Wednesday, October 27, 2021

CNN Commentator Calls Out Georgia Election Lie

After the Georgia election, the losing candidate refused to concede.  The candidate claimed that widespread voter shenanigans in the Peach State had tipped the election to the opponent.  Yet the candidate offered no proof in support of the claim.  The losing candidate's party though accepted as gospel that the election was stolen.  

I am not talking about Donald Trump in 2020, I'm talking about Stacey Abrams in 2018.  

Stacey Abrams ran for Governor in Georgia in 2018.   She ran an admirable race, but lost by nearly 55,000 votes.  Trump lost Georgia by less than 12,000.  Despite losing the state by nearly 5 times what Donald Trump did, Abrams almost always gets a pass from the media on offering proof in support of her claim that voter suppression cost her the election.  

To his credit, CNN commentator Chris Cillizza took a more thoughtful approach in an column published yesterday:

At a rally over the weekend, former Virginia Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe did something his party has repeatedly bashed Donald Trump and Republicans for doing: He suggested a past election had been unfairly decided because of ballot shenanigans. 

With 2018 Georgia gubernatorial nominee Stacey Abrams by his side, McAuliffe said this: 

"She would be the governor of Georgia today had the governor of Georgia not disenfranchised 1.4 million Georgia voters before the election. That's what happened to Stacey Abrams. They took the votes away."

Which is not, in fact, what happened.

Cillizza goes on to note that Kemp, who was then Georgia Secretary of State, had presided over a purge of the voter rolls that removed hundreds of thousands of voters.  What Cillizza does not mention is that under federal law, Kemp was legally obligated to clean up the voter registration rolls by purging voters who hadn't cast ballots in several election cycles, most likely because they had died or moved out of state.  This process had been delayed by litigation which is why there was such a backlog.

Abrams simply assumes these purged voters were actually qualified voters who would have shown up and voted for her, were it not for being removed from the voting registration rolls by Kemp.  Abrams though has never offered anything more than a few examples of such voters, not even remotely the numbers needed to overcome a 55,000 vote margin.

Although Abrams claims voter suppression, the 2018 election featured 55% turnout, which is 21 points higher than the average turnout for a Georgia midterm from 1982 through 2014.  Abrams' more specific claim that the African-American vote was suppressed is likewise bogus.  Minority turnout in Georgia surged in 2018, due in no small part due to Abrams' candidacy.  While voting locations in Atlanta were moved and in some cases consolidated, that did not dampen minority turnout.  Nor were the moves necessarily nefarious.  Voting locations often have to be moved and consolidated due to shifts in population and voting trends.

The article continues:   

As Charles S. Bullock III, political science professor at the University of Georgia, told The Washington Post's Fact Checker in 2019: "Abrams was very effective in mobilizing her supporters, but in the end — perhaps due to a narrowing of the enthusiasm gap following the [Brett] Kavanaugh hearings — lots of Republicans also turned out. The [voter fraud] claim is not based on fact but will continue to be articulated by Abrams since it helps mobilize her supporters."

Sort of like what Donald Trump is doing.

Wednesday, October 20, 2021

Trump Uses the Passing of General Colin Powell to Mock Him; Courts and Congressional Subpoenas

 On the day we learned Colin Powell died, Donald Trump issued the following statement:

Could there not be any better proof that Donald Trump lacks the character and integrity to be in any position of authority, much less President of the United States?  Powell volunteered for the army and had a military career 35 years long in which he rose to the rank of General and held several leadership positions.  As a young man, he had two tours of duty in Vietnam.  During the first he was wounded when he stepped on a punji stake, making it difficult to walk.  During the second, he survived a helicopter crash and single-handedly rescued three passengers from the burning wreckage.

Meanwhile, Donald "Bone Spurs" Trump was dodging the draft.  Later he said his Vietnam was trying to avoid STDs as a young man.

