ms. Trump and the rest of the Trump family made plans to travel with the candidate to the debate, in part to buoy his spirits.

“So we’re going to chop off heads?”

“So we’re going to chop off heads?” 

by digby

Friendly reminder. I don’t care how much you loathe and despise Hillary Clinton you have to realize that it’s either her or this sociopath:

STEPHANOPOULOS: The issue of waterboarding front and center last night as (INAUDIBLE). You said, I would bring back waterboarding and I would bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding.
What did you have in mind?

TRUMP: Well, George, you’re not talking about what I said before that. I said we’re living in a world where, in the Middle East, they’re cutting people’s heads off. They’re chopping a Christian’s head off. And many of them, we talk about Foley, James Foley, and you know, what a wonderful young man. Boom, they’re chopping heads. 

So then I went into this. I said, yes, I would bring back waterboarding. And I would make it a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes. What did you have in mind?

TRUMP: I had in mind going worse than waterboarding. It’s enough. We have right now a country that’s under siege. It’s under siege from a people, from — we’re like living in medieval times. If I have it to do and if it’s up to me, I would absolutely bring back waterboarding. And if it’s going to be tougher than waterboarding, I would bring that back, too

STEPHANOPOULOS: As president, you would authorize torture?

TRUMP: I would absolutely authorize something beyond waterboarding. And believe me, it will be effective. If we need information, George, you have our enemy cutting heads off of Christians and plenty of others, by the hundreds, by the thousands.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do we win by being more like them?

TRUMP: Yes. I’m sorry. You have to do it that way. And I’m not sure everybody agrees with me. I guess a lot of people don’t. We are living in a time that’s as evil as any time that there has ever been. You know, when I was a young man, I studied Medieval times. That’s what they did, they chopped off heads. That’s what we have…

STEPHANOPOULOS: So we’re going to chop off heads…?

TRUMP: We’re going to do things beyond waterboarding, if that happens to come.

Apparently that kind of talk is just fine with Paul Ryan and Mike Pence, much less violent psychos like Giuliani and Christie. About 40% of voters have no problem with it. But anyone who doesn’t think this is an acceptable moral position should think twice about doing anything to enable this bloodthirsty barbarism. I mean — my God.

Read this and see what was already done in our name. It is horrifying.

.

If Trump goes rogue

If Trump goes rogue

by digby

This piece on Vox by Andre Prokop looks at the Bill Clinton line of attack that seems inevitable tonight:

First, there’s the simple truth that this line of attack doesn’t poll well. A little over a week ago, Politico asked voters whether it would be appropriate or inappropriate for Trump to bring up Bill Clinton’s affairs and “allegations that Hillary Clinton tried to silence women who accused her husband of infidelity or sexual misconduct,” only 33 percent said this would be appropriate, and 56 percent said it would be inappropriate.

Second, it is really difficult to strike a balance between appearing contrite and going on the attack as Trump appears to want to do. The story since Friday has been about Donald Trump’s conduct. So if he tries to change the subject, it will be interpreted as him trying to change the subject. His video apology statement was hammered for just this reason — the apology just seems less sincere when you throw in “Bill Clinton is worse.” Either the apology or the attack is going to come off as weak.

Third, there’s the question of just what Hillary Clinton will say in response — she’s deliberately said nothing about the leaked tape so far. That’s because, according to a report by Politico’s Annie Karni, her team wants to maximize the impact of her first response by having it take place live on the debate stage, in front of an audience of tens of millions of people.

Fourth, the leaked Trump tape is already out there, voters are widely aware of it, and what it portrays is indisputable. So Hillary Clinton can afford to use a lighter and more subtle touch in discussing it, if she feels that’s the best option. But if Trump truly wants to portray Hillary Clinton as “an enabler of sexual violence,” he is going to have to be the one to do it — all those ugly and disputed allegations are going to have to come out of Donald Trump’s mouth onstage.

Fifth, the optics of Trump aggressively confronting Clinton might be quite bad. Her best moments in past political debates have often come when arrogant male opponents have aggressively overplayed their hands, and Trump has already been hammered for interrupting her too many times in the first debate.

