Nicholas Frankovich:
Last week America was introduced to Anthony Senecal, that curious octogenarian who lives in Trump’s house in Florida and writes bilious Facebook posts about his view that the president should be lynched. Senecal is flesh and blood. “John Miller” and “John Barron,” who are not, are made of faith, trust, and pixie dust. Former associates of the Republican party’s presumptive nominee for president in 2016, the pair was presented to a bemused nation on Friday.
This most recent distraction — the revelation that Trump impersonated his own, imaginary publicists on the phone for several years in the 1980s and ’90s, confessed to it then, and denies it now — freshly illustrates his well-established flair for drama and deception. It also ratchets up a little the Fremdscham that he stirs in those who, as Rachel Lu put it the other day, “remain un-hypnotized” by his antics: They feel his embarrassment, and all the more so because he does not, or pretends he doesn’t. Instead of correcting course, he doubles down and rubs the public’s nose in it.
We should be talking instead about ISIS and Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, his supporters say on Twitter and elsewhere, disingenuously. His campaign is nearly bereft of ideas and policy arguments except the flavor of the moment. He contradicts himself routinely, with insouciance. It matters to most voters and to many donors, though clearly not to his base. Has a presidential campaign ever been built on such a small ratio of substance to mood music? Obama 2008. There you go.
A vocal and passionate bloc of voters on the right want their own Obama, a president who for a change —change! — will cut out all that “principled conservative” jabber about “the Constitution” and exercise an imperial presidency in their interest, as they perceive it. They resent conservatives for standing between them and the Left. The new populists, or nationalists, demand to have at it: “Out of the way, you had your chance, our turn, we’ll show you how it’s done.” What they mean is that they aim to install a Clinton donor in the Oval Office, to keep Clinton herself out of it. Got that? Meet the new boss, same as the old one. Or worse than the old one? That’s a question for another post.
We the people are the boss, of course, and Mr. or Mme. President our public servant, at least on paper. That notion is now fairly quaint, a parchment piety. Too many Americans would rather have a king, like the Israelites who ended up with Saul. It turns out that the demand for an American monarch far exceeds the supply of willing candidates. Voters in the market for such a thing will take what’s on offer. That is how the Republican party has come to this, preparing to nominate for president a person whose primary qualification for the office is that he can rage with senior-style ferocity, like Lear on the heath.
To deflect attention from a swelling drumbeat of questions about what might be in his tax returns, Trump released to the Washington Post a tape of a phone interview that “John Miller” gave to a reporter for a celebrity-gossip magazine in 1991. So speculates the reporter, Sue Carswell, who says that she lost the tape long ago and that the only other person who would have had a copy is Trump. But if he was the one who released it, why did he appear caught off guard when asked about it on TV on Friday, and why did he hang up when asked about it again a few hours later, 44 minutes into an interview with the Post?
Whatever the bottom of that peculiar story is, it’s backward-looking and sad, a picture — it’s ironic — of what Americans who rally to Trump fear their country has become. Remember Shelley Levene, the paunchy, andropausal real-estate con man played by Jack Lemmon in Glengarry Glen Ross? On the phone with potential marks who probably won’t buy the sketchy and possibly nonexistent real estate he’s so desperately pitching, he shouts directions to and answers questions from his nonexistent secretary. The guy is sunk.
Carswell suggests that we keep our eye on Trump’s failure to release his returns. Others, including Paul Krugman, suspect that the reason he’s stonewalling is that the returns show him to be poorer than he lets on. In his book TrumpNation (2005), Timothy L. O’Brien wrote that “three people with direct knowledge” of Trump’s finances estimated that his net worth was between $150 and $250 million. Trump sued O’Brien for defamation, insisting that he was a billionaire, and lost in court.
Since the IRS has all of Trump’s taxes, don’t his critics think that, should there be problems, the IRS would find them?
I think Trump’s taxes are in the best possible place for irregularities of a legal nature to be found.
@Nanny G:
Did Trump himself not s that he was not going to release is taxes because he is big audited? Audited for WHAT?