But let's put aside Trump's lack of character and cowardice.  Trump is also an extremely ignorant, poorly educated man.  He put that on display yesterday as well; 

Of course, Jefferson was in France during the Constitutional Convention and played no part in drafting the Constitution, much less being its "principal writer."  (James Madison is considered the "principal writer" of the Constitution.)  But why should we expect the President of the United States to have an understanding of how our Constitution was developed?  Of course, Trump displayed a complete disregard for our Constitution when he was President.

To clarify, the above statement came from Donald Trump and was posted on Twitter by his spokeswoman, Liz Harrington.  Being the great communication person she is, she wrote it as if the statement were being directed to Donald Trump rather than being from him.

For the record, I don't support the removal of the Jefferson statue. I think you have to judge people in the historical climate they lived, considering their entire historical achievements along with their flaws.  Washington also owned slaves as did many of the Founding Fathers.  Yet they left a legacy of government that is undeniable, and for that, they and their work should be celebrated.


I wrote this as a comment on the Bulwark's bulletin board yesterday.  
Speaking of Bannon, the fact he, Trump and their ilk are using the courts solely for the purpose of delaying the January 6th's Select Committee's investigation of the insurrection until it's too late really ticks me off. I've been an attorney for 34 years. In civil and criminal proceedings, if someone ignores a subpoena or makes an obviously bogus argument like executive privilege, the matter gets resolved in days, a week or two tops. There is no reason for drawn out legal proceedings to decide these rather simple issues. And when it comes to their judicial proceedings, courts generally are extremely intolerant of people using legal proceedings to "win" via delay. Why then do courts treat legislative action differently? 

Contrary to public perception, courts can act quickly when they want to. You have your regular docket, then you have emergency type matters that are expedited. When someone is making bogus legal arguments to effectuate delay, the courts should expedite the matter and give the recalcitrant litigant a boot to the backside. 

But there is no reason for Congress to continue running to courts to enforce their own subpoenas. Courts have ruled that Congress has inherent contempt powers, i.e. Congress can enforce its own subpoenas. I don't care that Congress hasn't done it in a 100 years, now is time to start doing it again. Put a few low level people in jail to send a message that these orders are going to be enforced. (I know Congress doesn't have jail cells any more, but jurisdictions needing jail cells rent them all the time. I'm sure DC has a few cells available.) Also, Congress needs to start hitting these people with fines which increase each day that there is non-compliance. Those fines can attach as a lien to property they own, even without a separate enforcement action. That will get their attention.
Since I wrote that yesterday morning,, the January 6th Select Committee unanimously approved a criminal referral for Steve Bannon for refusing to comply with its subpoena.  Thursday, the full House is expected to approve the referral and send it to the Justice Department for consideration.  My question is what is the backup plan if Attorney General Merrick Garland says "no" to prosecution?  Garland thus far has been inclined to give Trump and his associates a pass on pursuing possible criminal conduct.  I again would emphasize that Congress needs to start enforcing its own subpoenas and stop running to courts for assistance.  Even if Garland takes up the issue, Bannon will still be using the courts to run out the clock.

Again, what is the backup plan, Congress?

Friday, October 15, 2021

Virginia Governor's Race: Will Trump Fix the Democrats' Turnout Problem?

Republican candidate Glenn Youngkin thus far has masterfully threaded the needle, saying enough to keep the GOP Trumpers happy while reaching out to anti-Trump Republicans and independents who are positioned to decide next month's Virginia gubernatorial election.  While Youngkin still trails former Governor Terry McAuliffe in most polls, he is well within striking distance.  It will all come down to who shows up to vote.  Youngkin needs a favorable turnout dynamic, i.e., motivated Republicans casting ballots while unmotivated Democrats stay home.

Former President Donald Trump may well be on his way to blowing up that hopeful scenario.  On Wednesday, Trump sent an email to his supporters telling them the most important thing they can do is NOT vote in 2022 and 2024...unless the "Presidential Election Fraud of 2020" is "solved."  That no doubt includes the few elections held in 2021, including the contests in Virginia.

Glenn Youngkin

Of course, there is no evidence of election fraud tipping the 2020 election and, even if there was, Trump is not ever going to be "reinstated" to his former position because of it.  So Trump's instruction is actually without limit.  He does not want Republicans to vote in the next few elections, including ironically the presidential contest of 2024 in which he says he will be a candidate.

Youngkin can only hope that GOP voters forget Trump's directive to not vote.  But for Youngkin, it is likely to get worse.  The  spotlight on the Virginia governor's race is only going to get brighter as the November 2nd election draws near.  It is not in Trump's nature to pass up an opportunity to stand in the spotlight, to be the center of attention. It is very possible that Trump will decide to hold a rally in Virginia prior to Election Day.  That would put Youngkin in an impossible situation. Does he attend and draw even more attention to Trump's support of him in a state where Trump is very unpopular?  Or does he decide to skip the event and possibly tick off Trump and his supporters, the GOP base vote he desperately needs? 

It is not just his association with Trump that Youngkin is trying to downplay.  Youngkin wants Trump to stay out of Virginia because the former President holding a rally in the state would stoke Democratic turnout.  Presently, McAuliffe is struggling to motivate his Democratic-leaning voters.  Youngkin wants to keep it that way.

Yesterday, Fox News released a poll showing McAuliffe leading the race 52-41 among registered voters, but just 51-46 when the pollster screened for "likely voters." That is a pretty big enthusiasm gap. 

A week ago, I would have predicted a Youngkin victory.  I now believe Younkin may have hit his high water mark last week and that McAuliffe is now righting the ship.  McAuliffe may well end up getting assistance from Trump in winning the race.

Nonetheless, expect after the election that Trump will announce Younkin lost because he didn't embrace Trump enough.

OOP's short takes:

  • Indianapolis media personality Abdul Hakim-Shabazz tells an interesting story about his being banned from a news conference by Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita because he was not "credentialed" media.  
  • In the past I have been critical of Abdul for blurring the lines between reporting on the news and commenting on it.  Unfortunately, that is a trend with too many reporters (see CNN's Jim Acosta for an example).  But on this issue, Abdul seems to be 100% correct.  Did Rokita ask that all reporters be screened for "credentials?"  Or was Abdul singled out?   It does sound like Abdul had been issued a press badge so it is not clear what "credentials" he was supposedly lacking.
  • Nonetheless, it is not clear why "credentials" would have been needed.   Since when does a public official holding a news conference exclude the public from attending?  Maybe if it was a popular subject and there wasn't room for all who wanted to attend.  I don't believe, however, Rokita's press conference on robocalls was such a popular event that such restrictions on who attended would have been needed.

Thursday, October 14, 2021

Trump Encourages Republicans NOT to vote in 2022 and 2024

Donald Trump is the gift to Democrats that just keeps giving.   Yesterday, Trump emailed instructions to his followers not to vote in the 2022 and 2024 elections unless the "Presidential Election Fraud of 2020" is "solved."

Upon reading Trump's message, Kentucky Senator and Majority Leader Wannabe Mitch McConnell had a heart attack.  Meanwhile, Republican Virginia gubernatorial hopeful Glenn Youngkin ended his candidacy by jumping off a 10 story building.

The Democrats ought to support Trump's efforts to get back on Twitter.  They should want to amplify as much as possible every dumb thing Trump says, including his statement encouraging Republicans not to vote in upcoming elections.

Trump is an expert when it comes to motivating Democrats to vote.   But that has always been offset by his ability to get his own supporters to the polls.  If Trump succeeds in encouraging his supporters to stay home that would have a devastating impact on Republican candidates up and down the ticket.  

Can we stop pretending that Trump actually cares about the GOP or conservative causes?  Donald Trump cares about Donald Trump and no one else.

Wednesday, October 13, 2021

Insurrection Clause Should Be Used to Bar Trump from Seeking the Presidency Again

Last time the Insurrection Clause of the 14th Amendment received attention, the country was in the middle of Donald Trump's second impeachment.  The impeachment effort, since Trump was then out of office, was not about his removal, but to disqualify him from running for office again.  Since convicting someone on an impeachment required a 2/3 vote in the Senate, disqualification via that route seemed improbable at best.  Further, failure to achieve the Senate conviction would likely embolden Trump and his fervent base.  

Instead many people, myself included, floated a different option - Section 3 of the 14th Amendment:  
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 Insurrection Clause was aimed at disqualifying public service those government officials who had sided with the Confederacy during the Civil War.  But the clause is not limited to those facts.  While it has been little used since, there has not been the need.   Never in American history has there been an effort by an incumbent politician to disregard election results and stay in office.  That effort led to a violent mob on January 6th storming Congress to stop the counting of electoral votes.

While 57 of the 100 Senators (including 7 Republicans) thought the record at the time supported Trump's conviction on the impeachment, that was well short of the 2/3.  Without the conviction, the disqualification (the real goal of the impeachment) was also off the table.   That didn't seem a huge loss at the time.  In early February, Trump seemed politically damaged by the impeachment and the attempted insurrection he had fomented.  The notion of his running for President again in 2024 seemed highly unlikely.

That has changed dramatically.  

In the months that followed, the history of 1/6 was rewritten.  Never mind the violent altercation we saw on our TV screens, the Trump World turned the event into a: 1) glorious and peaceful protest about a stolen election; 2) an ordinary tourist visit; 3) an FBI false flag operation; 4) an ANTIFA false flag operation; 5) all of the above.  Never mind the video, never mind the Trump supporters who were arrested, never mind the confessions of those charged and convicted of violence on 1/6.   Trumpers live in a world of "alternative facts."

The months since the impeachment has brought forth shocking revelations of how far Trump and his allies went in an effort to overturn the 2020 election.  Trump pressured state officials to disregard the popular vote.  When that failed, he pressured the Justice Department to take action. When that failed, Trump tried to convince Vice President Mike Pence that his ministerial obligation to announce the electoral vote result gave him authority to override those electoral votes.  When that failed, Trump helped foment a violent insurrection in which his supporters tried to stop Congress' counting of the electoral votes.

The bipartisan January 6th Commission may well uncover even more evidence of Trump's attempted coup. Quite possibly, the report the Commission will issue will be damning.  But what happens next?  It is obvious that clear and convincing evidence of Trump's misdeeds, no matter how serious, will never matter in Trump World.  Those people are lost, at least for now, in their own blissful ignorance. 

For the rest of us who still believe in American democracy, we do not need more words from our elected officials about how bad Trump's attempted coup was and the threat he poses should he run again in 2024.  What we need from our elected officials is ACTION.   The January 6th Commission's report needs to include a recommendation that the Justice Department file an action to disqualify Trump from ever serving in state or federal office again.   Hopefully, Attorney General Merrick Garland, who thus far has been giving Trump a pass, will recognize the danger of doing nothing and this time do something.

Admittedly there are several legal hurdles to using the Insurrection Clause to disqualify Trump from being President.  But that doesn't mean we should not try.  The survival of our Republic is at stake.

OOP's short takes:
  • Contrary to popular conception, courts can rule quickly when they want to.  I am more than a little peeved at federal judges who have allowed Trump and his allies to "win" legal cases by running out the clock.  When it is clear that a litigant is going to use delaying tactics to prevail, judges need to expedite matters so that tactic is foiled.  
  • Which brings me to the January 6th Commission's subpoenas for documents sent to Trump's allies.  Trump has encouraged them to claim executive privilege, even though the argument is highly unlikely to succeed.  Courts need to dispose of those bogus claims in days, not weeks, not months. 
  • Most times there is no legal defense to not complying with those subpoenas.  The target of the subpoena refuses to respond knowing Congress will have to go to court to enforce the subpoena and that will result in a significant delay.
  • That is why Congress needs to brush off the historical dust on the concept of "inherent contempt" and start enforcing its own subpoenas.  The time-consuming process of Congress seeking judicial intervention to enforce its orders is clearly not working.  Congress needs to start making examples of those who simply are ignoring subpoenas or treating them as requests.  Even if Congress does not want to start putting people in jail for contempt, Congress can issue fines for non-compliance. Until Congress starts doing this, no one is going to take congressional subpoenas seriously.

Sunday, October 10, 2021

Expect Donald Trump to Sink Florida Governor's Ron DeSantis' 2022 Re-Election Campaign

As the 2022 Florida Governor's race heats up, expect former President and current Florida resident Donald Trump to get involved.  And not in a good way.  Trump is likely to claim the election in Florida will be rigged, a claim that will discourage Republicans from voting.  Like the Georgia run-off elections this 
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis
past January, it won't take too many Republicans staying home to tip the election to the Democrats.  DeSantis won in 2018 by only .4%.  

Trump undermining DeSantis will not be an accident. The Florida governor is Trump's biggest rival for the presidential nomination in 2024.  A September poll by GOP pollster Carter Wren showed Trump to have 26.2% support of Republican voters compared to DeSantis' 25.2%.  This is a big change from July when a Wren poll had Trump at 46% and DeSantis at 13%.

But if DeSantis loses re-election in 2022, any hope he has of getting the 2024 GOP nomination for President is out the window.

Trump is already taking shots at DeSantis in anticipation of a possible matchup.  "If I faced him, I'd beat him like I would beat everyone else," Trump told Yahoo Finance late last week. "I think most people would drop out, I think he would drop out."

No doubt, DeSantis will try like heck to assure the Orange Grifter that he would not run against him.  But one thing I learned in politics is that political candidates are incredibly paranoid.  (A prime example is Watergate.  There was never any doubt Nixon would blow out McGovern in 1972, yet the Nixon campaign operatives bugged DNC's headquarters anyway.)  No matter how many assurances DeSantis provides, Trump is still going to view him as a political threat who needs to be eliminated. 

The way to remove the Governor DeSantis threat is to make sure he loses his re-election bid.  Trump can easily do that.  All he has to do is dust off that Georgia playbook.

Thursday, October 7, 2021

Activist Needs to Prosecuted for Filming Senator Kyrsten Sinema in a Bathroom; My Rants About Sports Gambling, Facebook

I am so tired of the lack of civility in today's public discourse.  Recently, a Carmel-Clay School Board meeting featured parents acting the fools, interrupting the proceedings.  The Board finally had to adjourn. For the time being, the Board will only be having virtual board meetings due to the uncivility of the Carmel parents.

Those were probably right-wing activists.  But such foolishness is not confined to the right side of the political spectrum.  In Arizona, liberal activists interrupted Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema who was trying to teach a college class at Arizona State University.   After class, Sinema proceeded to the bathroom but was trailed by activists who continued to yell at her.  One of those activists followed her into the restroom, continuing to videotape the confrontation.   The video continued to roll as the Senator entered a stall to do her business.  The activist then uploaded the video to social media, apparently thinking the confrontation was some sort of "win."  It was not.

The filming may have also been illegal.  Arizona's law on video recording says:  

It is unlawful for any person to knowingly photograph, videotape, film, digitally record or by any other means secretly view, with or without a device, another person without that person's consent under either of the following circumstances:

    1. In a restroom, bathroom, locker room, bedroom or other location where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and the person is urinating, defecating, dressing, undressing, nude or involved in sexual intercourse or sexual contact.

    2. In a manner that directly or indirectly captures or allows the viewing of the person's genitalia, buttock or female breast, whether clothed or unclothed, that is not otherwise visible to the public.

It is unlawful to disclose, display, distribute or publish a photograph, videotape, film or digital recording made in violation of subsection A of this section without the consent or knowledge of the person depicted.


Thus, the video recording and the publication of that recording could constitute two separate crimes, indeed felonies.  Although law enforcement is reportedly investigating the incident, the mainstream media seems intent on ignoring that investigation and the fact that the recording may well have been illegal.  Sinema though noticed the Arizona statute as has some far right, less than credible media outlets such as Epoch Times, Washington Times and Fox News. 

