P;ease Leave a Message at the Tone

For Christmas, I gave a close friend on the East Coast a landline phone to replace one that was no longer working well for her. She wanted the exact same brand and model as her old one, but it had been out of production a few years, so I went on to eBay and found one that the seller described as being used but in excellent condition. And so it was.

The phone, which came to me first before I Christmas-wrapped it and sent it off to my friend, was so well-packaged and in such good shape that it didn’t occur to me to check for old messages on its digital recorder and erase them. Being naturally curious, though, my friend, after receiving the phone, decided to listen to them.

There were only 15 messages on the recorder. The first was from a doctor reporting back to the phone’s previous owner, whom I’ll call John, with an update on the condition of his hospitalized wife. The doc had what he called good news, but left a lot of information about test results.

The news wasn’t all that good, it appears, as the next few messages were those of condolence to John from family and friends for the loss of his wife. John’s grief seems to have been deep, as one of his relatives suggested in a later message that he seek bereavement counseling. There was a subsequent message on the phone’s recorder from the counselor.

There was not much after that, except for a couple around the time of John’s birthday or a holiday which suggested that he was having an argument with a family member about something. But the final message was from John’s niece, congratulating him on beginning to date again. This one came in about a year after the first one on the phone. The niece felt that John’s grief had lasted long enough, and she was happy he was back out there in the world.

Questions, of course,  remain. Was John the phone’s seller? An eBay handle was used instead of a name, ad while I might be able find out, I’m not inclined to do that. Were these the only messages John received in a year? They were in perfect logical order, as if some editing had taken place. And finally, how did his dating work out? Did he marry again? Sounds like the beginning of a short story, or a novel, or a screenplay. Have we seen this movie before?

My friend, by the way, seems to understand what happened here. She has put her old phone away, but hasn’t erased the messages on its recorder, which still works, because some of the voices are from people no longer with us, as she put it. Something tells me she is not alone.

Just Giving Them a Reason

Do Democratic members of Congress “loathe” President Trump, and did they try to get him impeached for almost three years? Of course, some do loathe him and yes, they did try, and now have succeeded. Perhaps others have been praying that he change his ways and do right for the country. But I bet most just want him to go away, and their attitude was, “Just give us a reason.” Apparently, he gave them one.

Many of us are now gasping for breath over the historic nature of the impeachment vote. I look at it more like this: I am by no means a DIY type, but in the garage here at home, I have tools. There are some I have used very rarely, but once in a great while, there are jobs that arise requiring just one special tool, and I’m always grateful it’s there, and that I don’t have to head to the hardware store and spend top dollar on the latest version of that tool.

This may go against the grain, but it doesn’t really matter to me whether it was Russia, the Ukraine, or the 400-pound guy on his bed who interfered with our elections in 2016. It’s just the fact that the President and his fans have spent so much time looking backward. A more legitimate question is: where has Trump’s leadership been on protecting us against such interference in the coming year, or further in the future, from any quarter?

On another front, I don’t know that Presidents can always take credit for the performance of the economy during their terms. But in one area, Mr. Trump in fact has shown leadership: trade deals. Most all of the interested parties seem to feel that the new USMCA deal for the US, Mexico, and Canada is a huge improvement over NAFTA, and even though the latest version is much different from the version the President originally supported, he was the one beating the drum. Does a pending new deal with China indicate that tariffs actually worked? Stay tuned.

What we might call a typical voter, when asked by a TV reporter recently about whether he supports the President, said: “Well, he is an embarrassment to me, but you know, things are going pretty well.” The left loves to suggest that the record stock market only benefits rich people. Not true! Many workers have 401(k)s, 403(b)s or other retirement plans, and their performance is also going through the roof along with the markets. Is it going to be, “It’s the economy, stupid” again?

Back to the point, though. The first step in the impeachment process is done. Mr. Trump’s name will forever carry this stain, which he deserves. The next chapter will take place in the Senate, and if all goes as expected, the President will not be removed. That issue will remain with the voters. I don’t expect any Republican senators to vote for removal. But if one or more were to at least say something like. “This guy has been a terrible President, but removing him would cause too much disruption right now. Let the voters do it!” I might actually nod my head.

The Clock and the Calendar

The ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, Republican Congressman Doug Collins of Georgia, has it exactly right: the Democrats, in their haste to get impeachment of the President voted on, are consumed by the clock and the calendar – getting it all done before Christmas. Yes, the clock and the calendar are critical, but the Democrats have control of both – and they don’t have to be in a hurry.

Consider the impeachment hearings themselves. The Democrats couldn’t begin to buy the airtime they are getting for free to lay out their case against the President. These hearings are news, and the media outlets are essentially compelled to cover them. Wouldn’t it be a better idea to have this drag on into the election year? The Republicans want to have a “minority hearing day”? So let them have one! They want Adam Schiff as a witness? I think he should do it, he can handle himself. If there are certain reasonable procedural complaints that can be satisfied, the Democrats should do so, and deprive the GOP of the ammunition.

You’d think the Republicans would want the Dems to rush to a vote on impeachment, so that the Senate can bat the ball away early and allow the President to claim innocence and have clear sailing in 2020.

John Dean, the White House counsel for Richard Nixon, favors the long game for the Democrats. He wants the impeachment inquiry to include things like the Stormy Daniels payoff. I wouldn’t go that far, but I think the emoluments clause in the Constitution is fair game.

Yes, the Democrats do have to face the reality that getting the public on board for an early removal of the President is a really hard sell. But the drip-drip-drip of negative information could eventually affect the voters moods next year, even in Republican districts, where senators may have to decide between their jobs and their legacies as they take their stands on impeachment.

So it’s not just one group of eyes that will be on the clock and the calendar.