Trump could have simply claimed that all his tax returns contained was payments for yoga classes and wedding expenses, then deleted them.
I see no reason to expect only one side of the political spectrum to be transparent when that transparency is always weaponized. Once both sides comply, we can complain when we don’t get it.
The release of personal financial records has become some form of weird tradition. Personally I dont care whats in his taxes, or bank account. I want to know his core policies, something he wont back down on, Building a wall, fence, or berm at the border really isn’t enough of a platform to impress any but the television audience.
Unless someone has been cheating on their taxes (Clinton Foundation) or if they have been running on a platform of everyone paying the highest rates (Bernie) the returns don’t really matter. Trump is being audited, so whatever is amiss you can rest assured we will hear about it.
Likewise, scholastic records do not weigh on unless the candidate is being touted as some scholastic genius (Obama).
@Bill: Being audited does not mean you have cheated or even made a mistake on taxes, we know the administration routinely uses departments to punish citizens. He has a plethora of attorneys to pay as little tax as possible legally. So they will drag out 8 years of tax forms and sift through it to try to make a case.Even someone as anti Trump as I am cannot be swayed by this liberal bruhaha.
@Bill, #5:
Can you cite any evidence of that?
Unlike those of Donald Trump, the Clinton’s and the tax exempt Clinton Foundation’s returns are available for public examination. No doubt you can provide something very specific.
@Greg: Greg really? with 6 billion dollars improperly documented / missing from the state department durring the time that Hillary ran it. http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/17/exclusive-disgraced-clinton-donor-got-13m-in-state-dept-grants-under-hillary/. The FBI running a criminal investigation perhaps not just on email, but also the foundation. Best yet she is basically admitting she cant handle the economy she is going to give the checkbook to Bill if she wins, which is looking pretty bad about now.
@kitt, #8:
$6 billion is not missing. Steve Linick, the State Department’s Inspector General, determined that record keeping pertaining to $6 billion in contractor expenditures was inadequate, and recommended new standards that would result in tighter control. The State Department is complying with those recommendations.
Inadequate record keeping wasn’t a problem that suddenly appeared when a democrat was appointed as Secretary of State, or when State took over the management of activities in Iraq from the DoD. There were serious issues long before then. Have we somehow forgotten?
Not to worry. I’m sure Donald Trump can sort all of this out very quickly, given the stellar example he’s already setting for transparency, truthfulness, and personal accountability.
@Greg: Did Linick ever find out what services were rendered for a 50 million dollar check written by Mrs Clinton? Nice to know you will still bake a file in a cake for your supreme candidate you have not yet felt the Bern.
I don’t know who Nicholas Frankovich is, but I can tell you he is an absolute fruitcake. Now that we have that cleared up…..
Kitt says:
Oh, really? give me a link to obama’s tax returns. Even better, give me a link to his birth certificate. The real one, not the Photoshopped fraudulent one on line. Give us the link to obama’s tax return that has ‘his’ social security number on it.
Who is this ‘weird tradition’ supposed to apply to? Trump? No other candidate has released complete tax returns. NONE OF THEM. They are no one’s business.
05 says:
that’s correct. For what? You can damn well bet that the Dims running the IRS would already have released IT if they had IT..
Bill:
Right, the Dims are so interested in a thorough vetting, just look at what all they revealed about Obama’s scholastic record. Not one single record of Obama’s education has been released, to this date. Not one.
Then Greg chirps:
Really? Greg, you really haven’t seen any evidence? Have you even looked?
What $50 million check? The one she supposedly annotated, For services rendered?
One difference between people on the right and the left is that people on the left don’t automatically believe such reports. People on the left would need to know a few more details. On the right, such a claim instantly goes viral. People then believe it because they see it repeated in so many different places—none of which have any more details than the claim itself. This segment of conservative media is what is sometimes referred to as the right wing echo chamber.
@Greg:
That’s a real knee slapper. It’s not missing!, the records are just so messed up that we don’t know where the 6 billion is. That’s not the same as missing! It’s probably just ‘misplaced’.
