Friday Talking Points -- Will Trump Take The Bait?

[ChrisWeigant]

Maybe he'll actually take the bait, who knows?

Maybe Donald Trump's planet-sized ego and rampant unbridled narcissism will convince him that there just is no possible downside to testifying in front of the January 6th House Select Committee. This isn't just idle speculation, as hours after yesterday's hearing New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman posted the following (which has since been similarly reported in multiple media outlets):

Since it became public that the House select committee planned to subpoena Trump for his testimony, the former president has been telling aides he favors doing so, so long as he gets to do so live, according to a person familiar with his discussions. However, it is unclear whether the committee would accept such a demand.

Sounds like a plan. Put him on live television. He'd love it. He'd get great ratings (which is truly all he cares about when appearing on television), since tens of millions would watch. All his MAGA followers would watch to cheer for Trump, and the rest of the country wouldn't be able to resist watching, just to see the fireworks. The nation's strategic popcorn reserves would run dangerously low, that's our guess.

Trump released a letter this morning which is chock-full of invective and insinuation against what he likes to call the "unselect committee" and lefties in general, but any mention of the subpoena or Trump testifying is notable for its absence. So maybe he really is seriously thinking about it?

Of course, if Trump did appear, it would be a three-ring circus from the start. Trump has taken part in literally thousands of lawsuits, but somehow still doesn't have any sort of basic understanding of the legal process or the governmental process or the U.S. Constitution in general.

If Trump did appear, it would be at a congressional hearing. He would be under oath, giving testimony. It would not be a trial. It isn't even an investigation which could lead to an indictment, since a whole separate branch of government is in charge of such things. Trump would not be allowed to "cross-examine" anyone (since he would be the only witness, what's he going to do, cross-examine himself?), and he would definitely not be allowed to call his own witnesses. But, being Trump, he does not understand this even on a basic level. To him, all the world's a stage, and a courtroom merely one type of performance art. To say nothing of a committee hearing room.

The committee would expect to conduct the interview as it has conducted every other interview: the witness would be sworn in, and then the witness would politely answer questions from the committee members. The witness wouldn't get to question the committee, since that's not how the process works (except to clarify certain points about the questions asked).

But that is decidedly not what would happen if Trump did show up. Far from it.

First, Trump would demand to make an opening statement. That much is pretty guaranteed. He would likely ramble on for at least 45 minutes to an hour, venting his spleen as only he can (and he is a master of the spleen-venting art, it must be acknowledged). If the committee didn't let him finish his tirade, he would claim they were "censoring" him and "not being fair" to him and all sorts of other nefarious things.

So let's say the committee does allow him all the time he needs to get all the venting he needs to off his chest. The smart thing for them to do at that point would be to just completely ignore it all and begin questioning Trump, although I could see Bennie Thompson (or perhaps Liz Cheney) actually taking the time to refute Trump's fantastical and made-up claims for a few moments. Either way, though, the next phase would soon begin.

Anyone who has watched any of the hearings so far knows what is supposed to happen next. The committee members (and their lawyers) pose questions to the witness. The witness is allowed to confer with his or her lawyer before answering, and has a number of choices. They can either answer the question fully and honestly, they can answer the question partially (on advice of their lawyers to avoid anything that could fall under "executive privilege," for instance), or they can completely refuse to answer the question on the grounds that the answer is covered by executive privilege. The only other option is to refuse to answer the question entirely, on the Fifth Amendment grounds that it may tend to incriminate them. Those are supposed to be the only options.

Trump wouldn't be limited by that list, of course. Trump would treat the entire thing as if it was a presidential debate, which is to say: "as if there were no rules which applied to him at all." He would talk all over the questioners. He would interrupt, he would yell, he would try to intimidate them, he would bluster, he would ridicule them, he would personally insult them and their families, he would bring up completely unrelated and not-even-tangential issues, he would spend his entire time trying to score points, period. Anyone who has the slightest doubt that this is precisely what would happen should go watch clips of Trump debating, because it wouldn't just be "exactly like that," it would likely be ten times worse.

What Trump would not do is to actually answer any questions put to him. Does anyone really honestly think he would? He will ignore the question. He will answer the question he wishes had been asked, instead. Or he will just sink into the mire of playground taunts. Again: go watch any of his debates if you doubt this.

How would Bennie Thompson react to this tsunami of irrelevancy? It's tough to tell, really. Would he shut Trump's microphone down? Would he attempt to gavel Trump to silence? Would he threaten to hold Trump in contempt of Congress for his childish display of boorishness? Thompson seems like he's got a core of steel but usually doesn't let it show -- instead he displays intelligence and righteousness in a very calm and sobering manner. But how would that stack up against a Trumpnado of bluster and rudeness?

Our educated guess is that at some point during the proceedings -- probably within the first half-hour (just a guess, mind you) -- Donald Trump would completely flip out, lose his cool, stand up, and huffily walk out of the hearing. Nothing like a surprise ending, right? He'd then likely grandstand for the cameras outside the hearing room, just to vent his spleen a little more.

But we do have to admit the entire experience would indeed be "must-see TV." We'd watch. We'd be glued to our set, in fact. And so would (at a guess) at least 100 million other Americans.

Which Trump knows, full well. That's the catnip, for him. That's the bait. A bigger audience than he's had since he was president. All eyes on him. Stellar television ratings. Him getting to "tell his side of the story." Him getting to tell the committee members exactly what he thinks of them in the most scathingly personal terms imaginable, starting with Liz Cheney. Him against the committee, with no holds barred.

Trump also knows full well that no matter what happened in the hearing he would emerge and proclaim himself the victor. He would crow about how wonderful his performance was, how it was the best political performance not just in all of American history, but in all of human history all the way back to the beginning of time, and he would brag about how "perfect" his appearance was right up until the day he died. All of that is pretty much guaranteed.

So what's to stop him? If he can spin anything into a smashing victory against his nefarious opponents, why wouldn't he jump at the chance to do so?

One can only hope....

This was all precipitated, of course, by the House January 6th Select Committee voting unanimously yesterday to issue a subpoena to Donald Trump.

Which was merely one part of a very bad week for Trump's legal team, in the larger universe of legal proceedings against him. One judge ruled that Trump has to sit for a deposition in the case brought against him by E. Jean Carroll, who has accused Trump of raping her. The deposition will likely take place next week.

Without fanfare, the Supreme Court summarily dismissed Trump's appeal in the case of the government documents he stole when leaving the White House, with a terse, one-sentence ruling: "The application to vacate the stay entered by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on September 21, 2022, presented to Justice Thomas and by him referred to the Court is denied." That one probably hurt the most, out of all the bad legal news this week.

In New York, the state attorney general moved to freeze all the assets of the Trump Organization, although it remains to be seen whether she'll convince the judge to do so or not. If it happens, it would be a body blow to Trump's real estate empire.

More grand jury depositions took place this week, on the January 6th insurrection. These aren't the workings of the House committee, this is the Justice Department's investigation, which has a lot more legal might behind their subpoenas.

It also seems that a worker at Trump's Florida golf resort has been spilling the beans to the F.B.I. and is now talking to the press about having to move boxes of possibly-classified documents from the storage room where they were supposed to be kept to Trump's personal residence.

All of this has added up to quite a few legal bills for Trump, so much so that it is eating up many millions of dollars of donor money that could have been spent on the midterm elections. What a shame!

Once again, Trump has also eaten up most of this week-in-review segment of the column, so we're just going to whip through a few other notable events and then move on to the awards section. And we do have one surprise for readers later: short talking points, for once! So you've got that to look forward to....

Plenty of Republican senators and Senate candidates made news this week, starting with Tommy Tuberville just going full-on racist at a Trump rally in Nevada. He has managed to get away with this, with minor blowback, for two reasons: the media lets Republicans get away with naked bigotry these days, and his own party simply doesn't care since Donald Trump so obviously approves. Democrats, of course, handle things differently, but we're getting ahead of ourselves.

Pennsylvania Senate wannabe Mehmet "Dr." Oz killed puppies. And the Democrats are going to make sure as many people in Pennsylvania hear about this as possible. Because... well... puppies.

Oz also gave a speech this week standing in front of Adolf Hitler's car, complete with swastikas. You just couldn't make this stuff up if you tried!

Herschel Walker continues to crash and burn, in case anyone's interested. The Republicans aren't, they're all standing staunchly with him no matter what. Morally reprehensible? Who cares, in today's Republican Party!

Most pathetic performance of the week was Senator Mike Lee begging Mitt Romney to endorse him, on nationwide television. To date, Romney has not done so.

That's about all the campaign bilge we can stomach for one week. A few positive items from the other side of the aisle, a story of shining achievement for humankind, and one final amusing bit and we're done.

Bob Menendez is leading the charge in the Senate to immediately halt all weapons sales to Saudi Arabia, after they effectively sided with Vladimir Putin by agreeing to decrease oil production. It is rumored that Joe Biden is also interested in sending a message to the Saudis, so this could actually become a reality.

Biden's move to pardon people convicted of simple possession of marijuana in federal court is wildly popular among the public, which should come as no surprise to anyone.

NASA successfully smacked a spacecraft into a small asteroid and by doing so proved its orbit and trajectory could be changed. The results were far beyond what they were hoping for, in fact. We wrote about this earlier in the week, because it is the first "proof of concept" of what could become a planetary-defense system to be used against any threatening comet or asteroid. This is big news for the human race, in other words!

In big news for the feline race, we end with 10 Downing Street's chief mouser, Larry The Cat. Larry is a pretty feisty kitty, and has been seen driving other animals off the property (pigeons, another ministry's cat, etc.). But this week footage emerged of Larry taking on a fox that is easily half again as big as Larry. Larry fearlessly walks up to the fox, the fox attempts to hide in a flowerbed, so Larry takes a literal flying leap at him and lands with all claws drawn. Sadly, the bushes obscure the moment of truth, but the fox soon emerges and flees, with Larry hot on his trail. The fox then (perhaps to save some face) tries again, but Larry stares it down and chases it off once again.

Now that is a First Cat worthy of the name! Go Larry!





There was one Democrat who turned in an impressive performance this week, but an earlier entry was better, so we're only going to give Tim Ryan an Honorable Mention.

Ryan is running for the Senate in Ohio, and he debated his opponent J.D. Vance this week. Earlier, while appearing at a rally for Vance, Donald Trump had mocked him with:

J.D. is kissing my ass! He wants my support so much. I think he's running, J.D., on an "I love Donald Trump" policy. Yeah, he said some bad things about me, but that's before he knew me, and then he fell in love.

So Ryan turned it all back on Vance, right to his face:

I don't know anybody I grew up with, I don't know anybody I went to high school with, that would allow someone to take their dignity like that and then get back up onstage. We need leaders who have courage to take on their own party. And I've proven that. And he was called an ass-kisser by the former president.

Ouch. Later in the debate, Ryan tightened it up into a memorable campaign slogan:

I'm for Ohio. I don't kiss anyone's ass like him. Ohio needs an ass-kicker not an ass-kisser.

That is definitely an award-worthy takedown, folks!

But this week we're retroactively giving the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

We all got a very candid behind-the-scenes look at what Pelosi's leadership looks like yesterday, as the House Select Committee played video of Pelosi and other congressional leaders (of both parties) during the siege and invasion of the U.S. Capitol on January 6th, 2021.

Pelosi (and, to be fair, all the other leaders) are all doing exactly what Donald Trump should have been doing, but refused to. They are desperately trying to get some help to the forces defending the Capitol. They are seen calling the governors of Maryland and Virginia, the Pentagon, the attorney general, and Vice President Mike Pence, begging them all to send in the cavalry.

Throughout it all, of course, Trump was gleefully watching television.

Pelosi stands out in these videos. She is genuinely shocked at the events unfolding, she is determined to get the ball rolling on sending in the National Guard (or anyone else who might help), and she is resolute and direct and decisive throughout it all.

In a word, she showed real leadership.

She kept her head while others about her were losing theirs. She did what she had to do, and she did so as effectively as possible. She stepped into the leadership void that Trump had left behind.

Pelosi did have one moment where she blew off some steam, which is understandable given all she had faced that day. Here's the story:

New footage from Jan. 6, 2021, shows a candid moment when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi threatened to physically strike then-President Trump, should he have joined those protesting at the Capitol.

In the video, which was publicly shared Thursday, Pelosi admits the actions could have resulted in her going to prison -- a consequence she said she would "be happy" to accept.

"I hope he comes, I'm going to punch him out," Pelosi tells her Chief of Staff Terri McCullough, who discourages her boss from making the comments. "I've been waiting for this, for trespassing on the Capitol grounds. I'm going to punch him out."

"I'm going to go to jail, and I'm going to be happy," the speaker added.

Obviously, she was kidding. We think.

Seriously though, Nancy Pelosi is second in line to the presidency. If events had turned out differently that dark day, she might even have become president before the next day dawned. If Mike Pence had actually been captured by the mob, they might have either torn him to bits or frogmarched him out to that gallows they had set up outside the building and hanged him. If the cabinet had moved to declare Donald Trump unfit to serve via the 25th Amendment, Nancy Pelosi might have had to step into the job for the next two weeks (technical note: this section of the 25th Amendment has never been used and is more complicated than people think, so even if it had been invoked, Pelosi might not have become "acting president" ).

If this had indeed come to pass, those video clips clearly show she would have been up to the task.

So even though these videos are almost two years old now, Nancy Pelosi is definitely our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week. In a time of chaos and crisis, she showed unflinching leadership. There really is no higher praise than that for any politician.

[Congratulate Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi on her official contact page, to let her know you appreciate her efforts.]





First, allow us to say one final thing, as Tulsi Gabbard officially departs the Democratic Party: "Buh-bye! Don't let the door hit you on your way out!"

Sorry... we just had to get that off our chest.

Snark aside, however, this week's Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week was painfully easy to identify, even though it's pretty far down the food chain of politics.

Early this week, the Los Angeles Times published an exposé based on an audio recording which had been anonymously posted online. Nobody disputed that the audio consisted of a conversation between at least four people: three members of the Los Angeles City Council and one local Labor leader. They were talking about redistricting the city (after the 2020 Census) and plotting to draw the lines to increase Latino representation at the expense of Black and other minority voters. The language used is reprehensible. It is racist, plain and simple. There's no other word for it.

The speaker of the racist lines is City Council President Nury Martinez. The other two councilmembers are Gil Cedillo and Kevin de León. The fourth participant in the conversation is Los Angeles County Federation of Labor President Ron Herrera.

Universally, Democrats condemned Martinez and her odious racism. Everyone from California's governor all the way up to President Joe Biden called for her to immediately resign. The (Democratic) state attorney general is now investigating the entire city's redistricting process. This is all exactly what is supposed to happen when a member of a political party is proven to have done something indefensibly racist.

At first, Martinez somehow believed she could survive the political firestorm. She apologized and resigned her presidency of the city council... but not her seat on the council. She announced she would be taking a leave of absence, in the hopes it would all blow over and die down after a while. She was wrong. A few days later, she bowed to the inevitable and resigned completely.

The Labor leader has also resigned his presidency. Unfortunately, the two other council members have not. They did not make any racist remarks on the recording, but then again they didn't have anything to say to Martinez when she did. They didn't object or push back in any way.

Gil Cedillo and Kevin de León are toast, politically. They are dead men walking. They still somehow think they can brazen it out and continue their political careers, but they are wrong. Condoning (with their silence) remarks like this in the Democratic Party is disqualifying, period.

Kevin de León is probably the most frustrated by this turn of events, because he had a lot of ambition and saw for himself much greater things in the California Democratic Party. He had previously been a member of both houses of the state legislature, including a leadership position in the state senate. He displayed the measure of his political ambition in 2018, when he primaried Dianne Feinstein for her U.S. Senate seat. Feinstein won the two-person runoff in that race, but only by a little over eight percent. De León obviously had bigger and better things in mind for his political future.

But that dream is now over. When the two councilmembers tried to behave as if it were all somehow behind everyone (now that Martinez resigned), the acting president of the city council abruptly cancelled a council meeting scheduled to happen today, and issued a statement: "The people's business cannot be conducted until we have these next two resignations."

As of this writing, the two still have not resigned. But at this point, it is inevitable.

We are handing out Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week awards to all four of the participants of this call. Martinez is guiltiest, of course, but the other three also deserve their political fate as well.

Racist talk may be condoned or even celebrated in the Republican Party these days. But the Democratic Party should speak with once voice in proclaiming such behavior absolutely disqualifying for any Democratic politician. Because America needs at least one party utterly dedicated to the fight against racism.

[Due to their resignations, former City Council President Nury Martinez and former Los Angeles County Federation of Labor President Ron Herrera are now private citizens, and it is our standing policy not to provide contact information for such persons. However, you can contact Los Angeles City Councilmember Gil Cedillo via his contact page, and Kevin de León on his contact page, to let them know what you think of their actions.]




Volume 681 (10/14/22)

We've got a rather unique talking points section this week, for two reasons. The first is that we don't ever recall dedicating the entire section to what is essentially taunting one person. Perhaps we have (with Donald Trump, it's certainly possible, we freely admit), but we don't recall.

Second, it's going to be short. No, really! We know the audience we are trying to reach is easily distracted and favors to-the-point sentences, so that's what we're going to provide. We'll even limit ourselves to a single word as a lead-in, for each of them.

Perhaps this is silly, but at this moment in time it would seem like a goodly thing for all Democrats to focus on taunting Donald Trump. The late-night comics are already going full-steam-ahead in this effort, and it's such a fun game to play we feel that Democrats should get in on the action.

So here are our seven discrete (but never discreet!) talking points, each and every one of them aimed directly at Donald Trump's ego.



Hoax!

Let's start with the basic argument, shall we?

"You said you want to get your side of the story out there, right? So why not expose this gigantic hoax in front of the American people? Why not show us all what a big witch hunt it all is?"



Fun! (Part 1)

Toss the catnip with abandon.

"They'd probably allow you to give an opening statement, and you could make it as long as you liked -- wouldn't that be fun?"



Fun! (Part 2)

A lot more fun that what you've got now....

"Wouldn't it be a lot more fun than just using Truth Social to reach a small audience of followers? I mean, you'd be on teevee! On every channel! Everybody would get to see!"



Weenies!

Nothing like feeding into his instinct to insult and his instinct for self-aggrandizement, right?

"You're smarter than all those pointy-headed weenies on the committee, right? Why not show everyone how much smarter you are by telling them what you think of them to their faces?"



Ratings!

This is the catnip extraordinaire, of course.

"The ratings would be off the charts! It'd draw an audience of, like, half the American population! No president or politician has ever accomplished such a feat! They'd be the greatest ratings ever!!!"



Election!

Why not? Maybe he'll buy it....

"Why not appear right before the midterm election? You could make the case to all the voters how the election was stolen from you and undermine their faith in their vote being counted! Because that'll motivate more of them to vote for your candidates! You could guarantee a Republican landslide by appearing before the election! Why not do so?!?"



Victory!

And finally, we just can't resist....

"Just think of how good it'll feel to walk out of the committee room and proclaim victory to the cameras! I mean, seriously... what could possibly go wrong?"




Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Follow Chris on Twitter: ChrisWeigant
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com

[BigmanPigman]

1. Nope, no way in Hell.

A former employee with Celebrity Apprentice said so very clearly. We all know he would shit himself if he had to appear for any length of time. He would fall apart in one second. No way will he EVER testify. He is all about image and appearances and he knows he would fall apart by the third time he pleads "the 5th". He can't control the imaging so he will bail.

[JuJuChen]

2. He'd cave like the fuck he is

[BigmanPigman]

3. Who is "the snowflake" now?

Who is a "pussy" now? I hope he chokes on those words.