All posts by Dr. ESP

Championship at the Potomac River

Politics, Sports

This weekend marks the end of the 2022-23 PGA Tour season with the third and final event in the FedEx Cup playoffs, the Tour Championship at East Lake in Atlanta.  The seeding of the remaining 30 players is based on their performance throughout the year and the first two playoff tournaments in Memphis and Chicago.  Since 2021 the reward for such performance has been what can only be called a reverse handicap.  The #1 seed (Scottie Scheffler) tees off this afternoon at 10 under par.  This advantage is reduced for the other participants based on their seeding with those in the 26-30 positions opening their round at even par.  In other words, for a fan favorite like Jordan Spieth (#29 seed) to take down Scheffler, he needs to outscore Scheffler by 11 strokes, a tall order to say the least.

In one more Carl Jung moment of synchronicity, I realized it was no coincidence that the finale of the current PGA season is ending the weekend after the first debate among eight of the contenders for the Republican nomination for primary.  Consider the parallels.  First, on the same day the PGA Tour elite tee off in round one, Donald Trump has an 8:00 pm tee off time at the Fulton County jail to begin a judicial contest which may determine whether he spends four years in the White House or more in prison. 

Second, for both the debate and the Tour Championship, the elephant(s) in the room are those who are not on the stage.  Trump and Brooks Koepka.  For non-golf aficionados, Koepka was among those who abandoned the PGA Tour for the Saudi funded LIV Tour.  Yet he remains #13 in the Official World Golf Rankings and solidified that status by winning the PGA Championship  (the second of four major championships) in May.  [Note: The PGA and PGA Tour are two separate entities which is why he was able to play in the PGA Championship.]  The only difference between Trump and Koepka is the fact Trump, having “qualified” for the RNC debate, chose to sit it out, while Koepka was banned from playing in the FedEx Cup playoffs even though he was “high enough in the polls” to qualify.

Third, and most important, the race for the presidential nomination, as it stands today according to the FiveThirtyEight.com average of polls, is comparable to the seeding system for the FedEx Cup.  The bottom tier based on their inability to meet the RNC criteria to participate in the first debate–Doug Burgum, Will Hurd, Perry Johnson, Francis Suarez and Larry Elder–begin their quest at even par.  Mike Pence, Tim Scott, Nikki Haley and Chris Christie make up the next tier and start the election cycle at three or four under par.  Vivek Ramaswamy is seeded third at 10 under par.  Ron DeSantis is second at 15 under.  The prohibitive favorite Trump tees off at 52 under par.  Just imagine if Scottie Scheffler had a 37 stroke advantage over second place Victor Hovland and even more over the rest of the field.

But these two events differ in one very important aspect.  The presidential contest is actually two contests, one for the nomination and one for the White House.  The PGA Tour equivalent would require players seeded #2 through #30 holding a tournament to decide who takes on #1 seed Scheffler or “incumbent” FedEx champ Rory one-on-one for the FedEx Cup.  Which explains why non-Trump participants in the race to be crowned the ultimate winner next November are boxed into a corner.

To win the nomination championship they need to convince a significant portion of the 35 percent of GOP primary voters who are always-Trump to see one of them as the heir to MAGA-dom.  That explains why six of the eight participants in last night’s debate raised their hands in the affirmative when asked, “If Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination, would you still support him if he is convicted of a crime?”  That same response, however, makes them less acceptable in the general election to independents and anti-Trump Republicans who view anyone who says Trump is innocent as living on Earth2 and a continuing threat to democracy.

For a political party that prides itself on playing the long game as evidenced by their engagement in state and local elections and control of the Supreme Court, it is shocking no one took the advice of former and disillusioned Republicans who suggested viable presidential aspirants wait until 2028.  Their realistic chance of future success depends on letting Trump take the wind out of his own sails before leaving port to navigate the national political seas.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

A Candidate Without Convictions

Politics

If the Supreme Court, like it did when it declared corporations are people, also claimed words are human beings, “UNPRECEDENTED” would be the leading candidate for Time Magazine’s “Person of the Year 2023.”  Primary among the array of “never before” possibilities is the likelihood the 2024 Republican presidential nominee will be a convicted felon.  Which has led the handful of remaining sane GOP governors and members of Congress to suggest the party needs a candidate who is not out on bail following 91 federal and state felony counts so far.