@Greg:
Especially when it is written about people on the left.
@Greg:
Uh, yeah. They got caught under reporting thei foreign donations (for obvious multiple reasons) and had to refile about 5 years worth of returns. Or course, anyone else (especially a conservative) guilty of the same infraction would have a heavy fine levied on them. But the Clinton’s needn’t worry about such trivial details from Obama’s IRS.
@Redteam:
@Redteam, #13:
A critical review of State Department accounting practices leads you to instantly declare Hillary Clinton is a criminal. You have no concerns or suspicions about the $12 billion in U.S. currency that vanished like smoke in Iraq, however, when the only paper trail in that particular case consisted of stray $100 bills that blew off the stacks as they were carried away in pickup trucks.
This sort of double standard is pretty much typical.
@Greg: Big difference is no one is defending that or trying to sweep that filth under the rug. Cannot trace any of that money coming back into a slush fund.
@Bill, #15:
They amended their returns to bring them into compliance with requirements of the tax code. This is what is supposed to happen when a review reveals that something has not been done properly. It’s all out in the open.
You won’t know what Trump might be up to with his personal taxes, however, because he’s declared that it’s nobody’s damn business. I can easily imagine the reaction on the right if the Clintons ever said anything like that.
@Redteam: Please do not waste your time arguing with a rock. You are wasting electrons.
@Greg:
Yeah, that part of the code that says that income needs to be reported as income. As Al Capone found out, taxes are due even on ill-gotten gain. So, even when the Clinton’s sell influence to foreign entities and pay it back with US favors, the dirty contributions are required to be declared.
Uh, I believe that is EXACTLY what Hillary said when she deleted 30,000 emails before anyone could lay eyes on them. But, of course, she’s a Clinton and a Democrat, so anything she does is simply Okie dokie. Right?
Hillary Clinton’s personal e-mail is not the GOP kangaroo court’s business. They can hop off and discuss that among themselves, though it might be a better use of their time if they spent it figuring out how to keep Donald Trump from taking their party and possibly the country down with him when he sinks. The Good Ship Donald does not strike me as being a seaworthy vessel.
The rock will never understand that when you are in federal service, you have no personal email or anything else. You are suppose to be a servant of the people under extreme scrutiny. Public officials are suppose to even avoid the appearance of impropriety. The only people who can excuse Hillery’s behavior paddle the same boat!
@Greg:
Rock’s have poor memories also. Way back when this all started, the story was Hillary didn’t know anything about ’email’ or how to message on cell phones and all that stuff. She was clearly told that the government computers and email system ‘COULD NOT BE USED FOR PERSONAL E MAILS’. She assured everyone, back then, that she didn’t even use email. Using any server for classified emails other than a government server and computer is ILLEGAL even if your name is Clinton. As long as Hillarys emails are on the US Government server, which the ‘private one’ was because the US government paid for it, then THEY are the US government’s business. She broke very many laws. Ignorance is no excuse.
Being a dyke is no excuse either.
@Randy, #22:
Being a servant of the people does not make one’s private life public property. In any case, she successfully protected her privacy. That’s more than a number of government agencies and private concerns entrusted with personal information can say.
@Greg: If the government has that server she did not successfully protect her privacy deleted is not ever gone, wipe reformat, the only way to get rid of the written data is to crush and burn the server. They even managed to crack open an apple phone with its specialized encryption, do you think they couldn’t retrieve an email? They know her yoga routine. What flowers were ordered for the wedding, Slick Willies and Humas pet name for Hildabeast.
@kitt: That’s probably where the info on how many Lolita flights Slick took, came from. I’m sure Hildabeast was sharing that info.
@kitt, #25:
Files can be digitally “shredded” using a variety of inexpensive or free software applications. They overwrite designated files with random binary code multiple times. The Erasure application is said to do this 35 times. There’s not much chance of recovering anything, once that’s happened. Faint magnetic traces of any earlier code will have vanished into a many-layered cloud of random binary numbers.
@Greg: Why not provide the proof and confirmation that those 30,000 emails were all just personal emails? Why would Hillary go to such lengths to erase her yoga routines? To protect the reputation of her yoga instructor, who failed to reduce the size of her big butt?
@Greg: Dont Stop believing hang on to that last pathetic shred of hope. I was married to an IT specialist that worked for an international company. There is no way to perfectly hide the digital fingerprints, without destruction of the device. Try the freeware or cheapware to “wipe your server” what with a cloth? 😉
@Greg: gee, almost sounds as if you think she has something to hide on those servers.
I’ll consider her to be guilty of a criminal act once a particular criminal act has been specified and evidence has been produced that establishes her to be guilty of it. Until then, it’s just more bullshit propaganda, rolled out with the intention of defaming her character—which, at this point in history, could put a totally unqualified and potentially dangerous reality television host in the White House.
@Greg: Hmmm…. well, let me see if I can help you out. Let’s review (again):
A. Hillary intentionally and purposely had a secret, private, unsecured email server to conduct her State Department business on. This is a fact, is it not? Why, yes… it is. No one forced her to install that server. No one tricked her into using it. She willingly had it set up, for reasons that can only be speculated and assumed (but none of them complimentary to her honesty and/or decision making capability).
B. Hillary signed a document which means she acknowledged she was aware of the rules and regulations (i.e., sometime known as “laws”) regarding the proper handling and storage of State Department classified information. This, too, is a confirmed fact.
C. Now, for the kicker… over 2,000 emails with State Department classified information on them were found on her server (this, of course, does not include the 30,000 she deleted as soon as her server was discovered… revealed by the hacker, Guccifer). 22 of those emails were so highly classified that the investigators could not view them.
A. shows she did it, B. shows she knew better and C. shows that, whether she intended to do something naughty or not, she violated the law by violating B.
Yeah, she broke the law. No doubts or debate… settled science. All that needs to be determined is if she is corrupt or just stupid.
@Greg:
It’s pretty hard to defame the character of a POS.
A. She did do it intentionally. It was not illegal.
B. Indeed, she did. So did I. So did anybody who handled classified material.
C. BULLSHIT. E-mails which were not classified to begin with were subsequently classified before placing them on public display—something that was never intended to happen. Classification has now become the only means available to prevent internal State Department communications from being made public en masse. Such a comprehensive release of internal communications lowers the threshold at which information becomes sensitive. The threshold changes because with such a mass release of correspondence, seemingly irrelevant items can be analyzed in a much larger context. Patterns and cross references emerge that previously weren’t visible. (That’s the underlying logic that makes data mining a useful intelligence gathering tool, a fact which also seems to be lost on the right.)
This is ridiculous. Essentially, it says The evidence cannot be shown to investigators to demonstrate its classified nature because of its classified nature. The consequence is that it has ceased to be evidence—or, more correctly, it never became evidence to begin with. It’s nothing more than an unsubstantiated claim, and those are currently running about a dime per dozen.
@Greg:
Read again. I never said it was illegal. Anyone can have a server. However, she used it illegally. She intentionally used it to store classified information.
Well, actually no, it is not bullshit. It is fact. Much of the information never went through the process to get marked as classified, so the fact that it wasn’t marked is only another indictment. While some of it might have been classified at a later date, the vast majority was not. Whether a document was not qualified to be classified is immaterial. The facts are that the State Department determines how their classified information is handled and Hillary signed an agreement to abide by it, regardless of how foolish one or two of the documents may be. However, even Her Highness Hillary does not simply get to decide what qualifies or not. After all, her primary defense against criminal intent is her claim of her own stupidity.
Regardless of how you view the sequencing, the fact remains that TOP SECRET data was found, 22 times, on her server… where no classified information of any level was permitted to be.
And Hillary set up the server. Intentionally. Willfully. And she signed a statement to properly handle classified information. Guilty, guilty, guilty.
No, actually, you won’t. I’d bet on it.
@Redteam, #33:
POS?
At least the most likely democratic nominee hasn’t made any harebrained suggestions such as this one. I can think of no quicker route to crashing the U.S. economy and rendering our dollars worthless. I worked long and hard for my dollars. Are people even listening to what this guy is saying?
