Skip to content

Trump’s high profile opposition.

January 31, 2017

Assuming that you think that Hollywood, the DNC  and the liberal watering holes are where the true seat of power has long rested in the United States, it hasn’t been hard to identify who would form the phalanx of opposition to all things Trump.

That makes the latest addition to that choir completely predictable.

In a move that surprised absolutely no one, former President Barack Obama has come out firmly against the Trump travel ban, which he characterized as discriminatory against Muslims, not country of origin.

Remember that he said he would speak out on issues he felt passionately about and by George, he’s found his “passionate issue” an historically short ten days after leaving office.

Cynics note that he didn’t have to look very hard for it, given his sneering disdain for Americans whom he described as clinging to God, guns and their Bibles.

Let it be stipulated that as a private citizen he enjoys the same rights of assembly and free speech as any other American, even if he often trod perilously close to the edge of his office’s powers in decrying it in others. He is free to express his views unfettered by the niceties of tradition.

The flip side is that he is no longer protected from criticism by the office he once held.

Be that as it may, if the far left was in need of a charismatic cheerleader, it has it now.

True, he can’t run for the nation’s highest office again, but that doesn’t mean he can’t handpick the best and brightest in the Democratic party and begin to pull things together.

The dicey part of that for President Trump is that he might get all wound up in a Twitter war with No. 44.

Given the current President’s propensity for getting sidetracked on personality issues, and the fact that he enjoys endlessly baiting the press by reliving all things related to his campaign, that is no small land mine. In fact, it’s more like building a bonfire in an armory.

With Senate Dems already vowing full opposition to anything and everything Trump, it would behoove President Trump to keep his eye on the ball.

It isn’t as though he can’t understand that.  It can be argued that the reason he moved so quickly and for Washington, quietly, before announcing the seven-nation travel ban was because he didn’t want it leaked to the media by his political enemies ahead of the signing of his executive order.

That would indicate that he isn’t clueless about either the quality or the tactics of the opposition, but without his Cabinet in place, it also predisposes him to the charge that he hears only one side of any issue.

President Trump can’t afford to give the impression that he has fumbled the ball as it seems happened when rolling out his immigration policy.

Even his more ardent supporters feel that the temporary ban gets an A+ for intent, but only a C- for downstream communications that affected execution.

The Obama holdover and former Acting Attorney General of the United States Sally Yates was fired for openly defying her new boss and her oath of office by vowing not to defend the order, having prejudged it as indefensible and stating she didn’t even know if it was constitutional.

It does become clearer where FBI Director Comey was coming from when he said that no prosecutor would touch the results of the Clinton investigations. Apparently he meant no prosecutor would have been allowed to do so at the Justice Department.

When the news of Acting AG Yates’ termination broke, Stephen Miller, a Trump adviser, explained that what he referred to as “a team of attorneys” (actually, this was reportedly the  DOJ Office of Legal Counsel) had a hand in researching and drafting the language of the EO.

Assuming that is a verifiable fact, that’s the kind of information the administration probably should have been simultaneously made available in 140 characters or less to the press and the public when the order was rolled out and signed. That would have avoided the impression given by the MSM that it was drawn up by a bunch of political cronies and relatives of the President at midnight the day it was released.

Of course, as any action of the President will be, the immediate reaction of opponents like Senator Schumer will be shock and melodramatic, if misplaced outrage. Old habits die hard.

It is tempting to just dismiss the histrionics as mere political posturing. A wiser course might be to take the cumulative impact seriously.

From → op-ed

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: