The Irony Board: I Hereby Proclaim

There are many things Donald Trump is without: ethics... compassion... empathy... kindness... humility... courtesy... and irony - don't forget irony.

We've long celebrated November as Native American Heritage Month, under President George W. Bush, President Obama and even president Trump.

This year, in addition to celebrating our Native American heritage, we are celebrating several other things, including National Veterans and Military Families Month, with a proclamation noting that

Each warrior who fights for our Nation, along with their families, has earned our eternal gratitude, and I ask that all Americans thank and support them.  Together, we remain committed to fostering a national community of support for these brave heroes and their families.

This president signed this proclamation? This president, the guy who mocked a Gold Star family for speaking out against him; who assaulted the life and memory of John McCain; who deports  immigrant veterans despite the promise of citizenship for their patriotic service or the immigrant families of our veterans and soldiers; and who most recently has turned his "eternal gratitude" on Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman? This is the guy who proclaims

I encourage all communities, all sectors of society, and all Americans to acknowledge and honor the service, sacrifices, and contributions of veterans and military families for what they have done and for what they do every day to support our great Nation.

I can't even.

We're also celebrating, for the first time, National American History and Founders Month, a time for us all to remember that

...the United States will always remain steadfast in our dedication to promoting liberty and justice over the evil forces of oppression and indignity.  This same truth fuels us in our efforts to confront the challenges that face our citizens here at home, including protecting precious religious liberties, securing our Nation’s borders, and combating the opioid crisis.

Unless, of course, you're a Muslim, a person legitimately seeking asylum, a thoroughly vetted refugee, LGBTQ, a person with Temporary Protected Status, a political opponent born in the US or a naturalized citizen, and so on.

But let's include the opioid crisis as an "evil force of oppression and indignity," while we try to strip health insurance away from millions...  Also,

This month, we acknowledge the tremendous strides we have made as a people and recognize that our democracy’s survival is dependent upon a well-informed electorate.  To ensure the success of our future generations, we pledge to continue to build a more educated citizenry. We heed the warning of President Ronald Reagan that “freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.”

This is laughable, really, coming from a guy who lies in press conferences, lies in rallies, lies in Cabinet meetings, lies in tweets -- who lies about everything! All of his minions also lie, constantly, boldly, like clockwork, in lockstep with him, as if hearing themselves repeat something false will miraculously make it true. And knowing that if they are hearing themselves repeat something false, the president is hearing them, too, and that is good. For them. Not so much for us, but very good for them. And his supporters? Some of them believe the lies, all the lies, lie the lies right along with him, and call others liars for not agreeing with the lies. And no, 13,435 false and misleading statements do not a truth make... But,

To continue safeguarding our freedom, we must develop a deeper understanding of our American story.  Studying our country’s founding documents and exploring our unique history — both the achievements and challenges — is indispensable to the future success of our great Nation.  For more than two centuries, the American experiment in self-government has been the antithesis to tyranny, and our Constitution has secured the blessings of liberty.

This president doesn't give two hoots about the Constitution - it's just another thing about which he can uneducate the citizenry. His actions fly in the face of our founding documents, except the parts that serve his purpose-of-the-day, and he pretends the parts that don't serve him don't exist - you know, like the oversight stuff, or the Congress appropriates the money stuff, and more.

He proudly and officially compliments dictators, wishing that he had what they have -- an obedient press, subservient women, obscene military parades, and threatening people who don't agree with him. And he's got that last part, in spades.

Emoluments...government spending at Trump properties... promoting his children's personal financial interests... members of his administration doing the same...

As we sit today, he's obstructing Congress in an impeachment inquiry, he has his lawyers on a path of obstruction in ways the likes of which have never been seen before, even to the point of arguing that Trump could in fact kill someone in the middle of 5th Avenue and not even be investigated, much less indicted, while he's in office. (The president just loves that "the likes of which have never been seen before" stuff, so I thought I'd give it a whirl.)

Trump has got this American History and Founders stuff nailed, don't you think?

And the irony part? Yeah, well, that's going to have to wait for another day.

Wondering on Wednesday (V177)

Let's get some wondering underway, shall we?

Is anyone wondering how long Labor Secretary Alex Acosta will get to stick around, now that the Epstein stuff is hitting the fan, and taking attention away from the president? 

Acosta was the US Attorney involved in the plea deal that let Jeffrey Epstein spend 13 months in a  private wing of the country jail, and be picked up by his valet six days a week to go to work and earn money (and do who knows what in his office because no one, including the police, was paying attention). And yes, he had to register as a sex offender, but as someone pointed out, the 13-month sentence is what's recommended for someone possessing less than a teaspoon of crack cocaine, and that seems pretty light for someone who sexually abused over 100 young girls.

And how it is that Epstein, named co-conspirators and unnamed co-conspirators all got immunity from federal prosecution?  I can see maybe Epstein, if that's what it took to get him to take a plea deal on the state charges, but everyone else too?  This is part of why Acosta is in hot water.  And, of course, there's taking attention away from his boss, as noted above.

What else is going on? The president won a round in a court case, which doesn't seem to happen all that often these days. This time, it was the emoluments case that was filed by the District of Columbia and the state of Maryland, who asserted that the president's hotel was getting business from foreign governments and taking business away from other hotels in their areas.

In addition to not having standing, and to having been spanked for wasting the court's time, there was also a question of what the remedy would have been, had the decision gone the other way.  Here, in part is what the three-judge panel said.

Even if government officials were patronizing the hotel to curry the president's favor, there is no reason to conclude that they would cease doing so were the president enjoined from receiving income from the hotel. The hotel would still be publicly associated with the president, would still bear his name and would still financially benefit members of his family. 

So, we're left wondering whether there is a way to enforce any ethics rules against this president or members of his administration? The Hatch Act is ignored, emoluments cases can't go forward because there's no way to keep him from making money off being president...what's an ethical person to do? Grin and bear it, knowing that this president would be fired from most companies in this day and age?

Staying with the courts, the president did lose one this week, too: he cannot block people on Twitter simply because they disagree with him. In a nutshell, three judges of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals said that

The First Amendment does not permit a public official who utilizes a social media account for all manner of official purposes to exclude persons from an otherwise-open online dialogue because they expressed views with which the official disagrees... In resolving this appeal, we remind the litigants and the public that if the First Amendment means anything, it means that the best response to disfavored speech on matters of public opinion concern is more speech, not less.

Of course, if you read the comments on social media articles, you won't need to wonder how many people actually read the articles before commenting (in my experience, less than 10%) and not only that, won't have to wonder how many of them follow the president. Again, based on the complete lack of understanding on how the president uses his personal Twitter account (hint - it's not just for insulting detractors, antagonizing our allies, and lying to the public).

And about the court's decision? Hear, hear. Chirp, chirp. Tweet, tweet. And if you disagree with the president or any other government official, let 'em know in the comments. It's the right thing to do, and it's your right to do it.  Nothing to wonder about there.