One thing can truthfully be said about the Trump alternatives who believe they can convince Republican voters it is time to put Donald Trump in the party’s rear view mirror.  None will enter the 2024 primary season with convictions.  However, this morning I will focus on one of the contenders who made my point this weekend, former vice-president Mike Pence who recently patted himself on the back for making the tough choice between his boss and the U.S. Constitution.

At a June 7 Iowa campaign rally Pence finally broke his silence on the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

The American people deserve to know that on that day, president Trump also demanded that I choose between him and the Constitution. Now, voters will be faced with the same choice: I chose the Constitution and I always will.

There is only one problem.  If you are going to abide by the Constitution, you might take time to read it.  Not just the original seven articles, but each and every one of the amendments. Especially Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment which reads:

Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

This particular provision of the Constitution has received quite a bit of attention following an article in the Pennsylvania Law Review by law professors William Baude (University of Chicago) and Michael Stokes Paulsen (St. Thomas University).  They write, even without a conviction, the former president has violated Section 3.  “[Trump’s] overall course of conduct disqualifies him.”

As much as I would like to agree with these and other scholars, I cannot.  Section 3 uses the specific phrase “shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion.”  My question? Who makes that determination?  Not two law professors  Not House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who on January 13, 2021, infamously said, “The president bears responsibility for Wednesday’s attack on the Congress by mob rioters.”  Nor FBI director Chris Wray who MAGA world considers corrupt and should be fired. Nor MSNBC, CNN or even Fox News to whom we look to call elections but whose decision desks lack the necessary algorithms for this purpose.

I believe there are only two venues in which there would be an actionable conclusion whether Trump’s behavior meets that threshold.  The first, of course, would have been impeachment and conviction by Congress.  The other is a court of law.  A conviction in either Jack Smith’s January 6 case or Fani Willis’ Georgia RICO case would authoritatively tag Trump’s actions as meeting the insurrection/rebellion test.

Which brings me back to Mike Pence, who proved over the weekend he is one candidate with no conviction. Two and a half months after steadfastly stating he would always rely on the Constitution for guidance, he told ABC’s Jon Karl he did not believe a conviction would disqualify Trump from seeking the presidency.  “I think that needs to be left to the American people.”

For Pence, always, like art, is in the mind of the beholder.  In this instance, 74 days to be exact.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

Georgia on My Mind

Politics
The National Commission [investigating the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack] finds the attack on the United States on September 11, 2001. was, above all, a failure of imagination. Washington Post/July 22, 2004

What the Commission meant was the U.S. national security apparatus never imagined the three key elements leading up to the attacks on the Twin Towers and Pentagon. One, the homeland would be the target of such a coordinated terrorist playbook. Two, hijackers could be suicidal. Three, passenger airplanes could be turned into guided missiles. In short, no one anticipated things that never happened before.

The same thing occurred in 1963. At the time of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, it was a federal crime to threaten a U.S. president through the mail but not to actually kill one. This anomaly in the federal statutes was responsible for the chaos at Parkland Hospital when Secret Service agents assumed custody of the president’s body. Agents forcibly removed the coffin, after pushing aside the Dallas County medical examiner, Dr. Earl Rose, who claimed, regardless of the victim, he was required to perform the official autopsy.

Which brings us to late last night when a Fulton County, Georgia grand jury voted to indict Donald Trump and 18 other co-conspirators on 41 violations of the Georgia state law involving 161 separate acts. While most legal pundits focused on the breadth of the indictment, former U.S. attorney and member of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team Andrew Weissmann made the following observation.

The Georgia indictment differed from special counsel Jack Smith’s similar filing related to crimes surrounding Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. He suggested Smith had to be creative when matching Trump’s actions with specific federal statutes. Why? Because the founding fathers and members of Congress for 233 years never anticipated a president of the United States would solicit the aid of a public official to commit a crime. Not the case in the State of Georgia. Weissman pointed to charge #5 in the indictment. “SOLICITATION OF VIOLATION OF OATH BY PUBLIC OFFICER/O.C.G.A §§ 16-4-7 & 16-10-1.”

A person commits the offense of criminal solicitation when, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony, he solicits, requests, commands, importunes, or otherwise attempts to cause the other person to engage in such conduct.
GA Code § 16-4-7 (2020)

In what can only be described as “20/20 foresight,” the addition to the Georgia criminal code could not better characterize Trump’s “perfect phone call” to secretary of state Brad Raffensperger or Rudy Giuliani’s presentation to a Georgia Senate subcommittee. In both cases, the defendants request public officials to violate their oath of office, with the intent those individuals “engage in conduct constituting a felony.” The same applies to Trump staffers who solicited the help of Coffee County elections official Misty Hampton who subsequently authored a “letter of invitation” to Trump attorneys authorizing examination of the county’s voting systems.

Recently, individuals who advocate televising Trump’s federal trial related to the January 6th indictment have invoked Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis’ proposition, “Sunlight is the best of disinfectants.” The same can now be said of moonlight, though the lesson will probably be lost on the current chairs of the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees. Jim Jordan and James Comer claim their hearings into weaponization of the deep state are justified due to their interest in legislative solutions. They should start by taking a page out of the Georgia criminal code, making “solicitation of violation of oath by public officer” a federal crime with stiff minimum penalties.

A lesson I learned early in my years as a state government official or with the National Governors Association is “celebrate a victory, even when someone does the right thing for the wrong reason.” If they feel they need to justify amending the U.S. code to mirror the Georgia statute, Jordan and Comer could claim it was written in response to actions by civil servants in the Biden Justice Department. However, residents of Earth One (as opposed to the MAGA-verse) will know at whom the new provision is directed.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

The Dog Days of Reaganomics

Economics, Sports

“The Dog Days of Summer” is an expression that one hears often in baseball. The phrase comes from the very challenging days of playing baseball in the heat of the summer. Not only are players contending with the heat, but they are also contending with the length of the baseball season. The excitement of the beginning of the season has certainly waned, and the end of the season with championships on the line is too far away to make a difference. Added to this is the sad reality that some teams recognize that their championship hopes have all but been shattered. Championships are won or lost in these “dog days of summer.”

~Dr. Steve Horn/LOUSIANABAPTISTS.ORG

Sometimes you find the best definitions for a word or phrase in the most unlikely places.  In this case, Dr. Horn used baseball as a metaphor for life.  For Christians, he compares it to the time between the excitement of rebirth and the ultimate reward of eternal life in heaven.  I may not share his belief in salvation, but from his perspective, the metaphor is valid. 

When friends and family tell me they no longer pay attention to the news, what I believe they are saying is, “These are the dog days of political discourse.”  I understand completely.   The excitement of Joe Biden’s victory in 2020 has waned.  And the 2024 election is still too far in the distance.

I too find the heat and humidity of this warmest of all summers draining.  I prefer the comfort of air conditioning, and rather than watching the evening talk shows, I now make a nightly habit of following the Baltimore Orioles’ hold on the top spot in the American League East. (NOTE: I became an Orioles’ fan during my time as a graduate student at John Hopkins University (1971-73), when Memorial Stadium was a 10-minute walk from my apartment and bleacher seats were 85 cents.)

This morning, as I glanced at the AL East standings, I observed what can only be called “a metaphor within a metaphor.”  Despite a blown save last night, Baltimore is still in first place, two games ahead of the Tampa Bay Rays.  Meanwhile the New York Yankees continue to go back and forth with the Boston Red Sox for last place in the division, 11.5 games back of the Orioles.

It is no stretch to think of the Yankees as the latest incarnation of Reaganomics which depended on two theories of growth:  supply side economics, and by increasing the wealth of the rich, benefits would “trickle down” to the poorest workers. Owner Hal Steinbrenner and general manager Brian Cashman have spared no expense ($187 million this year) when it comes to supplying the team with talent. In one more example of failed “trickle down” impact, more than half of that investment ($108 million) goes toward the salaries of just three of the team’s 26 active players: Aaron Judge, Gerrit Cole, Giancarlo Stanton.  And yet, the Yankees remain a half-game out of the AL East cellar.

In contrast, the Orioles’ active roster has a combined payroll of $65 million.  Instead of buying talent, the Orioles have developed a cadre of exciting young players through what baseball writers credit as the best farm system in baseball.  And the team’s success is not likely to end any time soon.  Eight of the top 100 2023 draft choices are future Orioles, waiting in the wings, playing in the minor leagues for the Triple-A Norfolk Tides and Double-A Bowie Baysox.