The activist who videotape Sinema in the bathroom needs to be prosecuted.  And if any Arizona State students were involved in the interruption of her teaching, they need to be expelled.  People need to learn the lesson that one's free speech rights do not include the right to interrupt classes or public proceedings. And those rights certainly do not permit the videotaping of public officials in the bathroom.


I've long described myself as a libertarian conservative.  It might be time to rethink the first part of that description because of my next two rants.

Sports gambling.  I am tired of all those ads trying to entice new gamblers by promising them risk-free first bets.  It reminds me so much of the practice of drug dealers giving away free samples to entice new customers.  For many people, gambling is an addiction that can destroy their lives.  Just ask former Colts quarterback Art Schlichter.  While I know opportunities are going to be available for people who want to gamble, I don't think making it easy for them is good public policy.  The sports gambling industry has to know that the tobacco industry style regulation is coming down the road.  Those TV ads promoting sports gambling may be short-lived.

And don't get me started on the NFL going from steadfast opposition to sports gambling to warmly embracing it...and making money in the process.  

And, no, I am not going to call it "gaming."  Removing the "b" and "l" to create a new word isn't clever.  "Gaming" is GAMBLING.

Facebook, et al.   Our public discourse is poisoned.  Facebook and other social media outlets have played a role in that poisoning by using logarithms which cause people to be exposed to more and more extreme content.  As the recent whistleblower said, Facebook likes to stoke anger as anger keeps people coming to Facebook.  These social media companies need to face regulation.  One of the first changes needs to be treating them as a publisher, and thus liable for content.  One of the next steps needs to be regulation of the logarithms which have acted to stoke anger and outrage.  Unless that is done, things are going to get worse.  Political violence, maybe even a coup, are not that far down the road.

OOP's short takes:

  • Trashelle Odom's statement to police about Corey Lewandowski is a must read.  

Married Trump donor told police she feared for safety when Corey Lewandowski told her he killed man | Daily Mail Online

Friday, October 1, 2021

In 2019, Indiana GOP Invited Corey Lewandowski to be "Special Guest" Despite Groping Allegation and Extramarital Affair

The news didn't come as a shock.  Former Trump Chairman Corey Lewandowski was accused of drunkenly groping a woman during a charity dinner.  Politico reports:
A Donald Trump donor is accusing Corey Lewandowski, one of the former president’s longtime top aides, of making unwanted sexual advances toward her at a Las Vegas charity event over the weekend.

Trashelle Odom, the wife of Idaho construction executive John Odom, alleges that Lewandowski repeatedly touched her, including on her leg and buttocks, and spoke to her in sexually graphic terms. Odom said that Lewandowski “stalked” her throughout the evening.'
Corey Lewandowski

“On the evening of September 26 in Las Vegas, Nevada, I attended a dinner to support a charity and spend time with wonderful friends,” Odom said in a statement to Politico. “He repeatedly touched me inappropriately, said vile and disgusting things to me, stalked me, and made me feel violated and fearful,” she said, referring to Lewandowski.

“I am coming forward because he needs to be held accountable,” Odom continued. “I am blessed to have a loving husband and family behind me. I want other women to know that you can be heard, too, and together we can stop terrible things like this from happening.”

Mrs. Odom stated that over the course of the dinner, Mr. Lewandowski tried to hold her hand, and she pushed his hand away. He touched her leg, and she moved it away. He grabbed her napkin off her lap and tried to touch her leg again, and she pulled her dress over her leg, to move his hand away and cover her skin,” Odom’s attorney wrote in the statement.

“He touched her back and she tried to get away,” the statement continued. “He described an area where he was sore from a workout, on the side of his butt, but he demonstrated this by touching her there—on the upper side of her rear end. Lewandowski tried to touch her approximately 10 times, and Mrs. Odom always rebuffed him.”

Odom left the room but was soon followed by Lewandowski, who remarked that she had a “nice ass,” according to the statement from her attorney and another attendee who heard the comment. Lewandowski also “threw his drink at Mrs. Odom, and it landed all over her shoe and the bottom of her dress,” and “called her stupid,” her attorney stated.


Odom and her husband are relative newcomers to the Republican donor scene, and she told the attendee that she felt intimidated by Lewandowski’s claims that he has control over the former president’s orbit and can determine the fate of those around Trump.

Lewandowski said no candidate receives the president’s endorsement without Lewandowski’s approval, Odom told the attendee.

In the statement from Odom’s attorney, Lewandowski is alleged to have said “repeatedly that he is very powerful and can destroy anyone,” and that he “is close with President Trump and can get anyone elected or can take anyone out.”

“Corey was verbally and physically aggressive and forceful,” Odom alleged in a statement. “I was fearful for my physical safety.” She continued: "I was also fearful that Corey has the power to destroy and ruin everything my husband and I have been working on in our business, personal and charitable endeavors.”
Some quick observations.  What in the hell were her parents thinking naming her "Trashella?"  Fortunately, Trashella's twin sister, Garbagella did not attend the event.

It's also hard not to note the hypocrisy of Trashella being outraged by Lewandowski's groping while apparently having no problem being a big donor to President Donald Trump who was credibly accused of groping by nearly twenty women.

When the alleged groping became public, Lewandowski was removed from overseeing Trump Super PAC, Make America Great Again Action Inc.  In taking the action, a Trump spokesman said Lewandowski "will no longer be associated with Trump World."  Not without irony, the ethically-challenged former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi was announced as Lewandowski's replacement.

This is not the first time that Lewandowski has been accused of groping a woman.  But this time, Lewandowski groped, allegedly, a big Trump donor.   For the Trump folks, the fact it was one of their donors made it a fireable offense. 

Corey Lewandowski has been a reprehensible human being for a long time.  I was outraged when the Indiana Republican Party, led by Chairman Kyle Hupfer, invited Lewandowski to be a "special guest" at the 2019 Indiana Republican Party Spring Dinner.  It wasn't like Lewandowski's proclivities were unknown at the time the invitation was extended.  

In March 2016, Lewandowski was charged with misdemeanor battery after he roughly grabbed a female reporter's arm during an event.  Those charges were later dropped. Then in 2017, singer Joy Villa, a Trump supporter, albeit apparently not a Trump donor, accused Lewandowski of slapping her on the butt.  Villa says after she told Lewandowski to stop, he slapped her on the butt again.  She described Lewandowski's behavior as "boorish, drunken and disgusting."  Of course, Villa, like Trashella, had no problem when it came to supporting for President a serial groper like Donald Trump. 

It was also widely reported that, during the 2016 campaign, Lewandowski, who is married with four children, was carrying on an affair with Trump adviser Hope Hicks.  Nothing says Republican "family values" like a husband and father of four children having a very public extramarital affair.  Trump supposedly told Lewandowski that Hicks, a former model, was "the best piece of tail" Lewandowski would every have. 

Interestingly, after Hicks split with Lewandowski, she began dating Trump aide Rob Porter who ended up resigning after two ex-wives accused him of verbal and physical abuse during their marriage.

Despite all the accumulated knowledge of exactly what type of person Corey Lewandowski is, Hupfer and the Indiana Republican Party had no problem inviting him to be a "special guest" at a fundraising dinner.  Interestingly, the other special guest at that 2019 spring dinner was David Bossie who a few months later was accused of scamming elderly MAGA voters with a fundraising scheme that seemed to be about lining his own pockets.  Bossie was booted from Trump World for that offense, but was let back in when Trump tapped him to challenge the results of the 2020 election.

OOP's Short Takes:
  • I am well aware of the American Greatness article which claims South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem has of recently been having an affair with Lewandowski.  While it is okay that the story uses anonymous sources, journalists are still supposed to confirm via first-hand accounts the claims of anonymous sources. Otherwise they're just publishing rumors.  Maybe it is just me, but I have trouble believing the story, which appears to be a hit job on Noem for not holding sufficiently crazy positions.  Then again, I wouldn't have believed Hope Hicks would have dated someone like Lewandowski either.