I've speculated in the past that, when
it came to the Mueller investigation, Donald Trump was playing
“rope-a-dope”, by which I meant that, by not firing Mueller
(which he could have done quite readily -- and legally) and by allowing the
investigation to continue he was giving the opposition time to lay
all of their cards out on the table. He was allowing the Deep State
to slither out from under all of the rocks which are their usual
hiding places and pursue their agenda in plain sight. He was
allowing the FBI and the Department of Justice to, basically, stand
down for two-plus years and engage in a witch hunt (or what, in a
more charitable vein, is called a “snipe hunt”, to recall a
favorite ruse from my Boy Scout days). He was allowing the
opposition, in its many and variegated forms – including, but not
limited to, the mainstream media, the “entertainment” industry,
late-night TV, the Democrats/liberals/progressives, the hard-core
globalists – to stand up and be counted, and to expose themselves
with little fear of ever being called out or held accountable (or so
they assumed).
Now, from the opposition's point of
view, this was a good thing. Apparently Trump was so culpable, so
guilty of countless enormities, that the best he could to was to
hunker down and hope it all went away, the way people will take
shelter when a tornado bears down. The problem is that after
two-plus years of painstaking investigation, subpoenas, rumor,
innuendo, leaks, threats, intimidation, arrests, testimony, mountains of
documents, and being aided and abetted by pretty much everyone on the
planet who had any sort of helpful information (its veracity being of
no concern), the Mueller investigation has laid a giant goose egg
when it comes to the issue of “collusion” – not Russian
“interference”, which seems to be fairly well established, but
actual cooperation between Trump's 2016 campaign and those
ever-fearsome Russkies. (And by the way, the House Democrats think
they can succeed where Mueller failed; that shows you the extent and
severity of their delusional system.)
And now – or so it seems – that
glowing halo has been rudely knocked off the head of the estimable
Robert Mueller III (now there's a ruling elite name for you!) and he
is suspected of having... well, not chickened out or sold out
exactly, but of, in some mysterious way, decided that Trump –
while not “exonerated”, no-no-no, surely we can't have that –
cannot be proven, beyond the shadow of a doubt (another way of saying
“non-impeachable”), to have won the 2016 election with the help
of the left's newfound arch enemies, namely the Russians, who
committed the cardinal sin of dissolving their very own empire, i.e.
the Soviet, in an unforced error, and becoming, for lack of a better
word, just another “fascist” country since, in the liberal world
view, there are only two possible forms of government, namely
socialism (good) and “fascism” (which covers everything else).
For them, Russia can never be forgiven for having given up on
communism, after a meager trial run of only 70+ years. After having
won World War II (and I've always held that they were the only real
victor in that war) and taken over half of Europe, they got cold
feet. Where is Uncle Joe Stalin, who inspired so many American
liberals from the New Deal on, when we really need him? From being
on the right side of history for so long, Russia is suddenly declared
to be on the wrong side of history, and no example is so compelling
at that of having colluded with Donald Trump in 2016. So yes, there
is definitely an element of “payback” in all of this – an
aspect that, as far as I know, has totally escaped the attention of
the commentariat all across the political spectrum. If this
“collusion” had been attributed to any other country –
Botswana, for example – it would have been laughed out of the
Department of Justice and any other government agency populated with
even half-sane people. But the “fact” that it was Russia – the
new enemy of the left and a traitor to the cause of human freedom,
fairness, and justice – gave it not only credibility but an air of
near-certainty. The verdict was in, in other words – and it was
Mueller & Co.'s job to simply build up the case to the point
where impeachment was not only called for, but demanded, for the good
of the Republic. (Impeachment is always possible, but it's not
always politically advisable. A favorable finding by Mueller &
Co. would have been a political gold mine.)
But as it happens, the collusion issue
turned into a nothingburger, as the saying goes, which left the
opposition, basically, naked as jaybirds, with no place to hide.
Except! They have – and in fact had, all along – a Plan B, which
was to pretty much say, to quote Emily Litella, “never mind” when
it came to collusion, but to turn on a dime and declare that their
campaign, all along, was focused on “obstruction of justice” –
which is another term for “a president exercising his
Constitutionally-granted privileges”.
So now we are seeing a full court press
for obstruction of justice, which will inevitably (once again) create
fertile grounds for impeachment – although, as I've said
previously, since impeachment is a political, not legal, exercise, no
particular “grounds” are required – “high crimes and
misdemeanors” meaning, basically, whatever the opposition says they
mean (another of many examples where the Constitution left things
ambiguous in order to force people to exercise reason and common
sense – a fond hope on the part of the Founding Fathers, which has
turned out, in our day, to have been naive at best).
