STORMY REFLECTIONS
Donald Trump is to the Obama era as Jimmy Carter was to the Nixon era. His presidency could not exist without it. Whereas Obama preserved the outward forms of the presidency as head of state, he broke the forms in substance as head of government. By contrast, Trump breaks the outward forms as head of state while working to restore the substance as head of government.
Beyond Obama, however, last night’s Stormy Daniels interview on 60 Minutes reminded me how important the Clinton presidency was to making Trump possible. Trump would not be president were it not for the presidency of Bill Clinton and the faithful service that Hillary Clinton rendered to its preservation. Hillary was a terrible candidate in her own right, of course, but consider how Bill and Hillary paved the way for Trump every bit as much as Barack Obama did.
The Stormy affair is ancient history. Unlike Clinton’s more notable escapades, at least it was consensual and at least it didn’t take place in the Oval Office. Yet the media — 60 Minutes, Anderson Cooper, and the rest of the Democrats’ mainstream media adjunct that agitated in support of Clinton’s preservation — are working overtime to make the Stormy affair a current political scandal that might take Trump down. I should think that the electorate must already have discounted Trump’s marital bona fides rather heavily when it bought Trump.
The “grab them by the pussy” tape almost proved fatal to Trump’s candidacy. By any conventional standard, he should have been a goner. Trump survived the release of the tape in incredibly Trumpian fashion. Indeed, Trump revealed his skill as a candidate exploiting a Clintonian weakness when he assembled female former victims of Bill Clinton for a news conference and sought to seat them in his VIP box at the debate with Hillary Clinton in St. Louis. His position was that history must be told and a single standard applied.
At a fateful moment of his candidacy, Trump theatrically called Clinton out. It was outrageous. Putting the character of the Clinton presidency on display in this way, Trump flaunted the truth that CBS et al. had sought to suppress in the Clinton era, or the truth from which they had done averted their eyes. Through the drawn-out Lewinksy matter and related impeachment drama, Bill Clinton has done at least as much as any other American to desensitize us. And he did so with the invaluable assistance of the Missus all along the way.
STORMY WEATHER?
After last night’s 60 Minutes interview, it’s clear that the story Stormy Daniels, her lawyer, and CBS are peddling has three elements: sex, campaign finance law, and intimidation. Let’s look at all three.
Daniels’ claim that she had sex with Donald Trump is more than credible given the money she was paid to keep quiet about it. The idea that Trump would have extra-marital sex just months after his wife gave birth is revolting. However, in the post-Bill Clinton/pussy-grab era, I question whether the sex side of this story has much resonance.
What about the claim that campaign finance law was violated when Trump’s lawyer paid Daniels $130,000 to keep quiet? The theory is that this was a campaign contribution well in excess of what the lawyer was allowed to donate.
We may see Democrats push this theory during impeachment proceedings if they win control of the House. However, I don’t think it moves the needle.
The claim that someone threatened Daniels and her child if the porn star didn’t keep quiet about her relations with Trump would raise very serious concerns if true and if Trump authorized or knew about it. However, so far as I know, we have only Daniels’ word that she was threatened, and no evidence that Trump authorized or knew about any threats.
It’s possible that Daniels was threatened and that Trump was involved. However, I don’t take her word for it. She is not a credible witness.
For one thing, Daniels took $130,000 in exchange for not talking about her relations with Trump, and then talked about them. That’s reason enough not to trust her.
For another, Daniels has previously stated that she didn’t have sex with Trump. Now she says she did. This is not an honest person.
In addition, some of what Daniels told CBS’s Anderson Cooper doesn’t pass the straight face test. When Cooper asked why Daniels consented to having sex with Trump, she said it was because she “had it coming.”
I realized exactly what I’d gotten myself into. And I was like, “Ugh, here we go.” (laugh) And I just felt like maybe– (laugh) it was sort of– I had it coming for making a bad decision for going to someone’s room alone and I just heard the voice in my head, “well, you put yourself in a bad situation and bad things happen, so you deserve this.”
That’s ridiculous. Daniels was under no obligation to have sex with Trump merely because she went to his room alone. And Daniels has a strong will — that’s apparent from the rest of the interview. She could have walked out of Trump’s room, and surely would have had she not seen an advantage in staying for sex.
The advantage may have been sexual pleasure. It may have been the opportunity to do business with Trump, e.g., via an appearance on Celebrity Apprentice. In any case, the true reason why Daniels had sex with Trump was not that she considered it condign punishment for going to his room.
Daniels is dishonest. So is Trump. But she should bear the burden of proving that someone threatened her. In my view, she cannot meet that burden through her word alone.
No comments:
Post a Comment