‘Le ronca el mango’ and more thoughts about Trump’s conviction

It’s hard to think about the Trump verdict without thinking of bananas, republics that is. Who knew that we would ever see such a travesty in the U.S.?  I didn’t but then again I have never suffered from a derangement syndrome.

I agree with Matt Taibbi:

Maureen Dowd in the New York Times in this morning’s op-ed about Donald Trump’s trial:

Even though the case was a stretch and not the strongest one against Trump, there was something refreshing about the jury doing what no one else around Trump has been able to do — not the inexplicably sycophantish Republican lawmakers, not the corrupt Supreme Court, not the slowpoke Merrick Garland.

Whoa. Trump has so altered American consciousness that detractors feel comfortable publicly supporting the idea of slapping 34 felony convictions on the man as punishment for alleged earlier offenses. Dowd’s slip (if it was one) wasn’t rare. Editorial pages, broadcast panels, even political mailers in the past days implored readers to focus on Trump’s overall history, not this particular case.

Yes, we are irrationally obsessed with Trump that we want him destroyed. I remember when we used to send people like that to a psychiatrist, or a witch doctor in previous generations or some cultures.

The good news is that Trump is right when he refers to them as sick and nasty people. They are making his case every time that they go so far just to get the Orange Man. We will survive and Trump will return to power.  I just hope that he appoints an Attorney General who goes after lawfare for once and for all.

In the meantime, I hope that some red state district attorneys are exploring their options. I guess that statutes of limitation don’t matter and local district attorneys are now free to go after presidents. Wonder what accounting procedure was used to record the Paula Jones payments?  I’d like to know.

P.S.  Check out my blog for posts, podcasts and videos.

Leave a Comment