Sunday School 10/10/21: Extra Credit

Your Sunday School this week included interviews with Steve Scalise and Janet Yellen. For your Extra Credit, I've got the mess that was Chuck Todd on Meet the Press talking with former White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham, who I hear has written a book.  

Here's Chuck's intro to Grisham.

The White House press secretary is one of the most high-profile jobs in Washington, but you'd be forgiven if you had no idea what Stephanie Grisham looks like. That's because she's the former Trump press secretary who never actually held a press conference.

That's true. Here's a bit of what the WaPo had to say about her tenure.

Unlike her overexposed predecessors, Sean Spicer and Sarah Sanders, Grisham was infamous for being invisible. In her nine months on the job (her tenure lasted from July until her firing on April 7), Grisham never held a White House press briefing. This makes her unique among the roughly 35 people who have held her position. She rarely conducted the smaller informal briefings known as “gaggles” and almost never appeared on TV, unless it was Fox News.

To me, Todd started in the right place: before her book, she had a high-profile job, and for all intents and purposes, didn't do it.  

She has, however, written a book, I'll Take Your Questions Now. - Get it? - What I Saw at the Trump White House. It is a rather chatty account of her time with Team Trump, where she also was chief of staff to Melania Trump, who has responded to Grisham's book this way, quote, "Ms. Grisham is a deceitful and troubled individual who doesn't deserve anyone's trust." So, with that, Stephanie Grisham joins me now. Ms. Grisham, welcome to Meet the Press.

So, maybe we should delve into that first part, the 'not doing her job' part, at least a little? I mean, she's there to answer questions, right? Wouldn't the first question be, "before we get to the book, I've got to ask. Why didn't you ever engage with the press? Wasn't that your primary job, as press secretary?"

Oh, heck no - it's Chuck Todd, after all - so that didn't happen. Here, in order, are the questions he did ask,  and excerpts from her answers.

So, I want to start with you explaining why viewers tonight, today, should trust what you say in response to my questions. Because you lay out in the book, you admit you were, many times in Trump world you're asked to misinform or perhaps lie on behalf of the boss. So, you're doing a tell-all now. Why should we believe you? In short, I don't have anybody to answer for anymore... And I thought to myself, if I'm going to write a book, I want to write something that is just honest and brutal. And, you know, I don't spare myself in there either. 

I would have asked: "You say you don't spare yourself in the book; can you give us an example? And, following up, how does that make us want to trust you now?"

So, I'll just start with some of the things. Do you regret not resigning sooner? You waited until January 6th. After seeing everything you saw for four years, you wait until January 6th, some might argue the day everybody was wanting to run for the hills from Team Trump. Why did you wait so long? ...for about the last six months, I actually tried to resign a couple of times and Mrs. Trump talked me out of it... But absolutely, to answer your question, I do regret it...

I would have asked: "She talked you out of it? Can you give us some insight to those conversations? And, can you share anything you said in your resignation letter?"

When do you believe -- do you believe President Trump thinks he actually lost the election or not? I do think he believes it. That's been part of what has been scaring me as I've been watching from afar... I honestly thought this was a lot of his bluster, which you know, he's good at doing. He was doubling down. He'll never admit to losing, et cetera, et cetera. I thought he was going to just kind of raise some money so he could pay off legal bills, et cetera. But I think now, because his base is reacting to him the way that it is... and very, very few Republicans are refusing to speak up about, you know, his role in January 6th, but also this current attack on democracy with regard to election integrity, I think he is going to run again.

I would have asked: "Is there anyone you think would be able to talk him out of running again? Mrs. Trump, maybe? Is this something that would fall to Jared and Ivanka to do? Or is there no one in his circle who has that kind of influence with him?"