So if “collusion” was Plan A, and
it didn't bear fruit, then surely Plan B (obstruction of justice)
will save the day! But, how do we know that Trump, who succeeded so
admirably with his strategy vis-a-vis the Mueller investigation into
collusion, isn't playing another game of rope-a-dope when it comes to
obstruction of justice? Let's say the entire Mueller report is
unredacted, and the opposition descends on its every minute detail
like flies on you-know-what. And let's say they try to make a case
(although, as I said, they don't really need to make any sort of
“case” in order to proceed with impeachment). And let's say that
it winds up in court this time. They might lose again! Which would,
basically, reduce the rationale for impeachment down to the level of
Trump's hair, his complexion, his speaking style, his wife's outfits,
his business dealings (which seemed to work perfectly well in New
York), his time spent playing golf (that most deadly of deadly sins
on the part of any Republican president), and so on. If the collapse
of the collusion myth has left the opposition exposed as schemers, plotters,
and subversives, what would the collapse of an obstruction of justice
myth do? Cause them damage when it comes to the 2020 election,
perhaps? But they aren't thinking about that, because hope springs
eternal (you know, “hope and change” and all that). This time it
has to work. It just has to! Because the alternative is
simply too dreadful to contemplate – not just Trump surviving the
balance of his first term (which Nancy Pelosi seems more or less
resigned to permitting), but – gasp! – running for a second term,
and maybe even – gasp! – winning!
But while it can be said that the
Democrats and their facilitators have not yet learned a lesson, the
same may not be true of the Republicans. I described their
discontent in a previous post (“Tired... So Very Tired...”, Dec.
8), and I don't see that much has changed. They are old, tired, and
worn out; they are sick of living at ground zero and having to fight
trench warfare (or at least put up with it); they have been forced to
either defend Trump or oppose him in a half-hearted way ever since he
took office, and it goes totally against the grain. It's just not
the way they're used to doing business. They never asked for Trump,
they never really supported him in the 2016 election, they were
rendered extremely uncomfortable when he won, and they've been that
way ever since. When one of Trump's core supporters asks (on the
Internet or elsewhere), “Tired of winning yet?” their answer is
“Yes! We are tired of
winning, and we want things to go back to the way they used to be
before this... this 'thing' rose up out of the Hudson River and
descended on Washington.”
So now is when it gets interesting. We
have two converging vectors – impeachment (or not, but don't depend
on Old Nancy to get her way, not in the face of all the young
radicals straight out of the ranks of the Red Guard) on the one hand,
and Trump's optimism vis-a-vis the 2020 election on the other hand.
Or – maybe that too is just a ruse. Trump could very well get on
TV, in the best LBJ tradition, sometime early in 2020, and say that
he's had it – that he tried, he did his best, but the opposition
was just too intense, and why waste four more years of his life
trying to get anything done in Washington when no one would allow him
to move a muscle in his first term. (If a president isn't permitted
to defend our national borders, everything else is detail.) He could
do this, and it would be saving face in a sense – not being forced
out of office but leaving voluntarily. (He may already be planning
to do this, but lots of luck finding out, despite the notoriously
leaky White House. He has to keep up, for the time being and for all
sorts of reasons, his image of being determined to run again.)
Or, the obstruction of justice witch
hunt could bear no more fruit than the collusion witch hunt has done,
and Trump could emerge triumphant, re-energized along with his base.
But will his 2020 base be as formidable as his 2016 base? Hillary
Clinton was surprised, as were her supporters, at just how many
“deplorables” were out there in flyover country – and that they
were actually willing and able to knuckle-drag to the polls and vote.
Will they be as numerous, and as willing, in 2020? And how about
support from the Republican Party? They are old and tired, remember.
They might prefer to have a less controversial candidate, albeit one
who is guaranteed to lose, in 2020 – in which case they will have
to pull off their own coup, taking a page from Hillary's play book
when it came to Bernie Sanders, to keep Trump from being nominated
for a second term, regardless of how the primaries turn out (assuming
there even are Republican
primaries – this is not a legal requirement, remember).
So really – if
you thought the last two-plus years have been interesting, that was
just Act One – the preliminaries. Right now, in the most basic
terms, it's a race to the 2020 elections between Trump and the
opposition – but the opposition has developed fault lines, and who
knows how Trump is going to feel after another year of trench
warfare? Hang on, it's gonna be a ride.