What do “Lock Him Up!” chants, social media, and some suspicious emails have in common?  They are all part of a purported “October Surprise” intended to boost the President’s re-election chances. The story is about the “smoking gun” emails allegedly found on a laptop that implicate Joe Biden in criminal partnership with his son Hunter involving the Burisma board of directors and China.

The heart of the scandal is that Hunter, with the help of his father, sold access to Joe Biden in exchange for significant amounts of money. If true, the alleged activities would be felonious. 

Facebook and Twitter took down the stories, which are not yet verified. Trump and Republicans have since attacked the two social media giants for doing so.  Republicans accuse the companies of bias in favor of Biden, a perception supported by some Facebook executives joining the Biden team.

The dramatic content of the alleged emails–direct contradictions of the former Vice President’s claim he knew nothing about his son’s business activities–qualifies the story as an “October Surprise.” The President enthusiastically welcomed the New York Post coverage.  At a Las Vegas campaign rally, he referred to Biden’s family as “a criminal enterprise.” This prompted the crowd to start a “Lock Him Up!” chant.  Trump himself joined in, obviously enjoying this moment.

How the New York Post Got the Emails

The Post claims incriminating emails were extracted from a MacBook Pro computer that was dropped off at a repair shop in 2019 but never picked up.  Because the emails include messages sent to and from Hunter Biden, the assumption is that the laptop (hard drive) was his. The memory also held photos of the Biden family. 

Through his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani obtained the emails and shared them with the Post.  Steve Bannon, a former Trump aide now under indictment for fraud, was also cited as a source by the Post.  CBS News reports the repair shop owner is “unwilling and unable” to provide details on who dropped off the laptop for repair and other information that might support the emails’ authenticity.

The FBI is now investigating the emails. Several major news organizations, including NPR, have also raised questions of authenticity. A Biden campaign spokesman has said that a 2015 meeting detailed in the emails did not take place.

The New York Times reports that there was dissension in the New York Post newsroom relating to the decision to publish the piece.  One reporter who worked on the piece declined to put his name on it due to his doubts.  

Trump Jumps onto the Story

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the email scandal is how quickly President Trump moved to incorporate it into his campaign message. Since the news broke, he has tweeted dozens of times about Facebook and Twitter’s decision to remove the story. Here’s one example:

So terrible that Facebook and Twitter took down the story of “Smoking Gun” emails related to Sleepy Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, in the @NYPost.  It is only the beginning for them. There is nothing worse than a corrupt politician. . ..

Then There is the Chant, “Lock Him Up!” 

Trump is calling the Biden story the “second biggest” case of political corruption in history.  That may be an exaggeration, but his supporters are agreeing.  Attendees at Trump’s recent Las Vegas rally did the chant, just like those in Detroit called for the jailing of Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer. (Whitmer’s crime is shutting down the State to curtail the virus—the same crime that almost got her kidnapped). 

Trump has also called for former President Obama to be jailed, in this case for allegedly spying on his 2016 campaign. The President is also resurrecting Hillary Clinton and her alleged crimes in his rallies.

Is Trump Asking for Trouble in Calling for the Jailing of Politicians?

One aspect of the Trump focus on the alleged Biden scandal is curious. Trump himself may face criminal investigations and prosecutions once he leaves office.  Have you read the New York Times reporting on the President’s taxes (non-payment)? 

Is it smart for Trump to focus on prosecution of elected officials?  

The Bottom Line

As of today, doubts continue to rise regarding the authenticity of the emails. Major news outlets, including the Washington Post and NPR are not convinced. Hopefully, the FBI will decide and, if the emails are fakes, find out who produced them and why.

None of this is likely to make a difference to President Trump as he enters the home stretch of a campaign he appears to be losing.  Vilifying Hillary Clinton over emails contributed to his surprise victory in 2016. Will a similar tactic work in 2020?  

Not if everyone gets out to vote.

It’s time for the circus to end. 

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant. For more than 30 years, he advised clients on federal education and social service policy.

 

Imagine my surprise when Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at NIH and head of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, showed up in a Trump campaign commercial.  The ad touts Trump’s leadership in responding to the campaign, tells viewers, “we’ll get through this,” and advises us not to be afraid.

Despite and perhaps because of Trump’s leadership, I remain afraid of the virus.  My fear prompts me to continue to follow CDC guidelines and, for my own sake and that of others, to tune out pretty much every word about the pandemic that the President utters.

Call me naïve, but I think Fauci’s advice may be more valuable than Trump’s, even if detractors, including Peter Navarro of the White House staff and the White House itself, are able to identify instances where Fauci’s projections have not proven accurate. The doctor never claimed to be clairvoyant, especially when compared to Trump.  Remember when Trump set the goal of reopening the country by Easter?

I have no doubt that sometime in 2021 President Biden will award Dr. Fauci a second Presidential Medal of Freedom to complement the one he received in 2008.  For all Fauci has done, he deserves it.  Not only has he emerged as a calm, trusted voice on the virus, he has done so despite repeated interference from the Trump administration.

