Why Do Republicans Shoot Themselves in Both Feet?

THE G.O.P. HOLDS such a small and precarious majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, it makes it nearly impossible to advance legislatively. It’s worse today, thanks to the loss of two Republicans, which narrows the majority to just two.

It started with George Santos, who served as the U.S. Representative for the 3rd Congressional District of New York for less than a year. Elected in 2022 after having unsuccessfully running in 2020, he defeated Dem incumbent Tom Suozzi. He was a devout supporter of President Trump, and spoke at a Stop the Steal rally and attended the Save America rally at the Ellipse on Jan. 6th, 2021. He holds the dubious distinctions of being the first openly gay rep for the G.O.P., as well as the sixth person to be expelled from the House of Representatives. 

It turned out his bio appeared to be fabricated, including his ancestry (which is a foremost issue today for no reason whatsoever); ethnicity (also vitally unimportant, but highly scrutinized); education; employment, including charity work; finances; property ownership; victimhood, and even his residency. He ultimately admitted he fabricated his education and employment, but it wasn’t all he lied about or hid. 

He had committed check fraud in Brazil in 2008, failing to appear in court. He eventually agreed to plead guilty. And in New York in the 2010s, he failed to pay personal debt and eviction judgments against him, amounting to thousands. Two federal indictments alleging 23 fraud-related charges were brought against him in 2023, to which he pleaded not guilty. 

Santos refused to resign his office, bartering his resignation to the issue of the speakership, and avoided an initial expulsion vote, but wasn’t so lucky the second time, after a House Ethics Committee report issued in November. The second vote on Dec. 1st was 311-114 to expel, with 112 Republicans joining Dems—over the 2/3 needed to pass. Santos was the first Republican rep expelled and the only one who was expelled without first being convicted of a federal crime (or supporting the Confederacy in the Civil War.)

As guilty as Santos may or may not be, he is the first person to have been expelled from the House without having been convicted first. That there is precedent for needing a conviction isn’t trivial: it’s called due process. A better approach would be to try to convince him to resign—after some critical votes the House had planned, including and especially spending bills. That’s just smart lawmaking, and Dems would do it that way in a New York nanosecond. But no. The G.O.P. likes to shoot itself in the foot because it either wants, or believes it deserves to lose.

Another loss to the G.O.P. is former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who announced on Dec. 6th he would be resigning at the end of the year. It was a debacle when he was forced to resign his speakership on Oct. 3rd, so soon after he received it, but those were the terms he agreed to. It made the G.O.P. look like the grumpy old party, but it had been battling the mental demon of donkeys in elephants’ clothing for years, without much success. 

Still, McCarthy’s seat is staunchly Republican, so probably no worries there, but Santos’ seat is usually Dem all the way. It is said he won only because of disinterest in the election during the Covid-19 pandemic. It’s up for grabs.

It’s Dems versus the G.O.P. and the G.O.P. is divided. The G.O.P. is MAGA versus Neocons, and MAGA is ascendant. Unfortunately, Neocons are as toxic as most Dems are today, so there is no reconciliation likely in the near future. Some of just hope it isn’t because Neocons have hands as dirty as the Biden and Obama-affiliated, corrupt Dems.

It’s NOT Anti-American to Hear the Russian President Out.

NOT MANY AMERICANS really want to struggle through the prodding overdubbed female voice translating Russian President Vladimir Putin’s equivalent of a lengthy and pontificating state-of-the-union address. The headline about him “suspending” or abrogating the New START nuclear arms treaty with the U.S. (which is technically illegal under international law) sufficed. All we need to know about Vlad is he caused the war—and inflation. Along with Trump, of course, because the two are co-conspirators—of something. The Federalist’s Eddie Scarry, however, took a stab at interpreting Putin’s speech last week, and I think he was right on target. Here are his other three big takeaways, quoting from the Russian leader’s speech. (Speech translated here.)

First, “[t]he U.S. has used Ukraine to prepare for a large war. They have publicly admitted that.” Scarry cites Biden’s proclamation that Putin “cannot remain in power.” He also called Putin a war criminal. This threat of regime change isn’t only evidence Putin thinks the U.S. is anticipating a long conflict, it’s an existential threat, and a very personal one, at that. That Biden made a ‘surprise’ visit to Kyiv last week wasn’t just a statement he (and by extension the U.S.) stands behind Ukraine, it was a provocation on its own. That Biden keeps giving away American taxpayers’ money to Zelensky to underwrite two-thirds of the war’s costs makes it clear money is no object to him (even if it to the taxpayers.) (Biden would be wise to recognize the Putin he knows is better than whoever takes over is likely to be, whether it be the saber-rattling Dmitri Medvedev or someone else.)