Think of infrastructure, sustainable energy, workforce heath care and investment in critical  industries  as the farm team of the American economy.  Americans are better served by investments in these building blocks which can be the foundation of sustainable growth.  Massive tax cuts to a few rich people and multinational corporations may give the economy a short-term shot in the arm, but as we saw at the end of the last three GOP administrations, the benefits are short-lived ending in economic recession, higher unemployment and/or stagnant wage growth. 

The Republican Party has given this Orioles-like approach to economic policy what they thought was a derogatory name:  Bidenomics.  Their error is evident every time the president retweets one of his detractors blaming him for the bi-partisan infrastructure legislation, CHIPS Act and the Inflation Reduction Act with the tag line, “I approve this message.”  In my July 6 post, “Shoot the Messenger,” I chastised Biden’s communications team for failing to make the connection between Biden economic policies and America’s leading global standing.  Even I could not imagine Marjorie Taylor Greene and other MAGA mouthpieces would fill the gap.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

The REAL Pronoun Issue

Culture

To clarify, I was betrayed by a fake friend and that’s what I meant with ‘they’ not anything more.

~Jamie Foxx/Instagram/August 5, 2023

The above quote is an excerpt from Foxx’s online apology for an earlier Instagram post which could be interpreted as anti-Semitic based on its historical use to blame Jews for the crucifixion. 

They killed this dude name Jesus … what do you think they’ll do to you???! #fakefriends #fakelove.

~Jamie Foxx/Instagram/August 4, 2023

As seems to be the case these days, celebrities, regardless of occupation, seem incapable of simply saying, “I know I screwed up.  I’m sorry.  And I know I need to work at being a better person.”  Instead, Foxx’s explanation only made the matter worst.  Why? Because his explanation makes sense only if one of the following must be true.

  • His #fakefriend is non-binary and refers to himself as “they.”
  • By simple deductive reasoning, if “they” refers to Foxx’s #fakefriend, Foxx accused this individual of killing Jesus.  Should we, therefore, expect a new comedy album in which Mel Brooks, in a role reversal, is the straight man to Foxx’s #fakefriend, the new 2,000-year-old man?
  • Foxx refers to every individual as “they,” as in “Joe, how are they doing this afternoon?”

Of course, Foxx is not alone, Donald Trump and his campaign played “can you top this” over the weekend.  It began with Trump’s now infamous post on “Truth Social.”

If you go after me, I’m coming after you.

~Donald Trump/Truth Social/August 4, 2023

Jack Smith correctly pointed out in a filing to Judge Tanya Chutkan it took Trump less than 24 hours to violate a federal magistrate’s warning not to intimidate or threaten anyone associated with his obstruction and conspiracy indictment.

It is a crime to try to influence a juror or to threaten or attempt to bribe a witness or any other person who may have information about your case, or to retaliate against anyone for providing information about your case to the prosecution, or to otherwise obstruct the administration of justice.

Her concern was not unfounded. This unusual admonition was likely tied to findings by the House Select Committee to Investigate the Attack on the United States Capitol’s finding Trump had contact one of their witnesses prior to that individual’s interview with committee staff.  And once Trump’s legal team realized their client might be in jeopardy of having his bond vacated, they backtracked quicker than Vin Diesel in the latest Fast and Furious movie.

The Truth post cited is the definition of political speech, and was in response to the RINO, China-loving, dishonest special interest groups and Super PACs, like the ones funded by the Koch brothers and the Club for No Growth.

~Unsigned Statement from Trump Spokesperson/August 5, 2023

If that is who Trump meant, why did he not mention them specifically?  I thought maybe he might have referred to the one security officer at his hush money arraignment in New York who did not cry when he was led into the courtroom.  The irony is Trump’s lawyers did not appreciate that the very statements and ads sponsored by the Koch Brothers and others, which so upset their client, are the “definition of political speech,” without the “fire in a crowded theater” threat to avenge a perceived wrong.

Despite the MAGA-verse “war on woke,” the real problem is not whether an infinitesimal percentage of Americans who could be described as gender fluid choose to attach a non-traditional pronoun to their persona.  The real problem is the use of pronouns such as “they” and “you” which are bandied about as a façade for moral fluidity.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP