For the first time in what seems like an aeon, the rain stopped and the sun shone so I started the day with a light step. Well, that didn't last long before it turned into a miserable trudge! For a start, one of our local pubs has started serving cooked breakfast fry-ups on a Saturday morning. I just 'luuuurve' what I call a 'cookie' made up of fried bread, two eggs, sunny side up, grilled bacon, a tomato and some mushrooms. So, against all my principles I actually dragged my self out of bed and up to the pub for 9.30 - yes, actually 9.30! It was awful! Instead of cooking to order it was all displayed in heated pans and it reminded me of the, er, good ol' days queuing up for grub in the army!
So, not the best of starts but on returning I settled down to read The Mail. Guess what, more and more and yet more about bloody Meghan Markle and her 'Prince Ginger'! I thought that once they had buggered off to Canada that would be the end of it. No chance! So I turned to The Telegraph and my favourite opinion writer MDJ - My Darling Janet (Daley). She proceeded to, in effect, nut me, kick me in the kneecaps and then stomp on my face with a vicious, withering onslaught against President Trump!
Now, as regular reader will know, I am far from being an ardent fan but then I am rarely an ardent fan of any US President. Alas, for them, they are under minute, searchlight observation 24/7 and being mere men, of course, their blemishes are soon spotted and with an army of opponents waiting eagerly, they are publicised even faster! Trump's fault lines are all too apparent but they seem to me to be fairly harmless stemming as they do from his 'yuuuuuuuge' conceit, his inability (or indifference) to understanding how others might view his eccentricities and his constant desire to be always and forever at the centre of attention. Ms. Daley thinks otherwise!
She maintains that his greatest fault is his wanton, almost childlike, destruction of the 'religion' which guides America - the Declaration of Independence, the words of the founding Fathers and the Constitution. Alas, The Telegraph will not allow me to 'cut and paste' (or steal, if you prefer!) from Ms. Daley's onslaught, so you need to read it for yourself. Coming from her, it is well worth it!
ADDITIONAL:
Via Zero Hedge I have just read an opinion by Alan Dershowitz, a man worth listening to especially on legal matters. In essence, he writes that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) doesn't know the law from the hole in its collective arse and nor, by implication, does MDJ (My Darling Jane) I am sorry to say. Read the link!
The piece is behind the paywall but the thrust of it seems all too common. Trump is not the first to "wantonly destroy" any of these symbols. Woodrow Wilson, arguably the worst President since the dawn of the 20th century until Obama, is where the onslaught began. Trump is merely the 'corrective' after eight years of Obama's outrages and a preventive against a Clinton adm. continuance of the same.
A lot of people are put off by his style- fair enough- but too bad. Obama had style coming out his pores, but his style was exceeded by his simmering guile. Trump is exposing the rotten under belly of the Administrative State that resents interference from mere elected people who think differently.
Above all, Trump is winning and he has never held public office. Correct first then restore. If the cancer that is official DC is not cut out, there will be nothing left but The State as a law unto itself guided by nothing but lust for power.
Posted by: Whitewall | Saturday, 18 January 2020 at 16:13
A stout defence, Sir, well done!
Posted by: David Duff | Saturday, 18 January 2020 at 16:38
What part of the constitution, or indeed the declaration is Trump supposed to have ignored? He is the commander in chief, and it is his job to order the military about. He is head of the executive branch, and likewise obliged to give them orders. If they don't like his orders, they are free to resign. They were not elected!
I am unsure what is meant by using the attorney general as his personal lawyer. I'd like to see justification for that charge. Perhaps she thinks it wrong for illegal acts to be investigated when they might affect people she likes?
You can be pretty sure that he is the cleanest President ever, since after three years investigation the best the opposition can bring up is that he asked for an enquiry into corruption that if proven may implicate someone they like.
Posted by: Pat | Saturday, 18 January 2020 at 20:22
Get a free screen grabber (SoD will explain). You will then be able to grab and paste anything you want from The Telegraph or anywhere else you fancy.
Posted by: Sam Keith | Saturday, 18 January 2020 at 21:15
Hmm, last time I did a "grabber" I got my face slapped.
Posted by: Whitewall | Saturday, 18 January 2020 at 21:23
Thanks, Sam, although I dread the hectoring lectures I will receive from SoD - 'I told you to press X not Y!
Posted by: David Duff | Saturday, 18 January 2020 at 21:42
First of all, it is the General Accounting Office, not the Governmental Accountability Office, and unlike most other government agencies, which are part of the Executive Branch, they are a creature of Congress, half of which is under the control, for now, of the Communists, or, what do they call themselves? Ah, yes, they are "the Democrats. So they will say the darndest things. They are, however, not honest brokers but political hacks.They are a mouthpiece for those wretched would-be tyrants. What they say means nothing and adds nothing to the discussion.
Posted by: Michael F Adams | Monday, 20 January 2020 at 18:20