Sixth, there’s the fact that this debate takes place in a town hall setting. The room will be full of undecided voters who will ask pre-selected questions, and most will likely focus on more traditional policy issues. How does Trump press a sexual misconduct-focused case against Bill and Hillary Clinton in an environment when the questioners will likely want to talk about other things? It’s much easier to ignore the question and completely change the subject when it’s a moderator talking rather than a flesh-and-blood voter.

And finally, Trump’s mental state does not seem to be the greatest at this moment. The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman writes that he is “increasingly isolated and upset.” And he couldn’t manage to seriously commit himself to debate prep even before his campaign entered this recent tailspin, after all.

Any of these challenges would be tremendously difficult to overcome even for a polished political veteran running a stable, professional campaign — let alone for Trump, whose campaign is in crisis.

I sense that the media is yearning to re-litigate the hundred million dollar Starr investigation in these last few weeks. (Yes, Starr investigated the Broadrick charges.) They hate being accused of bias against Trump and while most of them probably don’t want him elected they also don’t want Clinton to win by more than the narrowest of margins so they can morally preen about their own “pox on both their houses” superiority.

I don’t know if Trump will be smart enough to lead them where they want to go. Let’s hope not.

.

Sticking with their man. Of course

Sticking with their man. Of course.

by digby

A wave of Republican officials abandoned Donald Trump on Saturday, but, at least for now, rank-and-file Republicans are standing by the party’s presidential candidate, according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll conducted immediately after audio was unearthed Friday that had the GOP nominee crudely bragging about groping women and trying to lure a married woman into an affair.

Overall, fewer than four-in-10 voters — 39 percent — think Trump should end his presidential campaign, while only slightly more voters, 45 percent, think he should not drop out.

But voters are largely viewing Trump’s comments through their own partisan lens: 70 percent of Democrats say Trump should end his campaign, but just 12 percent of Republicans — and 13 percent of female Republicans — agree.

There is obviously nothing he can say that will tear them away. But why would we think so? It’s not like he hasn’t shown himself to be a crude, disgusting boor and a violent, white, nationalist authoritarian already. They like that about him.

I think he’s staying in and he’ll probably get between 35 and 40 percent of the vote.

And, by the way, anyone who votes for him really is deplorable. Not half of them. All of them.

.

“If you care about your future, vote for it.” by @BloggersRUs

“If you care about your future, vote for it.”
by Tom Sullivan

This short Twitter video by Robert De Niro brought home just how low this country has sunk.

SkyNews reports:

The clip of De Niro was originally produced as part of a series of 100 video statements recorded by celebrities including Leonardo DiCaprio and Julia Roberts as part of the #VoteYourFuture campaign encouraging Americans to vote.

It is thought De Niro’s rant was an outtake not intended to form part of his published message.

In campaignland less than two weeks before early voting starts, the day is gone before there is enough free time to catch up on news. But watching the De Niro clip last night after reading through a string of tweets about the Republican candidate for president was especially depressing. How have we come to this, where one of the two major political parties has nominated a bigoted degenerate to lead the United States of America?

With hours to go before tonight’s “town hall” presidential debate, the Washington Post reports:

The Republican Party plunged into an epic and historic political crisis Saturday with just a month to go until Election Day as a growing wave of GOP lawmakers called on defiant presidential nominee Donald Trump to drop out of the race in the wake of a video showing him make crude sexual remarks.

[…]

By midafternoon Saturday, more than two dozen Republican lawmakers had called on Trump to leave the race, often touting vice presidential candidate Mike Pence as an alternative. Others including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the 2008 GOP nominee, said they could no longer vote for Trump but stopped short of calling on him to drop out. Still, the Republican Party’s top leadership — including House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (Wis.), Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and party chairman Reince Priebus — continued to support Trump even as they denounced his comments.

Days ago, dozens of evangelical leaders acknowledged the integrity of their faith hangs in the balance in this election. Yet others, like Republican leaders, steadfastly stood by their man-child. Gary Bauer, Ralph Reed, Robert Jeffress. Even while finding Trump’s taped comments indefensible, Franklin Graham (who has not endorsed a candidate) pivoted to finding the “godless progressive agenda of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton” (equally?) indefensible. Where are their proclamations of God’s judgment now? Perhaps they should review the prophets again, reading not through the eyes of the prophets, but putting themselves in place of the prophets’ targets.

Reap what you’ve sown.

The Sunday bobblehead shows this morning promise to be epic. Then comes tonight.

First and Foremost…. by tristero

First and Foremost…

by tristero

He’s a Republican.

Cruz is no better. Pence is no better, Rubio is no better. Not one of them has any good ideas. And none of them has the character to be president.

And we should resist all attempts by Republicans to disown him. He is one of them.*

*Adding: I know personally many decent, honest members of the Republican party. It is time for them to leave the party. There is nothing left for them.

If the shoe were on the other foot

If the shoe were on the other foot

by digby

Samantha Bee:

Here’s Colbert:

More deplorable behavior

More deplorable behavior

by digby

… from his fans.

This from Kurt Eichenwald is just chilling:

Shortly after I wrote an article for Newsweek about how Donald Trump’s business interests could undermine national security should he be elected president, one of his supporters assaulted me. He used the internet to do it.

Throughout my adulthood, I have never made a secret of the fact that I have epilepsy. It’s better controlled now than it has been during other parts of my life, but not completely—my neurologist tells me I have intractable epilepsy, meaning treatment will never bring the condition fully under control. I know how people—particularly children—with seizures suffer when uninformed idiots suggest they should impose limits of their lives or quell their aspirations. So when Fox News blowhard and college dropout Sean Hannity practically drooled in delight this election season as he falsely proclaimed that Hillary Clinton suffered from seizures based on her acting goofy in a short video clip, it infuriated me. I knew how his message would be heard—people with seizures look ridiculous, they should be afraid of others laughing at them, they should listen to the voices telling them they can’t do what they want (even be president). And so I raged at Hannity in the pages of Newsweek, on cable television news shows and on Twitter.

A couple of weeks later, after my article about how Trump’s business interests would create a conflict of unprecedented proportions, I received a tweet from someone with the twitter handle “Mike’s Deplorable AF.” Like many Trump supporters, he has chosen to identify himself as deplorable to mock the label once used by Clinton to describe the racists, neo-Nazis, homophobes and like who have crawled out of the sewer to cheer for the Republican nominee. Mike, however, is indeed deplorable.

In his tweet, which has since been deleted, Mike made mention of my seizures and included a small video. It contained images of Pepe the Frog, a cartoon character that has been identified by the Anti-Defamation League as a hate symbol. I was carrying my iPad, looking at the still image on the video and, without thinking, touched the PLAY button.

The video was some sort of strobe light, with flashing circles and images of Pepe flying toward the screen. It’s what’s called epileptogenic—something that triggers seizures. Fortunately, since I was standing, I simply dropped my iPad to the ground the second I realized what Mike had done. It landed face down on the bathroom floor.

The deplorables are real. The deplorables are dangerous.

Because I have written critically about Trump, I have received innumerable death threats, sometimes just general invocations that I should die, sometimes more specific threats that I should be shot or “lynched,” as one Trump fan wrote. I have been called “kike,” “Jew” and “anti-American Zionist,” even though I’m Episcopalian with a Jewish father (as if that makes a difference). I have received video cartoons that look like they are from Nazi Germany of hook-nosed men dressed in Jewish garb rubbing their hands greedily over piles of money. I have been told to go back where I came from, whatever that means. I have been called “fag,” “pedo,” and once—in an email that made no sense—“ni**er-lover.” One Trump fan mentioned he knew which schools my children attended, and correctly named them. Topping it off, some Trump fans have even gone after one of my sons online, although he knew enough to immediately block them.

My family has been through this before—it is sometimes a consequence of writing about controversial topics—but this is the first time we have discussed whether I should continue investigating an issue. All of them agreed I should stay on this story— since Trump won’t release much information about himself, digging up everything that can be found before the election is important for the country. But why is this even a discussion? We do not live in a third-world nation where journalists who report unpleasant realities are in danger. While I believe that most of these threats—except for Mike’s—are from internet blowhards, why does my family even have to wonder about this? And why am I convinced that, just by writing this article, Mike will get lots of new Twitter followers and praise from profoundly evil people?

There’s more and it’s all awful. These are Trump’s people. There are millions of them. And the Republican Party has eagerly enabled it for years.