Trump, Believing His Own P.R., Over-Reaches

Collusion by Nancy Ohanian

Tuesday night it leaked out that Attorney General Bill Barr and Alex Azar, Secretary of Health and Human Services both opposed Trump's decision to invalidate the Affordable Care Act, kicking over 20 million Americans off healthcare and shit-canning popular provisions like protections for people with preexisting conditions.

Right-wing ideologue Mick Mulvaney and two deputies-- Trump's domestic policy chief, Joe Grogan, and the acting director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russ Vought were the ones who engineered the move. Eliana Johnson and Burgess Everett made clear in their Politico write-up that many Republicans are miserable over the decision "because they see it as bringing high political risk for a party that has failed to unite behind an Obamacare alternative and which lost House seats in the 2018 midterms when Democrats made health care a focus of their attacks.

Although Trump babbled some typical gaslighting bushiest about how "the Republican Party will soon be known as the party of health care," he handed the Democrats a winning issue for 2020-- exactly the kind of issue that will strengthen the anti-red wave that swept over 40 Republicans out of their House seats. The imbecile-in-chief continued: "I mean it 100 percent, I understand healthcare now, especially very well. A lot of people don’t understand it, we are going to be, the Republicans, the party of great healthcare. The Democrats have, they’ve let you down, they came up with Obamacare, it’s terrible."

At a lunch Tuesday with Senate Republicans, Trump was boasting while some Senate Republicans were sitting silently in dread. Susan Collins (R-ME), one of the most vulnerable senators up for reelection next year: "I was extraordinarily disappointed in the position the Justice Department has taken. I thought it was bad enough when they didn’t want to defend parts of the law, the parts protecting people with pre-existing conditions. This goes far beyond that and I think this was a huge mistake."

This is part of Trump's feeling that he was empowered by a p.r. victory in the way the GOP has been able to spin the still closely-held Mueller-report. The Regime succeeded in stampeding imbeciles in the media to repeat bogus claims that the report exonerated him, which it didn't. It was an empowering couple of days for an illegitimate "president" who isn't used to-- but always craves-- good press coverage. He thinks Barr's press release has vindicated him. Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA): "He's doing a victory lap, no doubt about it."

Burgess Everett and John Bresnahan reported that "Trump’s decision to jump headlong into another divisive health care effort-- with Democrats in control of the House no less-- shows that he isn’t shying away from conflicts, even those that could hurt vulnerable GOP lawmakers. In fact, Republicans had no real plans to pass or even necessarily plan for sweeping health care legislation as of 24 hours ago. And most in the party have been eager to put the disastrous effort to repeal Obamacare behind them." Trump urged senators to block aid to Puerto Rico, to investigate Hillary Clinton and Obama, to pass his new NAFTA deal and to help him wreck NATO. He also "told Republicans he wants to protect intellectual property produced by 'nerds' in Silicon Valley from China, angling for a new pact with the country by driving a hard bargain. 'Very good deal. Not a good deal. Not an OK deal it has to be a great deal,' Trump said, according to Sen. Marco Rubio.'"

So far at least, Trump got no bounce with voters after Barr claimed he was cleared of collusion. "A new Morning Consult/Politico survey conducted after Attorney General William Barr released his summary of Mueller’s findings shows a negligible immediate effect on how the public views the president. The March 25-26 survey found 42 percent of voters approve of the president and 55 percent disapprove-- a net approval rating 13 percentage points underwater and virtually identical to the poll conducted the week before."

Asked directly, 39 percent of voters said they had a more favorable view of the president after answering previous questions regarding the Mueller report, compared with 43 percent who said they had a less favorable view. Democrats and Republicans mirrored each other, while independents were 9 points more likely to express unfavorable views about the president, 41 percent to 32 percent.

Regardless of whether voters correctly identified Mueller’s conclusion on whether the president committed obstruction of justice, the determination itself did little to move public opinion: Forty-seven percent of registered voters said they believed Trump tried to impede or obstruct the investigation, compared with 44 percent who said the same in a February poll.

Similarly, most voters (52 percent) still believe it is likely that Russia has compromising information on Trump, compared with 51 percent last month.

...[T]he public is fully on board with efforts by lawmakers to make Mueller’s report public, with 82 percent of voters-- including 3 in 4 Republicans and 88 percent of Democrats-- saying the report should be disclosed.

A new poll by Ipsos for Reuters this morning shows that about half the country doesn't believe Barr's p.r. stunt and that they're more aware than the elite media hacks are that Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election and enrich himself. The survey found that 48% of respondents believe "Trump or someone from his campaign worked with Russia to influence the 2016 election" and 53% believe "Trump tried to stop investigations into Russian influence on his administration." Among independents 43% approve of the way Trump is doing his job and 56% disapprove.

David Leonhardt called it in his column this morning: William Barr, Media Handler. His point is that "Barr did a skillful job of managing the news media this weekend. He released a four-page letter summarizing Robert Mueller’s investigation, which rightly received blanket coverage, since it was the only official description of the investigation. But I think much of the media was too credulous about Barr’s letter, producing banner headlines and chyrons that treated it as an objective summary of Mueller’s work rather than as a political document meant to make President Trump look good. And it was very much a political document. Barr, the attorney general, works for Trump. Before he joined the administration, he made clear that he felt some disdain for the Mueller investigation-- especially about whether Trump obstructed justice. That disdain surely increased his chances of being appointed attorney general. Trump fired the previous holder of the job, after all, for not doing more to control the Russia investigation. It’s still possible that Barr’s summary of Mueller’s report is fair. But the longer that Barr waits to release a fuller version of the report, the more suspicious we should be. Barr has been around Washington a long time. He understands that an initial story line can matter more than the details that emerge later. Barr has to be very happy with the media coverage he has received over the past two days."

“The Barr summary did its job: control the narrative and turn ‘not enough to charge on this’ into ‘no issues with Russia ever,’” as Tom Nichols, a national security expert, wrote.

Susan Hennessey of Lawfare put it this way: “It is possible that the report really does say that there is no evidence. It’s also possible there’s a mountain of evidence just short of the criminal standard. Or something in between. Any of that would be consistent with Barr’s summary.”

Leonhardt, like most of us, still has as many unanswered questions as before Barr's press release, first and foremost "Did Robert Mueller find evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, but that the collusion was not criminal? And a couple of corollaries: "Why did Trump and his associates repeatedly lie about their contacts with Russians? [and] "Did Mueller find evidence that the activities of Trump or his aides have compromised national security?"