(Referencing his interview with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse just before he talked with Grisham) ...do you have an idea of who was helping sort of fund and back these crazy claims of the president and his former chief of staff, Mark Meadows? Well, certainly, I know, you know, as does the public, that there was Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell and some of those characters. I do know that there were a lot of private meetings in the residence taking place that were perhaps not taking place in the White House where there would be public documents about that... I don't have a specific name. I don't think it was one person. I think there were probably a few.

I would have asked: "Were you involved in or informed about any of those meetings? Can you give us any hint as to who the attendees were - was Mrs. Trump involved, was it administration officials or outsiders, or both? Did Meadows talk to you about keeping the meetings quiet, or give you information for Fox News or any other outlets?"

So, walk me through election night and the day after. There seems to be some evidence that he was accepting what was happening with the results and then something changed. Can you pinpoint it? I can't. I was with Mrs. Trump most of the night, to be honest with you...So, I think he just refused to give up. I mean, it's Donald Trump, right? And he will never admit to being wrong or to losing anything...I think one thing he's gotten really good at or he did get really good at as president is taking advantage of the base and this group of people who are, you know, so desperate for a voice, which I understand and support. But I think they're being taken advantage of now. And I think he knows they'll do whatever he says.

I would have asked: "You say you "understand and support" the people who are so desperate for a voice, but at the same time, you don't think Trump is the right person to help them. What message would you give his supporters? If Trump's not the right guy, who is? Where do they go instead?" 

Did you get taken advantage of by him? You know, it was interesting to me that you sort of admit that you got into that White House and perhaps you wouldn't have gotten there with another campaign. Did he take advantage of you? I think, I don't want to pin that on him. I definitely got very excited to be around this glamorous world of the Trumps. And certainly, when I got into the White House, you do get heady with power. I don't know that he took advantage of me in that regard. I think that that was my own weakness there.

I would have asked: "I can't help wondering, would there even be a book if you had only worked for Melania Trump? In hindsight, is there anything you would have done differently? Do you regret working for the administration?"

You know, I've heard from several former Trump staffers, some of whom share your concerns about him, but say that every decision you made was always in the best interest of yourself. Whether it was to stick in order to get a good job in the White House or, now, to do a tell-all when you need to make money. What do you say to that criticism? Well, two things. If there are people who are sharing my same concerns, I wish they would speak up, because looking back, I don't think is what's as important in terms of personalities and who did what and why. But I would disagree with that wholeheartedly. When I was in the White House, I lost a lot of friends and a lot of family. And I think I lost a little bit of my own moral compass.... And now, leaving, you know, yes, I got paid to write a book, but you cannot put a price tag on what is happening to me now. The right is mad at me, the left is mad at me. My family is getting threats. I'm being smeared. I'm being sued.

I would have asked: "Your family is being threatened? I know it might be difficult, but can you talk about that a little?" 

You said one of the reasons you're speaking out is you hope he doesn't run in 2024. If he does, do you plan to actively work against him? If I'm asked to. If there is anybody who wants me to speak out or talk, yes, I will. I think that, you know, I had a very unique perspective in that I worked for the former president, I worked for Mrs. Trump, and I worked for both of them at the same time. I know the way they think. I know the way they try to distract. And if there's any way I can be helpful, to help decipher some of those movements and what's really going on, I would do that, yes.

I would have asked: "You say 'if you're asked' you'll do it. Can you tell us if you've heard from anyone yet? And are you actively volunteering your assistance to anyone?" 

Do you think, if he's elected again, he'll destroy the democracy? I think he's on a revenge tour right now, right, with the people who voted to impeachment -- impeach him. I think it will be nothing but revenge, retribution, and how he can benefit himself. There will be pardons happening. I think there will be very draconian policies that go way too far. So, I believe, if he is re-elected again, it will be a really, really scary time.

Kind of like a Chuck Todd interview... See you around campus.

TGIF 1/17/20

Are we ready for this week's list-makers? As has been the case recently, I'm having a hard time deciding what list these folks should be on - maybe it'll be easier for you.

Let's start with Kenneth Starr. I can't decide which impeachment will be better for Starr's career, the cigar-wielding, serial 'Leaves of Grass' giver, or the race-baiting, xenophobic bigot?

That's right - if you didn't hear the news, Starr has joined president Trump's impeachment defense team, as has Alan Dershowitz. Former Florida AG Pam Bondi is already on the team, helping with 'communications' which, I think, means making appearances on the Fox shows, but I'm not sure.  And, as the article notes, Monica Lewinsky (like Hillary, a 'Leaves of Grass' recipient) chimed in on Twitter.

On Friday morning, shortly after news about Starr joining Trump's legal team broke, Lewinsky wrote in a Twitter post "this is definitely an 'are you f---ing kidding me? kinda day."

And then there's Lev Parnas, the guy with the scoop on all the guys who are pretending that they don't know him or anything about his involvement in the Ukraine affair. All the guys who are pretending that the documents and  pictures and texts that Parnas has shared are fake. Which is kind of funny, when you think about it. Take a look at this snip from a recent Daily Beast article.

In addition to charges of violating campaign-finance laws, Parnas has repeatedly been hit with lawsuits accusing him of refusing to pay rent or live up to his end of various business deals. As recently as 2016, he was ordered by a federal judge to pay more than $500,000 to family trust after he borrowed money for a movie that never ended up being made. 

Seriously, if there was no name in the first sentence, any reasonable person could have thought it was about the president, the guy for whom these same men have forsaken all others, and their ethics, and their collective consciences, and the truth. But I digress.

Here's The Woman Who Pretends To Be White House Press Secretary (TWWPTBWHPS), speaking of Parnas on Trump's personal news network.

The president has said he did not know him and I've got to say, just to say, 'Rudy told me these things' doesn't mean that it has anything to do with the president and it certainly doesn't mean that the president was directing him to do anything. We stand by exactly what we've been saying, the president did nothing wrong. The phone calls, the transcripts say everything there is to it. This is a man who's under indictment and who's actually out on bail. This is a man who owns a company called 'Fraud, Inc.' So I think that's something that people should be thinking about. You know, we're not too concerned about it. Once again, we know that everything in the Senate is going to be fair. It's unfortunate that he's now making a media tour with a lot of the outlets that are against the president. I think that shows exactly what he's doing.

Let's get Stephanie Grisham - she's the TWWPTBWHPS - added to this week's list. First of all, I think this may be the longest statement she's issued since adding the West Wing to her East Wing assignment. And second of all, look how well she pushes the company line, talking about the transcripts that aren't, the Rudy-slamming, mentioning Parnas' indictment and bail, pretending there's going to be a fair trial in the Senate - she's darn good, isn't she?

Of course, she messed up the name of Parnas' company - his business is called Fraud Guarantee, not Fraud, Inc. I think the latter's a Trump Organization holding company for Trump Steaks, Trump University, the Trump Foundation, and so on, maybe not.

For all the people who think Parnas should be completely discounted, all his evidence is right there in his phone, just like Rudy Giuliani says about HIS evidence. I'm not sure who's more reliable of those two, but I'm leaning towards Parnas.

I'm going to put That Guy From Vermont, Elizabeth Warren, and Amy Klobuchar on the list this week - the first two on the bad side, the latter on the good side. Klobuchar continued to demonstrate that she's focused on voters in this election campaign, speaking both about and to Iowans in particular, and to moderates like me in general. I appreciate that, as a non-affiliated voter looking for a candidate.

The other two - TGFV and Warren -  I think royally screwed up during the debate, and of course that hot mic at the end really got to the heart of it: let's call each other a liar on national television, shall we?

The same three of course are now going to be locked in the Senate for Trump's impeachment, without their phones or laptops. It'll be interesting to see who makes the rounds in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina on their behalf, and equally interesting to see whether Joe Biden, Tom Steyer, and/or Pete Buttigieg capitalize on the other three not being out there.

Did I leave out anyone important?

TGIF, everyone.