IMHO, George Will and Ross Douthat have some pretty good things to say this morning. Will sees a crisis caused by “a president’s fragile ego, as usual.” Douthat has two alternative explanations: “malignant narcissism flavored with insane Nobel Peace Prize-related self-pity” or “how Trump always negotiates.” There’s much truth in both op-eds, and you would probably do well to read them.
You would also do well to take a look at the online front page of the Wall Street Journal—a good source for the business/financial elites’ view of the world. Part of it is reproduced above.
The elites are worried. The thing they value most—maybe the only thing they value at all—is their money. Trump’s behavior is increasingly threatening their core values.
I’m posting right now because I have my own take on the Mad King’s current thought processes. It’s set forth in the next paragraph, which is all speculation—but reasonable speculation based on known facts, analyzed logically.
Trump has been told—probably by the Solicitor General, the unfortunately named Mr. Sauer—that he is going to lose the tariff case in the Supreme Court. Bigly. Faced with that grave forthcoming affront to his fee-fees, Orange Mussolini has devised an insane Hail Mary pass: use tariffs to force Europe to give him Greenland, thereby “demonstrating” to the Supreme Court the great “value” of his favorite play-pretty, his usurped power to bully other countries with tariffs and threats of tariffs.
A federal grand jury has declined to indict Letitia James, the New York attorney general, on mortgage fraud charges for the second time in a week, according to a person familiar with the matter, in an embarrassing blow to the Trump justice department as the president has sought retribution against one of his political rivals.
The department has attempted to twice file new charges against James after a judge dismissed an indictment against her after determining the prosecutor handling the case had not been properly appointed.
A decision [not to indict] by a federal grand jury is extremely rare. Only prosecutors appear before a grand jury and defendants do not to offer evidence in their support of their case. There is a legal axiom that “any good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich”, underscoring the power prosecutors have over grand juries.
The justice department declined to comment.
“For the second time in seven days, the Department of Justice has failed in its clear attempt to fulfill President Trump’s political vendetta against Attorney General James. This unprecedented rejection makes even clearer that this case should never have seen the light of day,” said Abbe Lowell, a lawyer representing James. “This case already has been a stain on this Department’s reputation and raises troubling questions about its integrity. Any further attempt to revive these discredited charges would be a mockery of our system of justice.”
James was charged with one count of bank fraud and one count of making a false statement in connection with a home in Norfolk, Virginia in 2020. Prosecutors say James committed a crime because she indicated on mortgage paperwork that the purchase would serve as her second home, but then rented it out. James denies wrongdoing and experts have said the allegations are thin. The New York Times reported James’ niece lives in the home.
Career prosecutors did not think there was sufficient evidence to file charges against James and were subsequently fired. The initial case was personally presented by Lindsey Halligan, a Trump ally installed to be the acting US attorney for the eastern district of Virginia. In November, a federal judge dismissed the case after ruling that Halligan was improperly appointed to the post. The criminal case against James Comey, the former FBI director, was dismissed on similar grounds.
Nothing prevented the justice department from trying to refile the case and they did so last week before a federal grand jury in Norfolk. A career attorney brought in from Missouri to work on the case, Roger Keller, handled that presentation, which was rejected. The office could again seek to refile charges against James with a different grand jury.
So … What is Trump Thinking?
It’s an important question.
Some folks sanewash Trump by claiming that he’s retaliating against his enemies by forcing them to spend time and resources to establish their innocence.
I don’t think that’s a logical explanation of his thinking. Mainly because, by doing the same thing over and over, he his making himself and his team look like the idiots they are.
No, I think it’s a lot worse than just an intention to misuse his office.
Trump does not understand that there are good legal arguments and bad legal arguments. To him, all legal analysis is a buzzing, booming confusion. Like some mad King Canute, he thinks he can bend reality with his magical bullshit. He does not understand that actions have consequences, and he is unwilling to accept advice from professionally competent individual who could correct his misunderstanding and help him to predict what the consequences of his actions will be.
In this video, the two talking heads cover a whole lot of ground. I mostly agree with them. If you don’t, then God bless, and have a nice day.
Toward the end, they turn to trying to suss out what’s going on in Trump’s brain. I particularly commend that part of the video.
In case you don’t know:
Rick Wilson is a former Republican and former Republican political consultant. He currently writes political opinion pieces and is a political talking head on YouTube and elsewhere. He has written two books, including Everything Trump Touches Dies.
During the video Wilson refers, at one point, to his “misspent youth.” He may be thinking about the time he created the ad that defeated Max Cleland—a war hero paralyzed by his wounds—by implying that Cleland supported Al-Qaida.
Will Saletan has been writing on public affairs since 1996. He has also written two books. Sometimes he’s right, and sometimes he’s not. In 2003 he wrote a book arguing that conservatives had won the public debate about abortion rights. Well, if they had won it in 2003, they have lost it now; look at the headlines out of Missouri today. In 2023, he wrote The Corruption of Lindsey Graham: A case study in the rise of authoritarianism.
Facing MAGA 