All posts by Dr. ESP

The Mark Meadows Project

Media, Politics

The year was 1976.  With the exception of Jimmy Carter’s election that November, the year was relatively devoid of significant events.  Asking anyone what else happened that year is followed by silence.  Even the long-hyped bicentennial celebration is remembered more for its missteps, e.g.  the misconceived renovation of Union Station in Washington, D.C., which consisted mainly of a massive hole in the middle of the great hall, that was touted as the National Bicentennial Visitors Center. 

There was, however, one exception.  Film director Brian De Palma changed the future of horror movies for decades to come with the release of “CARRIE”. Previously, most horror pictures had what could be called “a happy ending.”  The source of terror was eliminated and moviegoers left the theater believing life might return to normal in locations ranging from Transylvania (Dracula) to a radiated desert in New Mexico (Them!).

SPOILER ALERT:  In the penultimate scene of De Palma’s classic, Carrie (Sissy Spacek) and her mother Margaret (Piper Laurie) perish when Carrie, returning from the ill-fated high school prom, confronts her mother.  The resulting encounter ends with both perishing when Carrie unleashes her telekinetic power destroying the house with both mother and daughter inside. The fictional town of Chamberlain, Maine may never be the same, but at least it is free of Carrie’s wrath and Margaret’s irrational religious fervor.  That is, until Sue Snell (Amy Irving), the sole survivor of the prom night massacre, is shown placing a bouquet of flowers next to the “For Sale” sign on the vacant lot where Carrie’s home once stood.  In what would become the first in a stream of unnatural reanimations in moviedom, a bloody arm emerges from the rubble and grabs Sue.  It is only a nightmare, but the effect has served its purpose.  From that day forward, a villain’s death is no longer final as was the case with Freddy Krueger (Robert England) in “A Nightmare on Elm Street” to the less supernatural Alex Forrest (Glenn Close) in “Fatal Attraction.”

You are probably asking, “What does this have to do with Mark Meadows?”  As I read the transcript of Meadows’ testimony at last week’s federal court hearing, I realized Fulton County district attorney Fani Willis, had she not chosen a legal career, might be equally successful as the queen of courtroom thriller flicks.  In her directorial debut, she puts Meadows on the witness stand during the evidentiary hearing by which he hopes to move his upcoming trial as a RICO co-defendant from state to federal court.  In the opening scenes, Meadows resides in the equivalent of “Everytown, USA,” a familiar and safe environment created when his legal team asks a serious of softball questions.

This false sense of security soon vanishes with the arrival of the “evil” prosecution portrayed by Willis associate Anna Cross.  [NOTE: Was casting someone with the last name Cross to cross-examine Meadows more than a coincidence?] She shows her intended victim no mercy, immediately confronting him, “Did you have any role in coordinating the fake electors plot?”  And right on cue, Meadows does what a potential victim in any horror picture would do in a similar situation.  He tries to convince his assailant she is barking up the wrong tree.  Her thirst for revenge is more appropriately directed at others.  “No, I did not,” he confidently replies.  He then relaxes, believing he, like Sue Snell, has a chance to be the sole survivor of an impending massacre by jurisprudence.

But Cross is not vanquished.  Her arm emerges, not to grab Meadows, but to show him the telltale email which suggests he likely added perjury to his list of alleged criminal behavior.  This climatic moment is followed by Meadows’ return to the safe confines of his own legal teams.  Until Meadows realizes this was not a dream.  And he will forever be plagued by a recurring nightmare which takes place in the Oval Office where Donald Trump yells at him for failing to anticipate the next demand he should fulfill in pursuit of this boss’ illegal and extra-constitutional endeavors.

Based on its success, “The Mark Meadows Project” likely will not be a one-off blockbuster.  It is the beginning of a long-running motion picture franchise in which each new entry features one or more of the Georgia co-defendants falling victim to the long arm of the DA’s office as it presents damning evidence each co-conspirator wrongly assumed, like Carrie White, was dead and buried.  

