Not that again
Trump still has trouble staying on-topic.
On Thursday, during a meeting with 10 senators that was billed as a listening session about Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, the president went off on a familiar tangent, suggesting again that he was a victim of widespread voter fraud, despite the fact that he won the presidential election.
As soon as the door closed and the reporters allowed to observe for a few minutes had been ushered out, Trump began to talk about the election, participants said, triggered by the presence of former New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte, who lost her reelection bid in November and is now working for Trump as a Capitol Hill liaison, or “Sherpa,” on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch.
The president claimed that he and Ayotte both would have been victorious in the Granite State if not for the “thousands” of people who were “brought in on buses” from neighboring Massachusetts to “illegally” vote in New Hampshire.
According to one participant who described the meeting, “an uncomfortable silence” momentarily overtook the room.
Yes, it must be awkward to be trapped in a closed room with such a droning fantasist who thinks he’s The Boss of Everything.
During the meeting, Trump also reacted to Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren being silenced on the Senate floor while trying to read a 1986 letter by Coretta Scott King and in objection to Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions before he was confirmed as attorney general. According to participants in Thursday’s meeting, Trump referred to Warren several times as “Pocahontas,” the moniker he gave her during his campaign, and told the Democrats he was glad Warren is becoming the face of “your party.”
He calls her Pocahontas. Still. On the job. To her fellow senators.
That’s not a “moniker,” by the way, it’s a sneering reductionist insult to all Native Americans – it’s like calling an African American “Aunt Jemima” or “Sambo.” It reveals how his tiny little mind works – he hears the phrase “Native American” and translates it to “Pocahontas” as if they were interchangeable.
It was horrendous during the campaign. It’s mind-boggling that he’s still doing it now.
I have a friend who thought she had been betrayed by a boyfriend & a friend not just sexually but in losing a lot of money on a house she owned a part share of. It’s a long story, and certainly had several sides to it but she went on and on about it for YEARS!! – so that if the subject came up yet again everyone muttered quickly and then tried to turn to another topic. It is embarrassing if someone goes on and on about a grievance – especially an unreasonable grievance. He probably goes on about it to his doctor, masseur and the cleaner.
Although I can’t believe I’m saying this, I actually agree with Herr Bäbyführer—I too am glad that Elizabeth Warren is becoming the face of the Democratic Party. As for the rest, well, Herr Bäbyführer just can’t stand the fact that he lost the election, even though he won the office. If Warren is as smart as I’ve come to expect, she’ll keep needling him on that fact, and if the other Democrats follow her lead, Herr Bäbyführer will have no choice but to keep griping about his electoral loss for the rest of his miserable life.
“an uncomfortable silence”
There’s part of the problem right there. At some point, someone has to cut in and interrupt him when he does this, to voice disagreement. Senators don’t serve at the behest of the president, so theoretically they can criticise him without risking their Senate seats. Politeness, protocol and courtesy only serve the status quo and contributes to the normalization of Trump’s behaviour. This is not normal behaviour; he is not a normal president.
They may be afraid of Trump’s horde, though. And the fact that their own constituents voted for this baby-man, and they are afraid if Trump takes to Twitter to attack them, it will be the end of their own lucrative careers.
In short, it is going to take someone of true integrity and courage to stand up for him. That sounds like Elizabeth Warren to me.
A re-reminder. Robert Reich reported that ‘sane’ Republicans of his acquaintance who kept silent over Trump’s behavior during the election, admitted to doing so because they were physically afraid of Trump’s mob.
Physically afraid? I don’t think that’s right. I posted that Robert Reich post here and I don’t think that’s what he said. They were afraid of Trump people’s revenge, or some such concept…but that would be political and social, not a matter of truncheons and blades.
Socially or physically afraid doesn’t matter. It’s a secret ballot. The could have still voted for someone else, spoiled their ballot, not voted. Instead, pretty much all registered Republicans still voted for Trump and they’re crowing about having near total control of the direction of the US for at least the next 2 years, likely the next 4 and through a conservative SC possibly decades of influence.
Hypocritical. Gutless as well.