Indeed. It’s like incredible. And not in a good way.
@Greg:
I was being generous and nice. After all, this is public. POS is the nicest thing I could think of for her.
@Greg: Of which they “earned” 0 dollars Some of us think most taxation is theft.
@Greg: Let’s say, for the sake of argument, Trump cheats on his taxes. Just flat out cheats like a big mo fo.
Who cares? Why do YOU care?
Hillary invites Warren Buffett to speak at her rallies; his Berkshire Hathaway owes I’ve a billion dollars in taxes. Obama invites Al Sharpton to the White House to advise him on how to be more racist; he owes millions in back taxes. Al Gore tried to get around paying taxes he owed on the $100 million he was going to get for selling his network to Islamic propagandists. John Kerry tried to dodge taxes on his yacht. Bill and Hillary take a deduction on charitable contributions… TO THEMSELVES.
None of this bothers you… and all of these people push higher taxes on everyone else. Why would you expect Trump or anyone else to pay taxes?
@kitt, #39:
Some of us seem to think government doesn’t do anything essential that has to be paid for. They take everything from the water that comes out of their faucets to the roads they drive on for granted.
@Bill, #40:
If Trump’s casinos dodged $25 million of the $30 million in state taxes they owed , that’s a $25 million difference that New Jersey working families had to make up, or that got added to the state debt they and their kids will eventually have to deal with. That’s the problem.
The other problem is that Trump supporters don’t seem to recognize a con man when they see one. People are buying the pitch without thinking enough about the particulars.
@Greg: I have been on that road in front of the casinos in Atlantic city Its a jarring roller coaster from hell, Most of us pay a water and sewer bill, along with garbage and recycle fees, Boomers kids have moved out so we pay school taxes and dont have kids. Some have PP tax on autos, wheel taxes, gas tax,” hidden” taxes called fees, and pay for licenses and registrations. Open any utility bill and find taxes and fees, thieves and robbers waste the money collected sit around all day looking for ways to further tax and spend.
Yet have better healthcare, pensions than most taxpayers.
, social security needs to be reformed HA thier pensions and retirement benefits need to be reformed. From the Prez on down.
Flint did a bangup job taking care of the water didn’t they?
And after a lifetime of paying taxes Bi@#h Hillary wants to tax everything you have accumulated for dying. She is calling it an estate tax its a tax on having the nerve to die wealthy before the dems could figure out a tax to make you poor.
States shouldn’t create their budgets based on what they imagine they will collect.
They should create their budgets based on what they collect.
States, unlike the federal gov’t, cannot be ”in the red.”
(Of course, they do all sorts of accounting tricks to owe money to retirees that is unfunded and yet not on their balance sheets, but let’s put that aside.)
Donald Trump gets audited virtually every year.
IF he’s ”cheating” on his taxes, the audit shows that and he’s billed plus fees, interests and penalties.
But, if you say ”cheat” when what you REALLY mean is find all the LEGAL exemptions you misrepresent him.
And the auditors can’t force a person who follows the law to pay more.
@kitt: Taxation is theft–abolish the IRS–Fair tax based on consumption
My guess tax return shows little to charity–shouldn’t bother Repubs.
Buffet audited and challenges Trump to release and have tax return sit down.
@Richard Wheeler: A persons tax returns are NOBODYS business but their own, it has become tradition, well when has Trump been traditional?
His new hires have made it very very clear its gonna be a wild ride to the end, conservatives dont take wild rides. Steve Bannon is a perfect personality match for Trump, he has been at war with Ryan but what ever poll he used when saying Ryan was down in the polls…well…80% of the count proved how far this guy had his head up his own arse.
Breitbart and Fox regulars are already in the caboose of the Trump train, it really was time for him to begin courting other voters. I did not hate his last 2 speeches I am still waiting and watching there is much to see, the libertarian guy doesnt look so bad but can he beat Hillary, taking into account the few million die hard Trump people.
@kitt: With this Breibart hire Trump has doubled down on what won the Primary–in your face insults and bravado. This after two excellent.moderated speeches
Makes little sense but Trump never does. Trump apparently won’t compete for African American vote–polling at 2%–Hispanics and Women also anti Trump
IOO VOTERS 32 WHITE MALE 75% T 25% C
52 WOMEN 65% C 35% T
8 HISPANIC MALES 60%C 40%T
7 AFRICAN AMERICAN MALES 95% C 5% T
1% OTHER MALE toss up
Do the #’s 54% HRC 46% Trump—Trump can’t win with these numbers.
@Richard Wheeler: You believe the polls after the Ryan Wisconsin Primary ? Ryan got 84% of the vote, Sarah Ps guy Nehlen 16%
I dont dislike Trump because I am female, his resume sucks. He lied during the interview, but the other applicant is even worse. I cant speak for hispanics or blacks or muslims or others.
@Richard Wheeler: So, if I interpret your numbers correctly, that makes RW a Female Black male/female hispanic. That’s who you’re in the boat with.
I especially like your last category. They had one male left and it was a toss up. This apparently was not a Caucasian or Hispanic or black male. But half of him would vote for Clinton and half for Trump. See what you can do with statistics when you want to make them favor your candidate.
@Richard Wheeler:
RW, just to show you that you’ll believe anything, those numbers can not be correct. Just look at them:
IOO VOTERS 32 WHITE MALE 75% T 25% C
52 WOMEN 65% C 35% T
8 HISPANIC MALES 60%C 40%T
7 AFRICAN AMERICAN MALES 95% C 5% T
1% OTHER MALE toss up
Men32 x .75 = 24
Women52 x .35 =18
8 x .5 = 4 when there are 8, you can’t split them 60-40
7 x .14 = 1 when there are 7 you can’t get 5%
1 x 1.00 = 1 when there is 1 you can’t get .50 %
24 +18+4+1+1 = 48 so the numbers are 48T 52C but want to have some fun, do this:
Men52 x .75 = 39
Women32 x .35 =11
Don’t change the rest:
8 x .5 = 4 when there are 8, you can’t split them 60-40
7 x .14 = 1 when there are 7 you can’t get 5%
1 x 1.00 = 1 when there is 1 you can’t get .50 %
total T 56 C 44.
So anyone can readily see that stacking the poll with a high % women favor Clinton where as stacking it with a higher % of men favors Trump.
What happens if 50/50 men/women
84 total
Men42 x 75 = 32 Trump 10 Hill
Wom42 x .35 = 15 for T 27 for Hill
remainder the same
8 x .5 = 4 when there are 8, you can’t split them 60-40
7 x .14 = 1 when there are 7 you can’t get 5%
1 x 1.00 = 1 when there is 1 you can’t get .50 %
Totals 53 T 47 Hill.
Want to play with the math a little more? If a poll wants to show accurate numbers, why would they poll much more women when they know women favor Hillary. Nope. Don’t get discouraged, Hill might make a comeback and lift your spirits.
@kitt:
Really Kitt? If you wanted to improve his resume’, what would you change? More than half his executives are women, would you lower that number? His women exec’s get paid equiv to men. would you change that? About 98% of the companies he has been involved with has succeeded, would you lower that number? He employs a lot of non white’s, how would you change that? I’d really like to hear how you would ‘improve’ his resume’. Since it sucks, you should be able to quickly jot down several items to improve on.
@Redteam: You can’t make that big change on men and women
Women ARE 52% of electorate and will go around 65% C and 35% T.
White men are Trump’s base and total 32% of electorate. 16% of electorate are non white men and favor HRC as shown.
Women, Hispanics and African Americans over power Trump’s huge White Male advantage—-54 C-46 T about right. Reality is Libertarian 11% and Green 3% will reduce Clinton to 47% and Trump to 39%–Won’t effect E.C.
E.C looks bad for Trump—He must win FLA, OHIO ,AND PENN OR MICH. Currently trails all 4.
I SEE IT about 318 C-220 T