POSTSCRIPT

Georgia co-defendants would be wise to take a cue from Garry Shandling, who signed-off at the end of the last episode of “The Larry Sanders Show,” the fictional “Tonight Show” doppleganger he created to explore the behind-the-scenes world of late night television by granting permission to his viewers, “You can flip now.”  [NOTE: For those unfamiliar with this HBO series  (1992-98), before each commercial break in segments from the fictional late night talk show, “the show within the show” a la King Lear, Sanders/Shandling would urge his viewers not to go channel surfing with the catchphrase, “No flipping!”]

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

Three’s a Charm

Politics

The latest Wall Street Journal poll has Democrats on edge, the headline being Joe Biden and Donald Trump tied at 46-46 in a two-man race.  These “Nervous Nellies” should keep THREE things in mind.

  1. There are 14 “independent” polling services of which only THREE have Trump tied or ahead.
  2. Poll sampling depends on accurately gauging the percentage of THREE groups of people who are likely voters in the 2024 election: Democrats, Republicans and Independents.  Major shifts in demographics and party affiliation since 2020 make any poll that does not take these factors into account suspect.
  3. To win a majority of the electoral college, Joe Biden needs only THREE of the six 2020 battleground states: Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.  All THREE have seen a rise in Democratic voter registrations (largely from younger voters) and an increase in Democratic turnout following the Dobbs decision.

But that is not what I came here to talk about.  In the same poll, respondents were asked, “Is (candidate) too old to run for president?”  The results?  Biden, 73 percent.  Trump, 47 percent.  That is a significant difference for two individuals who are only THREE years apart when it comes to age.  Biden, 80,  Trump, 77.  

But even that is not what I came here to talk about.  Presidential candidates have been able to overcome a plethora of biases.  John Kennedy and Catholicism.  Barack Obama and race.  According to the popular vote, Hillary Clinton and gender.  Biden and age. Perhaps the only remaining bias that continues to dog most presidential aspirants is height. Texas Tech political science professor Gregg R. Murray found that in 67 percent of the presidential elections, dating back to 1789. the taller candidate triumphed over (pun intended) his shorter opponent.

Which is why no one should be surprised Florida’s governor chose not to accompany President Biden during his visit to view the damage caused by Hurricane Idalia. You guessed it.  Ron DeSantis is THREE inches shorter than Joe Biden. Biden, 6 feet tall.  DeSantis, 5 feet 9 inches.  And you can bet the farm one of DeSantis’ campaign consultants told the governor, “The last thing we need is a photo of Biden putting his hand on your shoulder as he did with Zelenskyy.  That picture screams, ‘Son, nice of you to be here.'”

Not surprisingly, a DeSantis/Biden portrait would also debunk Trump’s self-reported height of 6 feet 3 inches he submitted to the Fulton County, Georgia sheriff’s office prior to his booking on August 24.  Former President “Double Down,” of course, would claim to be two times THREE inches taller than his rival for the GOP nomination.  One need only Google photos of Trump and DeSantis, such as the one below of the two men meeting on an Orlando tarmac in March 2020, to see a half-foot difference in height is questionable.

Aristotle first suggested the “rule of THREE,” based on his belief people find it easier to remember three things.  This principle was later applied to writing, psychology and survival techniques.  Think of what we were always told about fire safety.  “Stop, drop and roll.”  You should now add politics to that list of topics for which the “rule of THREE” is relevant.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

Old Yeller

Politics

There is no dearth of opinions about what is at stake in the 2024 presidential and congressional elections.  Democracy versus autocracy.   The rule of law. A woman’s control over her own body.  Unfettered individual freedom versus community responsibility.  Let me add one more–not just the First Amendment, but the volume at which it is practiced.

Biden whispers repeatedly during 'really creepy' Q&ATwo events last week clearly demonstrated the contrast between the tone of communications represented by the front-runners in the two major parties’ respective nominations for president. At one extreme was Joe Biden’s assessment last Friday of the August jobs report at a briefing on the White House lawn.  You knew it was coming.  It was just a matter of time.  In what has now become a trademark of any Biden speech, especially when he wants to emphasize a point, the president leaned into the microphones and whispered, “You’ve heard me say many times: Wall Street didn’t build America; the middle class built America, and unions built the middle class.”  This mannerism, like his regular use of the word “malarky,” is both endearing and cringeworthy.