Second, “[t]he West is guilty of escalation.” Scarry notes NATO expansion has been the cards for a while as a “vanity project” for both parties. This is true enough, but Biden has advanced the cause unlike anyone else, save for select Neocons, which he himself is not. The late Sen. John McCain’s lapdog, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), have been particularly outspoken regarding the defeat of Russia. Putin’s failure to advance in Ukraine under the Trump administration isn’t because Trump and Putin were red co-conspirators. Trump simply wasn’t looking to expand NATO, as Biden is, and actually expected member nations to foot the measly two-percent of GDP they agreed to pay for their own defense rather than expect U.S. taxpayers to.

Third, “[t]hey [the West] want to have a strategic defeat of Russia…” Scarry observes this is not inconsistent with anything Biden or most of Congress has said, adding no one in the West would resume regular trade or cooperation with Russia if it retreated from Ukraine immediately. If true, and I believe it is, why would Russia be inclined to retreat in the first place? 

The problem is simple to explain; difficult to resolve. There is absolutely no incentive for Putin to do anything different than trying to make certain NATO isn’t lurking around with hidden bombs to take Russia out and him with it. Ukraine’s entry into NATO has always been a red line for Putin. Can’t Russia have its own equivalent of a Monroe Doctrine?  Or a modernized Brezhnev Doctrine?

Scarry concludes by saying Putin is not irrational. This is evident by Putin’s words and behavior, despite American spooks planting seeds of Putin’s physical and mental decline, or even his death. Between the West’s incessant prevarication, patronizing, and provocation, it’s a wonder the “special military operation,” that no one doubts is a full-fledged proxy war, isn’t spurring more deadly force from Putin.

Perhaps Russia is hoping for a negotiated settlement, but that seems a bit…irrational. Maybe it’s inept. It’s notable the Kremlin hasn’t done much with the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS). Maybe military equipment hasn’t been tended to over decades of relative peace there. While the U.S.S.R.’s losses in Afghanistan (nine years) were significant (as were ours), Russia has been out of the opium den since 1989 (unlike us). Putin was KGB then and had to learn from the experience, although apparently, not enough. (Summary here, albeit with a pronounced accent.)

Years of disuse may also be evident in the reported failure of a RS-28 Sarmat, or Satan II intercontinental missile test launch by Russia on Feb. 18th, although a test in 2022 was allegedly successful. Per the New START, Russia notified the U.S. of the test. (Also per convention, Russia was put on notice of Biden’s trip to Ukraine to ensure safe passage at about the same time.) Yet, while Russian weapons may be rusty from disuse, ours are conveniently being amassed in neighboring Ukraine, but inconveniently in the hands of among the most corrupt nations on earth. 

At this first anniversary of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and Biden’s fomenting of a WWIII, it isn’t clear what Putin will do. Some experts think he’ll resort to so-called asymmetric warfare. Maybe he already has and we just don’t know it yet. But the C.I.A., too, engages in suchthings and are just as guilty of propaganda, disinformation, deception, sabotage, assassination, psy-ops, cy-ops, and any of a number of other KGB tactics. It’s just what these people do.

Donald Rumsfeld: Fierce Warrior Dies Peacefully with Family by His Side.

YESTERDAY, THE WORLD LEARNED that Donald Rumsfeld, America’s 13th and 21st Secretary of Defense under Presidents Gerald Ford and George W. Bush, did from multiple mylenomia at age 88. His loving family was reportedly by his side. His death was said to be peaceful. Comfortable. Any number of dead troops from the Iraq War cannot claim the same.

Rumsfeld, or “Rummey,” as he was affectionately known by NeoCons, was probably most known for the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq under Bush II. He is also the man who initially recruited a staffer, Dick Cheney, who was for many Americans, their first introduction to neoconservatism when he ran as Bush II’s Vice President. Before the Iraq War, Rummey infamously claimed that Iraq had so-called “weapons of mass destruction,” although no stockpile was ever discovered. This W.M.D. story was repeated by others under Bush II, leading to a good pretext to waging war in Afghanistan and Iraq, the aftermath of which we still experience to this day. American troops remain in both nations as peacekeepers.

Rummie was also known for use of torture against enemies under Bush II, including the Abu Ghraib scandal. Eventually, it lead to Rumsfeld’s resignation in late 2006, where he was seceded by Robert Gates. He spent most of his life involved in politics, but had a good network of private people from many entities in between. He was a C.E.O. or chairman of any of a number of companies in between political gigs.  He served in the Navy as a young man only briefly.  

In fairness, 9/11 didn’t bring out the best in anyone. The attacks on American soil on September 11, 2001 caused tremendous loss of life and more of an unthinkable degree. That Americans and her leaders would want revenge was only human. The problem was finding the enemy. It wasn’t as if the enemy, al-Qaeda, was another recognized nation. But not finding the real enemy meant we guessed and we generally guessed wrong. In the land of the unaccountable lurking dangerously inside the beltway meant this horrible situation could never really be understood or adequately addressed.  The “shock and awe” campaign that followed that fateful day is unquestionably Rummey’s baby, even if he himself didn’t deliver the bombs. A great deal has been written about this period in history and the analyses are mostly worthy of thought, if not hindsight. It was certainly a different world. Now Rummey’s passed to yet another world — where hopefully there is no torture.