Fauci, despite his 79 years, is a tough customer. President Trump has used and abused him repeatedly. One suspects that when he first learned of the Trump commercial, he was not surprised. Another day, another insult. Or another piece of misinformation to correct.

Diplomatically, Fauci disavowed the ad.  He avoided an open argument with Trump, most likely, to avoid being fired. Fauci responded:

“In my nearly five decades of public service, I have never publicly endorsed, nor do I now endorse any political candidates. The comments attributed to me without my permission in the GOP campaign ad were taken out of context from a broad statement I made months ago about the efforts of Federal public health officials.”

Let us hope Fauci’s approach works. I suspect it will. Fauci was shown to be trusted as an accurate source of information about the virus by 68 percent of respondents in a Kaiser Family Foundation poll released in September. He is sufficiently trusted by the public that dismissing him so close to election day would further diminish Trump’s already bad poll numbers. With signs of a second wave of the pandemic and cold weather coming, we need him more than ever.  Without him, could we total more than 500,000 deaths in another six months?

It will surprise nobody that, despite Fauci’s statement, the Trump campaign is continuing to run the ad. Don’t forget, Trump is President (for a little over the next three months at least), and Fauci is only a doctor with expertise in the existential threat known as COVID-19.  

In the last ten months, Dr. Fauci has had multiple opportunities to acclimate to Trump’s abuse.  In May, Dan Scavino, Deputy Chief of Staff to Trump for Communications, posted a cartoon on Facebook depicting Fauci as a faucet flushing the US economy down the drain.  In July, the President himself retweeted a post alleging a conspiracy “by Fauci & the Democrats to perpetuate Covid deaths to hurt Trump.”

In August, the President was tweeting again. This time, after Dr. Fauci testified to a House of Representatives subcommittee that US coronavirus cases were greater than those of European countries because only part of the US economy was shut down.  Trump’s tweet screamed “WRONG!” and added, “We have more cases because we have tested far more than any other country, 60,000,000. If we tested less, there would be less cases.” Is there anyone you know who wants to shut down coronavirus testing?

Last week I was walking my goldendoodle, Lucca, on Oxford’s strand.  It was a beautiful day.  As I walked down the road, I noticed a sign that made my day.  It read “Thank You Dr. Fauci” and depicted a heart.  

I echo that sentiment. Thank you, Dr. Fauci.  Thank you for your courage, leadership, and perseverance during this difficult time. 

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant. For more than 30 years, he advised clients on federal education and social service policy.

Why is someone tearing down campaign signs?  As already discussed in a Spy letter to the editor, vandals recently destroyed a large Biden sign.  Another road sign was defaced with spray paint. And it gets stranger.  At least two Trump signs were rigged with what looked like fake booby-traps, apparently to deter anarchists and Antifa from removing them. Closer examination has shown them to be anti-theft devices.  

What is going on?

As far as the vandals attacking the Biden signs are concerned, one explanation is fear and desperation. A new Wall Street Journal /NBC News poll shows President Trump down by 14 points. With the President still ill with the coronavirus, hopes for a comeback are fading.

What caused the drop in the polls?  There are many places to start. Just looking at last week’s news, it is hard to determine whether it has been the President’s non-payment of income tax, his stellar debate performance on September 29th, or something else.  Evidence of his leadership failures on addressing the pandemic mounts every day along with the national death toll, now over 212,000.

Of course, the WSJ/NBC poll was taken before the President disclosed he has the virus. We all hope for the President’s recovery, but will there be a sympathy vote? Not likely, given the long history of reckless behavior on Trump’s part, which includes holding a fundraiser after he knew he had been exposed to the virus and ignoring the social distancing and mask rules at the first debate.  

There is also the issue of what he has done since disclosing his illness.  In addition to the White House issuing conflicting reports on the state of his health, the President faked a “work session” at Walter Reed Hospital at which he signed blank sheets of paper.  Perhaps worse, he risked the lives of Secret Service agents and others with a bizarre drive around the hospital, yet another ill-conceived photo op.  Doctors were shocked.

It’s also not likely that Monday night’s photo op will help.  Some doctors question whether Trump should have discharged himself from the hospital at all, an act setting the stage for prime-time news coverage of Marine One and Trump, in full business attire, returning to the White House. Then he walked, unassisted, up the stairs and, amazingly, promptly removed his mask and put it in his pocket before posing for a short video in a doorway.

I remain hopeful that the President will fully recover from the virus, but 72 hours in the hospital don’t appear to have taught him anything.  As one friend of mine commented, “It’s too bad Trump has the virus, but he has only himself to blame.”  The friend added, “You reap what you sow.”

Could it be that the destruction of the Biden signs is an expression of fear that the election is lost and that the Trump era is about to end?  Could it be that some deranged thought process has convinced the vandals that destroying the Biden signs will somehow either intimidate Biden supporters from voting or, worse, serve as a graphic demonstration of how strong Trump’s support is.  There is nothing like violence to cement political power. 

Not so curiously, I am not seeing much about Trump signs being destroyed.  I am sure it is happening somewhere, but I just haven’t seen it here.  And if there is vandalism on the left, I am not sure it is fair to credit former Vice President Biden.  Antifa and “anarchists” are not part of the Biden campaign and, given that they are both unorganized groups, the thought that they are coordinating with Biden is far-fetched.

Also, as noted earlier in this piece, it is rapidly becoming apparent that Biden does not need, let alone want, the help of hooligans to support his campaign. He is ahead in the polls by double digits.  

We are all blessed that less than a month remains before this sorry chapter in our nation’s history ends.  When the smoke clears, we will hopefully have a new day, a day of honesty and seriousness.  A new administration that listens to scientists and will focus the resources of the federal government and bringing the pandemic to an end. 

Here is a message to the vandals:  Your acts are only creating sympathy for the other side.  Seeing the defaced Biden sign on Oxford Road only makes me less likely to vote for Trump, not that there is any chance of that.

I hope you get caught and turned in to appropriate authorities. 

If you see one of these vandals or know anything that might lead to their arrest, contact the Talbot County Sheriff at 410-822-1020.

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant. For more than 30 years, he advised clients on federal education and social service policy.

 

Presidential debates are intended to educate voters. Debates contrast with campaign rallies, speeches, and even town halls, in that the candidates are supposed to be questioned, side-by-side, to help voters decide for whom to vote.  A recent editorial described the debates as the “metaphorical equivalent of a presidential job interview.”

No one would describe Tuesday’s debate as a job interview. If it were, neither candidate might have been hired. The debate was, as advertised, combat between two candidates who don’t like or respect one another. Civility never entered the building on the campus of Case Western University in Cleveland.

The debates are meant to be serious business—name-calling is supposed to be set aside in favor of facts. In theory, the candidate best proving himself as informed, competent, and having policies reflecting the will of the people would win the debate.

Tuesday night’s performance did not surprise anyone familiar with President Trump’s previous debate performances. He was aggressive in his responses to Biden, interrupting Biden’s time, and included ad hominem attacks. If you did not know that Biden spent 47 years in Washington, you did after the debate.

In practice, Presidential debates, like those in the primaries, have been less than lofty. Last night’s event in Cleveland might be characterized as an exception, but not in the right direction.  Biden called Trump “a clown” and described him as “the worst President in history.” 

President Trump met expectations (at least mine) by attacking Biden’s son, Hunter. He repeated allegations against him relating to both Ukraine as well as receiving $3.5 million from the wife of the mayor of Moscow.

Tapes of the debate won’t be used in high school civics class to teach students “how it is done.”

Despite the tone of the debate, it was worthwhile to watch, even though it is unlikely any votes were changed. While a lot of name-calling occurred, issues were addressed, albeit not in the manner high school debate coaches might consider optimal.

About that later.

First, the moderator. High expectations surrounded Chris Wallace of Fox News. In recent weeks he has been tough on the Trump administration. He is viewed as independent and smart. He lived up to that reputation despite the challenges inherent in a passionate exchange between two candidates who genuinely don’t like each other.

Wallace did his best to limit the mudslinging and to steer candidates back to topics he selected for the debate. He generally failed. At one point, Trump commented that he was not aware he was debating the moderator instead of Biden.

Charitably put, Wallace had trouble moderating the debate.  He did a good job considering the hatred in the room.

One pleasant surprise of the evening was that Wallace teed up climate change as a debate topic. It was not on the published agenda.  

Neither candidate departed from their established positions on the issue. Trump reiterated the wisdom of his repudiation of the Paris Climate accords and attacked Biden’s support for a Green New Deal. 

Biden attempted to dissociate himself from the Green New Deal after Trump’s repeated references to “leftist” and “socialist” plans. He referenced “the Biden Plan” and coherently suggested that it would ultimately produce net economic gains. 

It remains to be seen how this claim will play before voters. 

As a Marylander, living on the Chesapeake Bay and carefully monitoring how much the river rises after recent torrential rains, I was grateful Wallace raised this issue.

A bit about President Trump.  Trump performed better than I had expected, despite his being characterized as “out of control” by some commentators after the debate.  He was aggressive, but not in an unexpected way. Anyone who has studied Trump over the last four years, even a little, knew what was coming.

Trump’s debate style is a constant. He views encounters as fights and comes loaded for bear. Biden faced ridicule, accusations about himself and family, and name-calling.  All three appeared to be higher priorities for the President than putting forth a plan for the next four years. 

That is the perspective of someone who expected the worst from Trump and hoped for a disciplined discussion of issues.

Trump did talk about policy, but it was more in the form of a look back than a look forward. If there is a Trump plan on how to respond to the pandemic or anything else, we did not learn it. Instead, we were told everything was great with the economy until the “Chinese virus” was sent our way.  We were also told that he stands for “law and order,” an effort to contrast himself with Biden, who was accused of wanting to defund the police.

In contrast to Trump, Biden appeared to have effectively prepared for the debate. It showed, in good ways and bad. He responded coherently to many questions, abandoning the practice of changing his thoughts mid-sentence. But he also, at times, appeared scripted. One imagines a concise set of talking points being hammered into him during practice sessions.

Biden was at his best when he tuned out President Trump and addressed cameras directly. When he talked to families about how the pandemic impacted them, including a reference to the empty chairs of the 204,000 plus people who have died, it worked.

For many viewers Tuesday night, one crucial element of the debate was whether Biden appeared to be his full 77 years of age. Trump had teed up this issue by suggesting that Biden would need drugs to perform well. Biden triumphed here. While not necessarily performing like a 2019 Hopkins graduate, he was nothing like the often gaffe-prone candidate who participated in the Democratic party debates earlier this year. Score one for Biden.

Will everyone agree with that?  His night will not go down in history as remarkable, but it served Biden’s purpose. The “he’s senile” issue that Trump has thus far unsuccessfully attempted to raise was not revived.

How about the issues?

There was little in the discussion of issues that broke new ground for anyone reading newspapers regularly. Trump defended his handling of the pandemic and the resulting economic turmoil. Biden attacked Trump’s performance.  

 Trump described himself as a champion of law and order; Biden described himself as a champion of racial justice and healing. He effectively fended off attacks that he supported “defunding” police. Trump refused to denounce white supremacists and even encouraged them to “stand back and stand by.”

Biden cried foul on Trump submitting Amy Coney Barrett as a Supreme Court nominee. Trump described her has a great choice and defended his right and those of the Republican-controlled Senate to do so.  Biden emphasized major policy shifts likely under a conservative majority Supreme Court and suggested the nominee was outside the mainstream.

Nothing was said on Trump’s Supreme Court nominee worth commenting on.

The discussion of the integrity of the election was a low point of the debate. The arguments of both sides are well known. Democrats want everyone to vote. Trump repeated his fears of widespread voter fraud caused by mail-in voting. When the smoke cleared about the integrity of the election, nobody was wiser.  Most likely a few TVs were turned off during this segment.

Okay, who won?

Although certain Spy readers have accused this writer of looking forward to change at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, I am not calling a winner.  When I discussed the debate with a friend who watched it independently, he suggested America had lost. He said the debate was “dark” and didn’t want to discuss it anymore.

The next presidential debate will take place on October 15 in Miami, Florida. I look forward to it.  

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant. For more than 30 years, he advised clients on federal education and social service policy.

 

The President and Democratic nominee Joe Biden face off on September 29 for the first of three Presidential debates and everyone is worried. Not, of course, for the same reasons. My Trumper friends (yes, I have a few) claim they are confident that the senile, sleepy, gaffe-prone former VP will be crushed. My Biden friends are equally confident that the tactics that arguably worked for Trump in 2016 against other Republican candidates and Hillary Clinton won’t work this time. One friend told me, “The crows are coming home to roost; he can’t lie his way to winning the debate.”

Although I patiently listen to this stuff, I suspect both sides are not only worried about the debates, but also worried that the outcome could decide the 2020 election. I’m not so sure about the entire election, but as someone ready for a change, I’m worried about Biden despite expecting Trump to do poorly in the debates. Trump has a record of defying expectations.  After all, when Trump stalked Clinton in one of the 2016 debates, some voters, for reasons only a psychiatrist may be able to explain, claimed that it was a winning tactic. Bullies, I suppose, always will have someone cheering them on.

In preparation for the 9/29 debate, Trump already has planted the seed that Biden requires drugs to enhance his performance. He suggests that it is physiologically impossible for the candidate who did so poorly in many of the interminable Democratic candidate debates, to be the Biden we see today.  According to him, only a good sniff of cocaine could produce the clear-headed, articulate Biden.

What does it tell us that Trump already has planted seeds for trying to explain away his defeat in the first debate?  It tells us that he is worried.  He clearly wanted Sanders as his opponent so he could use the fight against communism as a theme of his campaign. The [censored] he has thrown at Biden so far, hasn’t worked, much to Trump’s chagrin.  Biden doesn’t want to defund police, encourage riots, invite China to take over America, encourage late-term abortions, or take away everyone’s guns.  

Mind you, Trump will continue similar “appeals” in coming weeks against Biden, so this campaign isn’t over yet.  But the debates provide a unique opportunity for both candidates to quash allegations made against them.  Biden has answers, I hope, for everything Trump throws at him.  I am confident that his aides are rehearsing answers as I write this. Is it OK if I still worry about how it will work?

And Biden will attack Trump for failing to respond adequately to COVID-19. He also will suggest that Trump has stoked the fires of racism, indirectly promoting some violence that continues in cities.  He also will suggest that Trump is a world-class liar. Trump will have answers ready for each of these and many other allegations, but his principal strategy will be to discredit Biden. What better way of fending off nasty facts—more than 200,000 dead from COVID-19, for example—than by calling your opponent a senile old man or suggesting that he is even more corrupt than Hillary Clinton, the most notorious criminal of the 21st century?

While I wouldn’t want to be Trump on September 29 (or any other day), I remain worried that Biden could get angry and flustered if Trump attacks him for the Ukrainian crime wave or anything else. What if attacks on his family, especially his son Hunter, are his Achilles’ heel?

Going into the debate, I think Trump has a heavier lift. Unlike Biden, he has a record for the past four years to defend. If I supported Trump, I would be worried about how you claim to have done a great job on COVID-19 with more than 200,000 already dead and epidemiologists suggesting a widely-available vaccine might not be available until late fall 2021.  How do you lie your way out of that?

Additional Trump worries include his mispronouncing words, having trouble walking across the stage, and encountering the wrong moderator. Chris Wallace of Fox News will moderate the first debate and, as a few recent interviews have demonstrated, he is no pushover. Wallace has a lot to gain by standing up to Trump if Trump openly lies in the debate or otherwise misbehaves. Trump himself should be worried.

I will be tuned in on the 29th.  Let me stick my neck out and suggest that both sides will claim victory.  I plan to make a call on that debate, as well as the two others (October 15 and 22), in future columns.  Stay tuned.  

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant. For more than 30 years, he advised clients on federal education and social service policy.

 

Last week saw several new revelations about President Trump. He allegedly called fallen US  soldiers buried in a cemetery in France “losers.”  He did not want wounded veterans to march in a military parade. He aggressively discouraged his own son from joining the Army. He could not understand why one General, whom he perceived as smart, joined the military.  

Are these vicious lies, spawned by never-Trumpers or, worse, Haters?  This week’s examples all come from one article by Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic, a publication not known for sloppy journalism despite its consistent criticism of the Trump presidency. Trump’s reaction?  “What animal would say such a thing?”

The President, and many of his supporters, including several regular Spy readers, seem to condemn any negative reporting of Trump as “fake news” and suggests that those reporting or repeating the stories have been out to get Trump “since before he was president.”

Is Trump right?  Is he the victim of people who are still angry that Hillary lost (at least in the Electoral College), who are socialists, or those who simply hate America?  

An objective look at even a handful of the allegations made about Trump suggests that almost all the most damning allegations are not “fake.”  They are, with some exceptions, relevant to our responsibility as citizens to monitor the President’s execution of his office, his health, and his integrity.  

Last week Stephanie Winston Wolkoff released  Melania and Me.  She substantiates allegations of grifting by Trump and his family in holding the 2017 Inauguration.  Ms. Wolkoff has stated that she has proof of the allegations she makes. Should this book be dismissed as “lies” because it also discusses the First Lady’s character and attitudes towards some of the President’s older children?  Prosecutors don’t seem to think so.   

Remember “Mad Dog” Mattis?  The former Secretary of Defense wrote:

“Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership.”

In response, Trump called Mattis “the world’s most overrated General” and suggested his “primary strength” was “personal public relations.”  

Additional reports include those of former National Security Advisor John Bolton in The Room Where it Happened.  Bolton writes that “obstruction of justice was a way of life” and that Trump actively solicited Chinese intervention in the upcoming Presidential election. Trump responded by claiming he fired Bolton and that, “Everyone in the White House hated him.”  He also called Bolton a “washed-up guy.” Bolton, best known as a national security hardliner and President Bush’s Ambassador to the United Nations, always has been considered a conservative Republican.  

This list could go on.  Consider Mary Trump’s book, “Too Much and Never Enough:  How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man.” She reports that Trump paid someone to take the SATs for him. She also describes him as a sociopath.

Consider reports that Trump declines to read national security briefings. Should we care? Are those who report this news disloyal? Or is this information relevant to citizens evaluating how Trump is performing as President.

Finally, remember that a picture is worth a thousand words and that (at least before Photoshop) pictures don’t lie.  Remember the picture of Trump in front of St. John’s holding a bible, upside down, in a photo opportunity made possible by the forcible removal of peaceful protesters?  Were the news outlets that published or broadcast that image “haters?”  Is what the President did irrelevant to whether he should be re-elected?

In the case of almost every negative story, picture, or report about the President, he is not a victim. Especially not a victim like the New York Times reporter with a disability that he chose to publicly ridicule. Not a victim like the children separated from their parents at the borders.  Not a victim like Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant. For more than 30 years, he advised clients on federal education and social service policy.

 

The sun looks like it’s setting on the Orange Menace. The Republican National Convention, a.k.a. the Trump Show, did not do much for his re-election odds. The death toll from COVID-19, a by-product of Trump’s failed leadership, has topped 185,000. His ham-fisted measures to force schools to re-open are backfiring, exacerbating an already bad situation. And civil unrest shows no sign of ending.

What to do if you are Donald Trump, a man who believes that you can lie, intimidate, cheat, or steal your way out of bad situations? Do you meet with competent advisors, do a candid assessment of the problems faced by America (as opposed to himself) and map a way out of the woods? 

Trump’s problem is that the same skills he developed as a sleazy New York real estate developer are the ones he relies on now. There is a serious deficit of competent advisors. Is Betsy DeVos the education expert to guide us on school re-openings? The problem is Trump has precious few competent advisors. His most trusted aides are sycophants. They reinforce Trump’s worst instincts, which, of course, are to ignore laws he doesn’t like, to influence people through fear, and, of course, to lie. These things worked in New York and New Jersey (sort of, because you must remember the bankruptcies), but they are not working now.

The curtain is coming down on Trump and he appears to know it.  Thus, sportsman that he is, Trump has turned to a football favorite—the Hail Mary.

Trump’s Hail Marys almost always are based on the destruction, or attempted destruction, of his opponents. Thus, “Crooked Hillary” was created. Unfortunately for America, it worked in 2016.  Enough people became convinced Hillary was indeed crooked that they overlooked her accuser’s own personal record.  (Of course, insights into Trump’s business ethics through a review of his tax returns were not possible because he refused to release them.)

This time, one of Trump’s early Hail Marys was to do to Joe Biden what he did to Hillary. Trump attempted to paint Biden as corrupt in connection with his troubled son Hunter’s service on the board of directors of the Ukrainian firm Burisma. The implication was that Biden already had done what Trump was being accused of in his sorry episode with Ukraine where he attempted to leverage American military assistance to launch an investigation into Biden’s “corruption.” Talk about a Hail Mary!  Discredit Biden and distract attention from your own corruption at the same time. Unfortunately for Trump, he got caught. He got impeached for it.  Whatever Biden and his son may have done in Ukraine no longer seems to be an issue among any voters other than the Trump cheering section.

Another Hail Mary has been the effort to paint Biden as a socialist. We all hate communism, don’t we?  This Hail Mary involves suggesting that Biden will adopt a New Green Deal, raise everyone’s taxes, encourage abortions up to the date of delivery, and end capitalism. Unfortunately for Trump, Biden has a long track record of being a moderate. That’s why he almost lost the nomination. The “socialism” Hail Mary is proving to be a dud.  

Let’s also label the fiasco with the Post Office a Hail Mary. First, he hires Louis DeJoy, a campaign contributor with no experience in running a postal service and with plenty of conflicts of interest. DeJoy is charged with the task of undermining the reliability of the Post Office. Trump now is attempting  to suppress turnout by suggesting that mail-in voting is fraught with fraud. The message:  Voting by mail is fraught with fraud and your vote might not get counted anyway—so why vote?  This Hail Mary backfired. You can call it a fumble. His Postmaster General is now being investigated for attempting to destroy the Post Office. No credible evidence of fraud in the past has been found. Trump has slunk away from the issue. 

Most recently, we have been witnessing Trump’s attempt to “fast-track” a coronavirus vaccine. If that vaccine can be developed and announced before election day, maybe voters will forget the series of blunders that could form the basis of a chronicle of Trump’s handling of the virus that could be titled, “While Donald Watched TV.”  Trump thinks he could yet emerge as a hero of the pandemic. Sounds like an 80-yard Hail Mary to me. Expect an incomplete pass.

Finally, we have the emergence of Trump as the law-and-order President. This Hail Mary consists of blaming the riots on Democrat governors and mayors, suggesting that Biden and others coddle rioters and may welcome violence, and that only he can stop efforts to defund police. White women and the suburbs are in danger. Unfortunately for Trump, his attempt to capitalize on violence may not be moving the polls in his direction as much as he hoped. What to do?  Encourage your supporters to engage in counter-protests. Praise them, even when they engage in violence. And visit troubled cities even when those cities’ mayors plead with you to stay home. Kenosha. Find excuses for police murder and misconduct. Did you see Trump equate the murder of Jacob Blake with a golfer choking and missing a three-foot putt?  You can’t make this stuff up.

Expect more Hail Marys in the next 62 days before the election. It will get worse—it always does with a candidate who has no character or conscience.  Hopefully, the quality of Trump’s efforts to date is an indicator of what he will come up with next. If that happens, Trump will leave the national political arena for good in January.  But don’t forget that it’s dangerous to underestimate Trump. We must make every effort to get out the vote and to encourage people to vote early. Our lives depend on it.  

 J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant. For more than 30 years, he advised clients on federal education and social service policy.

 

President Trump is a man with a curious collection of friends and a long, growing list of enemies.  As election day draws near, any of us not yet clear on the worth of our President would do well to review who Trump considers his friends and who is urging his defeat. As Aesop said, “A man is known by the company he keeps.”  A modernized version of this wisdom might add, “and by the enemies that reject him.”

Trump’s past and current friendships include a menagerie of recent arrestees, convicted criminals, porn stars, and crackpots. Among the President’s past or present associates are Steve “Build the Wall” Bannon, Paul “Ostrich Jacket” Manafort, Roger Stone, Michael “Russiaman” Flynn, and the turncoat rat, Michael Cohen, author of the upcoming best-seller, Disloyal. 

Among the President’s current friends, QAnon is of the greatest concern. President Trump has described this group as “people who love our country.“ The FBI has described it as a terrorist organization. QAnon believes that liberal elites, composed of Satanist pedophile cannibals threaten to take over America. Donald Trump, they believe, is leading an effort to eradicate them.  

Other friends of Trump include the white nationalists behind the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville in August 2017. Trump said the group includes some “very fine people.” Trump has followed up on his praise of these racists by making the preservation of confederate monuments a major theme of his re-election bid.  

Remember  former KKK leader David Duke?  He makes this list, as does the fascinating Ghislaine Maxwell as well as her friend and benefactor, the late Jeffrey Epstein.  Also memorable, but more difficult to pronounce (even than “Ghislaine”) is Rod Blagojevich, the former Illinois governor who tried to sell Barack Obama’s Senate seat after Obama resigned to assume the Presidency. Trump pardoned him.

Other friends include Vladimir Putin, Recep Erdogan, and Philippine dictator, Rodrigo Duterte, nicknamed “the Punisher.” In 2019, Trump described Erdogan as a “hell of a leader.” His actions in Syria have been described as “a gift to Russia, Iran and ISIS.”  What is it that this trio has in common that made them attractive to Trump?

And how bad are these despots?  Putin was accused just last week of poisoning a political rival. One quote from Duterte stands out, “Hitler massacred three million Jews. Now, there are three million drug addicts. I’d be happy to slaughter them.”  Trump has claimed to have “a great relationship” with Duterte. 

Let’s not forget Kim Un Jong of North Korea and, of course, the disgraced lawyer, Roy Cohn, who gained national prominence assisting Senator Joseph McCarthy identify Communists in the 1950s.  Despite Cohn’s efforts, the Democrats have now nominated one for President, at least according to Trump.

Is it fair to judge Trump through a list of his friends?  Perhaps not, but, if you complement this list with a list of enemies, including Republicans who have condemned him or left the GOP all together, it is hard to deny that you are dealing with a troubled man.

Do the names Bush, Romney, Bolton, McCain (Cindy), and Powell ring a bell?  All have said they are not voting for Trump. And 27 former Republican Members of Congress have publicly announced they are voting for Biden. It is unfair to describe some on the list as former friends of Trump, but their actions send a clear message. They view Trump as an existential threat to the GOP. 

Perhaps even more damning, more than 70 former national security officials from various Republican administrations endorsed Vice President Biden on the basis that Trump is “dangerously unfit to serve another term.  A procession of prominent Republicans headed by former Republican governor John Kasich of Ohio also spoke at this year’s Democratic convention.

Identifying reasons to oppose Trump’s re-election is easy. Thinking of reasons to support him is a heavy lift. Trump can’t win on his response to the pandemic and his message that Democrats and their anarchist buddies are burning down America’s cities. His thinly veiled appeal to white nationalists will work among some voters, but their votes will be more than offset by others who consider Trump’s continued residence in the White House as an invitation to disaster.

Don’t forget to register to vote and to vote early.

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant. For more than 30 years, he advised clients on federal education and social service policy.

When I learned that Talbot Council member Frank Divilio premised his vote against removal of the Talbot Boys statue from the grounds of the courthouse on the need for more time to study the issue, I was, frankly, gobsmacked. The explanation is ridiculous. His vote, notwithstanding his support for the addition of another statue that would depict both Union and Confederate soldiers, was a vote to keep a symbol of White Supremacy, offensive to many Talbot County residents, right where it is.  Apparently, the many arguments for immediate removal did not persuade him and the other two Council members who joined him. 

At first, I found the delay in removing the statue sad. Justice delayed is justice denied. As long as the Talbot Boys stand vigil in front of the courthouse, how can a black person expect justice inside?  Are the county’s judges comfortable with what many citizens, and, more importantly, people in the criminal justice system—arrestees—see as a racist symbol remaining?  Where are their voices?

Upon reflection, I am coming to see the light. The statue prompts us to learn history. It teaches us that boys from the county fought for the Confederacy and the right to own slaves.  Not the type of history to celebrate, but maybe worthwhile to know even if you don’t need a statue in front of a courthouse to teach it.   

Of course, there’s more. The statue represents something beyond just the Civil War. Something more recent. If you dig a little deeper and look into how the statue made its way onto the courthouse grounds, you learn that in 1916 in our county, as well as hundreds of other places, white people wanted to commemorate “The Lost Cause” and celebrate the men who fought for it.  What was the benefit in this?  Was it to remind African Americans that while the war was over, sympathy for what it stood for was not?  

Do you need evidence for the motivation behind the erection of the statue?  Read the writings of the racist lawyer, Joseph B. Seth, a leader in  the effort to erect the statue. He was unambiguous in revealing his motivation.  Seth viewed slavery as a fine institution. In his book, written with his wife, Mary W. Seth, Recollections of a Long Life on the Eastern Shore, Seth writes:

The bulk of the slaves were devoted to their masters and their families, taking great interest in everything concerning them.  They considered themselves part of the family and their devotion was so great that they would run any risk to protect them.  They considered themselves a part of the family and their devotion was so great that they would run any risk to protect them.  The families were equally devoted to the slaves and with the whole Southland had the tenderest affection for the faithful old Mammies and Uncles. 

Please note that Council member Peter Lesher, who voted to remove the statue, is aware of Mr. Seth’s contribution to our history. Are the three members of the Council who want the statute to remain? If so, how can they sleep at night? 

The history lessons offered by the Talbot Boys do not end in the 20th century. Unfortunately, it is offering new ones, one’s that may haunt future generations of Talbot County residents.  Here are two:

As late as 2020, the Council, through its inaction, maintained a symbol of White Supremacy in front of the County Courthouse despite the pleas of citizens to remove it. The message inherent in the Council’s vote is “Black Lives Do Not Matter.”

In 2020, an elected Council member was too cowardly to just admit he wanted to keep the statue and instead claimed more time was needed to study the issue.  If he is successful in keeping the statue in place, it teaches the unwholesome lesson that delay can often lead to success.  Deferring a vote clearly reflects the hope that “things will calm down” in a few months and that the fight over removing the statue will be over.  

Hopefully, outcries and protests over this symbol of racism will continue and force the Council to reconsider their shameful vote.  If that doesn’t happen, maybe the Council should allow various groups to erect a few new statues on the Courthouse lawn that might have educational value like the Talbot Boys. How about a statue of Richard Nixon?  He signed the bill creating the Environmental Protection Agency, which has done a lot to clean up the bay. How about a statue of Trump (to be erected after he leaves office)?  This one could teach children the price of incompetence in responding to a pandemic. If large enough, the pedestal for the statue could include the names of Talbot County residents who died from the pandemic. Given that the worst may be ahead of us, it may have to be a big pedestal. The lesson from the Trump statue would be:  Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.

Thank you, Talbot Boys. You got me thinking. Your final lesson to me is how important my vote is. I do not need more time to decide who needs to be voted off the Council.

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant. For more than 30 years, he advised clients on federal education and social service policy.

 

President Trump’s pathetic COVID-19 press briefings are NOT the highlight of my summer. They have, however, prompted me to turn off my television when they appear. Whenever you turn off a TV, it’s usually a good thing. Thus, the President makes it onto my list of highlights, one of which is NOT watching a lot of TV. Thank you, Mr. President.

Enough about the Orange Menace. Let’s not pursue such lowlights any further. Many good things are going on. Despite all the misery and challenges of this summer, I have a lot for which to be grateful. To identify them, I periodically reflect on things that have made me happy or a better person. I make a list of them. Where appropriate, I make a point of thanking those who made this possible.

On top of my list for the summer of 2020 are our hummingbirds. In May, we planted salvia, a plant that naturally produces the nectar on which hummingbirds thrive. Now that the salvia is in full bloom, we get air shows of these incredible birds every afternoon and evening. The agility of these tiny birds is incredible, as is their speed. I could, and have, watched them for hours. The highlight of this highlight is when a pair of hummingbirds work the flowers together. It looks like some sort of mating ritual, but I am told it is the wrong time of year. Whatever is going on, I hope it continues. There can’t be too many hummingbirds.

Sunflowers are also near the top of my list. I regularly drive by the fields of Eason’s farm, where rows upon rows of sunflowers can be found. I am deeply grateful for the beauty of these flowers.

I’ve also thoroughly enjoying harvesting the fresh fruits and vegetables from our garden—cucumbers, tomatoes, blackberries, peppers, eggplant and zucchini have been a wonderful addition to our meals this summer, especially since we’ve been doing a lot more home cooking during the pandemic.

Oxford’s Strand also makes my list. I regularly load Lucca, the Eastern Shore’s best goldendoodle, into my car and drive there for walks. Lucca practices social distancing and loves seeing the occasional boat go by. She revels in the cool breezes and observes the families enjoying the beach. There are many, many good things about Oxford, but The Strand is my favorite. I am grateful for how the town manages it.

Curiously, a debate also makes my list of highlights. It is a debate I have been following on the pages of the Talbot Spy about the impact of Paul Prager and Bluepoint Hospitality on the town of Easton. It has been interesting, and educational, to me to read the comments of those who oppose or fear the changes he is making in Easton.

The concerns articulated, frankly, were things I had not considered. Things like the businesses being a “Disneyland” fantasy world intended for an audience of people who do not already live here. I also have appreciated those who welcome the new businesses, including the “perfectionism” that Bluepoint has pursued with each of them.

Where do I come out on this debate? I don’t know right now. So far, I think all Bluepoint establishments are top drawer and a welcome addition to the town of Easton. But I’m still listening and, hopefully, learning. In the meantime, I welcome the debate, at least those parts of it not involving name-calling, threats, or worse. Citizens engaged in an honest debate over Easton’s future is a good thing.

Let me also add to the list the remarkable vision of Chesapeake Music. The virtual chamber music concerts were a highlight of my June. I am grateful to the organizers and musicians. I am particularly fond of classical music. Thank you, Chesapeake Music!

Another highlight of the summer, and the last one I will mention here, is the way much of the Eastern Shore has responded to the pandemic. Adherence to safe practices—mask-wearing, social distancing, handwashing, etc.—has been remarkable. Our area puts other parts of the State (and country) to shame. I am grateful to all those who are doing their part to keep us safe. You have inspired me to step up my own efforts to join you.

J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant. For more than 30 years, he advised clients on federal education and social service policy.