At the other extreme was Mark Meadows’ ill-advised decision to be his own witness at a federal court hearing at which he tried to convince the judge his role in the alleged RICO violations to overturn the Georgia presidential election should be held in a federal versus state court.  Under direct examination by his lawyers, Meadows claimed that his arranging phone calls and meetings for the president, despite the substantive content of those proceedings, was what a White House chief of staff does.  Therefore, his guilt or innocence depended on a determination whether he was “just doing my job” as a federal employee.

During the prosecution’s cross-examination, just as predicted in the August 26 post, “Legal TRAPpings,” District Attorney Fani Willis’ team provided several emails and phone conversations in which Meadows explores ways Georgia election officials might reconsider the results of the November 3, 2020 vote count.  They pointed out each instance was a violation of the Hatch Act as proof Meadows was operating outside the legal boundaries of his job description. More damaging was the possibility Meadows committed perjury when prosecution lawyer Anna Cross asked him if he had any role in coordinating the fake electors plot.  “No I did not,”  he asserted. Cross then showed Meadows an email he sent to Trump campaign advisor Jason Miller in which he wrote, “We just need to have someone coordinating the electors for the states.”

Trump Renews Attacks on Windmills, Vows to Cure Cancer at Ohio Rally – Rolling StoneOn redirect, the defendant’s lawyers then tried to address this damaging inconsistency.  But as is so often the case in MAGA-verse legal circles, Meadows’ team chose not to quit while they were ahead.  In hopes of rehabilitating their client, Meadows’ lawyer asks him about the motivation for the email.

Meadows:  It was mentioned to me that there was litigation going on, and that you had to have a provisional or conditional elector, and what I didn’t want to happen was for the campaign to prevail in certain areas and then not have this.

Defense Counsel: Why did you not want that to happen?

Meadows:  Well, because I know I would get yelled at if we had not.

Defense Counsel:  By whom?

Meadows: By the President of the United States.

If Meadows had only cared about his own interests as much as he claimed he was doing so  to protect Trump.  The Final Jeopardy answer would have been, “Mr. President, you should ask someone from the campaign to coordinate the electors for the states.”  The Final Jeopardy question? “How do you gently remind the commander-in-chief he is asking you to violate the Hatch Act and risk indictment for interfering in a state election?”

Not that it is the most important or objective criterion for selecting the nation’s chief executive, given a choice between the “Hoarse Whisperer” and “Old Yeller,”  I’ll take the former.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

A Story for the Ages

Culture, Politics

In space, no one can hear you scream!

Tagline/Alien (1979)

Not all senior citizens are alike.  How do I know this?  Personal experience.  I am looking forward to celebrating my mother’s 101st birthday this month.  And, what is becoming less and less unusual for someone her age, she is still quite active and has all her mental faculties.  Furthermore, as strange as this may sound, she is wise beyond her years.  At 93, she knew it was time to sell her condo and move to independent living.  Two years later, she no longer felt comfortable driving and sold her car.  If and when the time comes she needs to move into assisted living, I trust she will tell me long before I ever need to suggest it.

I share this with you in response to the news Wednesday afternoon that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell unexpectedly froze during a press conference for the second time in five weeks.  During coverage of the incident on MSNBC’s “Deadline White House,” host Nicole Wallace asked an insightful question, “In the current political environment (clearly referring to both GOP and Democratic concerns about Joe Biden’s advanced age), can we have an honest conversation about what Senator McConnell is experiencing without being ageist?”  In McConnell’s case there may be a correlation between age and these episodes, but are they necessarily causal?  On March 8 of this year McConnell suffered a concussion when he tripped while attending a Washington dinner party.  One has to ask, “Absent that incident, would the Minority Leader be having these episodes when he zonks out during a press conference?”

Similar questions are understandably being asked about California Senator Dianne Feinstein who is nine years older than McConnell.  And Iowa Senator Charles Grassley (89).  But what about John Fetterman?  The junior senator from Pennsylvania is 54 years-old, ten years under the current Senate average of 64.3 years of age. In Fetterman’s case there are equally compelling questions about his ability to serve that have nothing to do with age.

Editor-in-chief of The Bulwark Charlie Sykes responded to Wallace with what I thought was a more prescient observation.  Does each of these individuals’ public stature prohibit their friends and family from doing what you or I would do with loved ones who similarly struggle with mental or physical limitations?  I believe Sykes was making a much more important point.  Despite the political ramifications of either McConnell or Feinstein stepping down, this is not a choice between party and country.  This is about party versus grace and compassion.

The best example to make this case is McConnell because he is both victim and perpetrator.  Feinstein’s early retirement should be a no-brainer.  California’s Democratic governor Gavin Newsom preemptively announced he would appoint an interim replacement who would not be a candidate in 2024.  Therefore, Feinstein’s decision would not effect the current Democratic majority in the Senate or provide advantage to one of the three announced candidates seeking the Democratic nomination to replace her in January 2025.  Except Feinstein is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and is critical to the confirmation of Biden appointments to federal judgeships.  And McConnell, who infamously blocked Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court, said the Republicans will not allow Democrats to replace Feinstein on the 21 member committee consisting of 11 Democrats and 10 Republicans.  Without Feinstein’s tie-breaking vote, committee votes on judicial confirmations will be deadlocked 10-10 and would not be forwarded to the full Senate for a final vote.

So, Republicans who are shedding crocodile tears about how sad it is to watch Feinstein’s physical and mental health deteriorate in front of a national television audience can put away their hankies.  McConnell and his minions are the ones who are preventing Feinstein from making what is clearly the most rational choice.

Ironically, McConnell is in a similar position thanks to Kentucky’s legislature which is ruled by a GOP supermajority.  As reported in the New York Times:

For decades in Kentucky, the power to fill a vacancy in the U.S. Senate was reserved exclusively for the governor, regardless of whether an incumbent stepped down, died in office or was expelled from Congress.

But with Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat, in the state’s highest office, Republican lawmakers used their legislative supermajorities to change the state law in 2021.

Under the new law, a state executive committee consisting of members of the same political party as the departing incumbent senator will name three candidates the governor can choose from to fill the vacancy on a temporary basis. Then a special election would be set, and its timing would depend on when the vacancy occurs.

One more example of a Republican legislature changing the law when it no long benefits them politically.  But that is a discussion for another day.  Among the likely candidates put forward will be House Oversight Committee chair James Comer who has already signaled he will run for McConnell’s seat if he does not seek re-election next year.  Comer is a member of the Freedom Caucus, 2020 election denier and is leading the push to open a Biden impeachment inquiry though he has yet to identify the “crime or misdemeanor” the president might be guilty of.  The sane GOP members in the Senate who make up the caucus majority therefore prefer McConnell, which means the minority leader’s personal health and well-being, like Feinstein’s, are held hostage due to externalities beyond his control.

But age or cognitive ability are not the only criteria which determine fitness for office. Given a choice between an octogenarian who occasionally makes a verbal gaffe and a young, charismatic alternative who can race through a lie faster than A. J. Foyt, I will always take the former.  Which leaves only two concerns I have about one’s longevity in public life.  First, like my mother, an individual does not need someone else to tell them when to exit the stage.  Second, others do not create barriers which keep an individual from making that decision.

Let me close with one more personal observation.  I have occasionally been asked whether I ever considered a podcast.  I know my own limitations.  At the top of the list, I am no Casey Kasem.  I do not have a classic radio voice.  A close second is the fact I find, as I have aged, I often stop in mid-sentence to get my thoughts in order.  That too does not make for good audio.  Which is why I stick to the written versus spoken word.  To paraphrase the Alien tagline, “On WordPress, no one can hear you pause!“

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

What You Don’t See

Culture

There should be some limits to the kinds of weapons we can own but the gun people don’t think so. “I need an automatic weapon to defend myself.”  Really?  You can’t defend yourself with a pistol?  You have a constant onslaught of enemies rushing onto your lawn so you need 100 rounds a minute to mow them down?  If you’re that much of an ass you shouldn’t have a butter knife.

~Comedian Costaki Economopolous on the 2nd Amendment

In my “Imagination and Entrepreneurship” class at Miami University, I would start any discussion about the importance of observation with the following mental “warm-up” exercise.

Which way is this bus moving?

The solution is simple once you recognize this side of the bus is all windows. Can you imagine what the other side of the bus looks like?  There would be doors as well as windows.  Where would the front door be?  Opposite the window on the left, i.e. where the driver sits (unless you live in Great Britain or other countries where the driver sits on the right side of the vehicle).  Therefore, the bus must be moving to the left.  Consider this as the visual equivalent of reading between the lines of a manuscript to fully understand the author’s meaning.

Sadly, I was reminded of this exercise over the weekend while watching a video clip of a 21-year-old assailant with an assault rifle entering a Dollar General store in Jacksonville.  Why?  Because there are two perspectives from which we can examine this event. How many times have we been exposed to “this side of the bus” since the national assault weapons ban expired in September, 2004?  A well-armed loner, on the offense, staking out a location where he is sure to find his intended targets.

Now imagine the other side.  Instead of a front page headline or breaking news on CNN about a gunman (and they are almost exclusively male) leaving his residence with  an AR-47 to “hunt” his prey, how many times is the story about a property owner holding off a horde of invaders with his assault weapon? I found just two instances via a Google search.  These are the rare exception.  In every other case, a shot gun or handgun was sufficient deterrence.

I also Googled the question, “Why do you need an assault weapon for protection?”  Among the numerous hits was a March 2021 interview by then Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace with (drum roll) South Carolina Senator Lindsay Graham.  Graham explained:

I own an AR-15. If there’s a natural disaster in South Carolina where the cops can’t protect my neighborhood, my house will be the last one that the gang will come to because I can defend myself.

To be clear, Graham claims it is the intersection of these four factors that justify his packing an assault weapon.

  • He lives in an otherwise unprotected house.
  • Gangs are a present danger in his neighborhood.
  • South Carolina law enforcement is inadequate to handle an emergency.
  • A natural disaster creates the environment for violent crimes.

Graham resides in a 10,000 square foot McMansion in Clemson, South Carolina estimated to be worth $18 million.  Although I could not confirm whether the house is in a gated community, it is surrounded by equally impressive residences.  Most such communities have private security to guard the entrance and patrol the neighborhood.  Additionally, I am sure Graham’s home has its own electronic security system.

How about those ever present gangs (a dog whistle if I ever heard one.)  The crime rate in Clemson is less than half of that for the state of South Carolina.

Even if there is no private security, Clemson, like many college towns, has more police and emergency personnel than the average city.  Law enforcement in Graham’s jurisdiction is provided by the municipal police department and Clemson University’s security force.

All of the above would be irrelevant if there were no natural disasters to trigger Graham’s anticipated crime wave.  But this is the one thing he got right. Since 2000, South Carolina has had more than its share of hurricanes, tornadoes and coastal flooding, many of which resulted in FEMA emergency declarations.  Hurricane Kyle (2002).  Hurricane Gaston (2004).  Hurricane Hanna (2008).  Hurricane Dorian (2019) Hurricane Earl (2010).    Hurricane Zeta (2020).  Hurricane Ian (2022). A series of tornadoes in April 2020.

And yet neither the Senator or any other South Carolina resident is reported to have needed an assault weapon to deter those pesky “gangs” during any of these disasters.  Considering its projected path, Hurricane Idalia will again test Graham’s hypothesis sometime around noon on Thursday.  However, based on his behavior since January 6, 2021, we are more likely to find the Senator hunkered down at Mar-a-Lago than playing Rambo at his Clemson residence.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP