Timothy Birdnow

I was underwhelmed by the selection of Joe Lieberman to run the F.B.I. and remains so in many ways. Lieberman was a lifelong Democrat and was in fact liberal, although he was a reasonable man, unlike the modern bare-knuckle brawlers currently running things. Still, he is not on our side and he also has no experience with such things. Why couldn't Trump pick a conservative? Or at least a strong law and order guy like Rudy Giuliani? I wanted John Bolton, but that was not in the cards.

In a conversation with Dana Mathewson I was wondering if Lieberman were a reasonable pick. Certainly he is a decent man, albeit quite liberal .He has been on the wrong side of the issues for most of his adult life. The extremists in the Democratic Party hate him for not going along with them over national security then refusing to step aside when they successfully primaried him. His nomination is sure to outrage the crazies in the base. The Democrats will have to find a way to reject Lieberman and not come off as witch hunters. It's going to be tough to do.

Lieberman is no longer in the Senate so it won't take a vote away from the Donkeys. Too bad (I had rather thought he was still there) but then the governor of Connecticut is a liberal Dem and would appoint an interim Senator anyway, so perhaps it would have been worse.

As far as I know, Lieberman has no experience in law enforcement. And Senators are usually poor executives, meaning he will be forced to rely heavily on his deputies - a bunch already seen to be corrupted by the Obama Deep State. We needed a lion; a Giuliani or a John Bolton. I fear Lieberman will not be able to get control of the Agency.

Politico points out the difficulties for Joe:

"But Lieberman’s relationship with Democrats is damaged. After he left office, he urged senators in his own party to reject Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, infuriating Democrats. And his relationship with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Graham — the trio were known as the "three amigos” — tilted the Senate in a more hawkish direction during the first four years of Obama’s presidency. In 2008, Lieberman endorsed McCain over Obama for president.

"He has a history of angering Democrats and Republicans, which is probably a good experience for being FBI director. But my concern is about someone with a political background. This is a moment for someone with a law enforcement background,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who holds Lieberman’s old seat. "It’s really important to restore people’s faith in the FBI.”

Perhaps most surprising, Lieberman lacks support across the Democratic ideological spectrum. Moderates like McCaskill and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who are up for reelection in 2018 and could face difficult votes if Lieberman is indeed the nominee, are not lobbying for the former centrist Democratic senator.

"Any other time, man, Joe is an excellent, excellent, choice,” Manchin said.

Still, many liberals flat out don't like Lieberman. In an interview, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) fumed about Lieberman’s efforts to undercut more generous Medicare benefits in Obamacare and his relative closeness to Trump. After a monologue on Lieberman's faults, Brown ended by telling a reporter: "That’s all on the record.”

"Joe Lieberman has no real law enforcement credentials. Look where he works now, a Trump law firm. That tells me a lot,” Brown said, referring to the law firm where Lieberman now works that represents Trump. "

End excerpt.

But now they will have to trash a moderate, genteel individual, a man whose integrity has largely been unquestioned outside of the lunatic base of the Democratic Socialist Party.

I would like to see someone like Rudy Giuliani, a former prosecutor, or John Bolton, who was assistant Attorney General during the first Bush Administration. Bolton also has great foreign policy experience, and since the big issue of the day is "Russian collusion" Bolton would be the man to put in charge at this time. He bridges the two worlds.

But the Democrats would have a conniption. Frankly, we need the Democrats to have conniptions on a daily basis; it's the only way to keep them out of trouble. As long as the Demo/media axis can choose the time and place of attack the Trump Administration will be paralyzed by endless accusations of scandal, the old "when did you quit beating your wife" paradigm. Trump needs to give these people something of his own choosing to holler about. That's how you handle this sort of attack. Trump campaigned as George Patton, who famously called fixed fortifications "a monument to the stupidity of man" Patton was always about attacking, about barreling forward. Trump needs to take a page from his book.

I recently rewatched the move The Edge with Alec Baldwin and Anthony Hopkins. After a plane crash in the Alaskan bush Hopkins and Baldwin must walk out - with a man-eating bear stalking them. Hopkins explains how you hunt and kill such a formidable beast "you use it's weight against itself". Indeed, in a wild scene Hopkins kills the monster by enraging it then planting a spear in the ground just as the behemoth lunges to kill him. The result? A whole lot of dead bear lying on top of the man.

The bear's own weight killed it. That and it's blood lust. That should be a lesson to how to defeat the forces arrayed against Trump; you must control the timing of their attacks, leave a corridor open to them that they will follow then lead them to the deadfall where they will be killed. Naturally, we will have to do this over and over, and the "killing" will be embarrassing and repudiating them to the point that everyone in America sees them for the liars and hypocrites they truly are. This nomination of Lieberman may do that. But so would a nomination of a well qualified individual such as Giuliani, one well liked by the general public.

The one thing Trump cannot do is appease them. If he tries that (and he seems to have been trying it in recent weeks) he will be destroyed. Once they have you reacting to them you are beaten. You must take the Patton approach and attack.

So was this a good move? All in all I think yes, as a political maneuver. But Trump needs a firm hand on the tiller just now, and as long as the Democrat assistant head McCabe is running things Trump will be facing more leaks and innuendo. There needs to be a strong hand. Lieberman may be a good political move, but a bad choice for the actual job.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1136 words, total size 7 kb.