Although my favorite comment on the IG report is likely to remain Scott Adams’ “When I saw the report was 500 pages I knew everyone would be able to read anything into it they wanted,” the best of the numerous actual summaries I scanned/read was from Mollie Hemingway at the Federalist.

Hemingway still has a far more sanguine view of the FBI than I do…she seems to think all this is somehow abnormal. I say things like “massive leaking” and taking bribes are police state features, not bugs.

The real news is that the exposure of the FBI’s massive corruption and incompetence have left Team Trump with a strong hand. Unless Team Mueller pulls the sort of rabbit out of its hat that creates a massive backlash at the polls come November (its already clear Trump’s policies won’t provide the impetus–rather the opposite), then, come the end of the year, that strong hand will be a whip hand.

That’ll be fun.

And, oh yeah, James Comey? He’s what I said he was. No great insight. They all are. Including Mueller.

Welcome to my world.


I’m planning a couple of more than usually personal posts in the coming days (one I’ve been working at, off and on, for over a year, and another I haven’t started on anywhere but inside my head) so I thought a trip to the impersonal (which, for me, is contemporary politics, which I hold at arm’s length to defy madness) might be in order.

In a political season, I monitor political blogs much more than usual. I read voraciously and across the board (even more so this season, because I don’t have time to read history, which I take very personally, at the moment). By far the smartest commentary I’ve found on the Donald Trump phenonenom, in the blogosphere or elsewhere, comes from John Michael Greer and Scott Adams. Not surprisingly, both men are at least as detached from modern political passions than I am. Emotions cloud reason, and I’m sure one reason I think they’re both such smart guys is that they’ve articulated a lot of things I had intuited.

By way of anecdote: My interest in this political season was peaked last summer, when I was riding around in my car listening to PBS (which I almost never do anymore) and Diane Rehm asked a panel of Beltway reporters (if you’ve ever listened to PBS or watched their television news hour, you know the kind I mean) if Trump had any chance of getting the nomination. The reporters then spent several minutes trying to top each other with metaphors/analogies/etc. for just how impossible a serious Trump candidacy was. At the end, one of them stated flatly: “He has no chance.”

My own response in that moment, based on nothing but the air I breathe in my little world far from the Beltway, and my understanding of the long arc of declining empires, was “If you think he has no chance, you’re crazy.”

What I actually meant by “You’re crazy” was “You’re an idiot.”

Since the person talking was clearly not an idiot in the IQ sense of the word, what I really meant was “You’re sprinkling garlic because you think a vampire just walked into the yard and you think garlic really works on vampires and that’s the sort of nonthinking that turns people into idiots.”

If you want to read some analysis that has finally given shape to my raw impulse, you can find a typical Greer take here and a typical Adams take here.

Taken together, what they say seems about right, though I only give Trump an even chance of winning the presidency (which is less than either Greer or Adams give him but more than the present polls–see I told you I was dispassionate!). In any case, I just want to add that I do not find it the least bit surprising that the two people who have the surest take on our present crisis are, respectively, a Druid and a Cartoonist.

Unless, of course, you count the real prophets: