Isn’t The Whole Omarosa Thing From Beginning To End Simply About Trump’s Horrible Judgment?
Look, Everybody Makes Mistakes. But If You’re Not Willing To Take Any Responsibility, We Shouldn’t Suffer Bad Judgment Lightly…
“Vicious” skulduggery by a “lowlife loser”?
How about a President who was completely bushwhacked by something that pretty much every other single person in the country could see coming miles away?
What blinded him? Let’s go to the Tweet (or in this case, parts of two Tweets, which we combined below):
“People in the White House hated her. She was vicious, but not smart. I would rarely see her but heard really bad things. Nasty to people & would constantly miss meetings & work. When Gen. Kelly came on board he told me she was a loser & nothing but problems. I told him to try working it out, if possible, because she only said GREAT things about me….” (our emphasis).
And maybe a nondisclosure agreement?
And the accusation that the “Fake News media will be making overtime to make even Wacky Omarosa look as legitimate as possible.” No. Media has pointed out over and over again how non-legit she was by questioning over and over again what she was doing working for you in the first place. You alone asserted her legitimacy by hiring her into your White House.
Or maybe Trump is the brilliant one after all. The fact that no one ever thought Omarosa had any credibility, ever, may serve to immunize the President against a lot of her strongest accusations, because it’s that same utter absence of credibility that makes it so darn easy to refute anything she says.
We Were Almost Ready To Argue The F.B.I. Made The Right Move In Firing Peter Strzok Until Hysterical House Republicans Starting Doing Touchdown Dances About It…
Look, we have nothing against Peter Strzok. We admire that he represented himself fully and forcefully, standing up to Republican members of the House Oversight and Justice Committees during his marathon testimony earlier this summer. We also accept the DOJ Inspector General’s Assessment that ‘We found no evidence that the conclusions by department prosecutors were affected by bias or other improper considerations.” And we absolutely don’t buy, as Freedom Caucus Leader Mark Meadows asserts, that Strzok “used his official FBI position to try and stop President Trump from getting elected”.
We think this now-famous exchange between Strzok and attorney Lisa Page with whom he was having an affair is pretty much an idle assurance intended to both placate and impress an anxious girlfriend:
PAGE: “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!”
STRZOK: “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.”
At the same time, as a practical matter, Strzok could never be assigned high-profile cases again, if only for the fact that he’s now too high-profile. And he did bring a measure of this on himself through the outright stupidity of using a work phone as a tool to conduct an extramarital affair.
And that also fits with our theme today: we don’t suffer bad judgment lightly.
Still, Strzok’s firing doesn’t seem commensurate with the extreme celebrations of opponents, many of whom are also proponents of “deep state” conspiracy theories. Like Reps. Jim “Never Forget” Jordan and of course, President Trump.
Even if you believe they’re right, none of this is anything to celebrate.