Please note that you can leave a comment on any of our posts at our Facebook page.  Subscribers can also comment at length at our Angel's Corner Forum.

Our Angel's Corner archive is here.

JANUARY 21,  2017

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:55 P.M. ET: 

CHANGING FOX – FROM THE HILL:   Fox News has declined to renew contributor contracts for longtime political commentator George Will, Republican strategist Ed Rollins and actress Stacey Dash, according to a network spokesperson.  Will, 75, is a Pulitzer-winning conservative columnist who was with ABC from 1981-2011 before coming to Fox in 2013.  In June of 2016, he declared he was leaving the Republican party because of Donald Trump, a decision the then-nominee appeared to embrace.  In 2015 and 2016, Will had periodically feuded with the network's highest-rated host, Bill O'Reilly, with Will once stating that O'Reilly's best-selling book, "Killing Reagan" was "nonsensical" and "The Factor" host calling Will "a hack" in a subsequent interview.  Sad to see George Will go.  I didn't always agree with him, but he's, at minimum, a thoughtful man who's conducted himself well.  He still has his newspaper column.

OH, LEAVE THE NUT ALONE – FROM THE DAILY MAIL:  The Secret Service has reportedly said it will open an investigation into Madonna after the singer told the Women's March on Washington that she had thought about 'blowing up the White House'.  Donning a black p***yhat, the music icon caused controversy by dropping the F-bomb four times, sparking a slew of apologies from broadcasters airing the protest live.
She went on to speak of her rage at the election result, telling the crowd she had thought a lot about 'blowing up the White House' but knew that it 'wouldn't change anything'.  According to the Gateway Pundit, a spokesman for the Secret Service said they were 'aware' of Madonna's comments and will open an investigation, but the ultimate decision whether or not to prosecute is the decision of the U.S. Attorney's Office.   The Secret Service declined to comment on the matter.  I think sending her to a retirement home would be adequate punishment.  She's a sad spectacle.

JARED OKAY – FROM CNN:  The Justice Department concluded Friday that Jared Kushner serving in his father-in-law's administration would not be a violation of federal anti-nepotism laws.  "In choosing his personal staff, the President enjoys an unusual degree of freedom, which Congress found suitable to the demands of his office," wrote Daniel Koffsky, deputy assistant attorney general in the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel, which serves as interpreter of federal law for the White House.  In essence, Koffsky reasoned that the anti-nepotism law covers only appointments in an "executive" agency and that the White House Office is not an executive agency within the law. He cited a separate law that gives the President broad powers to hire his staff.  That law authorizes the president to appoint "employees in the White House office without regard to any other provision of law regulating the employment or compensation of persons in the government service."  The argument is in line with the interpretation put forward by Kushner's attorney, Jamie S. Gorelick, earlier in the week.   Wise decision.  Presidents have often depended on relatives for advice and special missions.  FDR assigned Eleanor Roosevelt to important duties, especially during World War II.  Bill Clinton assigned Hillary to develop a health plan, which was not adopted.  Milton Eisenhower served as an adviser to his brother, President Dwight D. Eisenhower.  It's interesting that Kushner's lawyer is Jamie S. Gorelick, who is especially close to the Clintons.

January 21,  2017     Permalink

SUPERB – AT 12:46 P.M. ET:   Why are the Democrats so bitter?  It's an intriguing question.  Others lose elections and go on with their lives, using their time to reorganize.  But Democrats are nearing riot.  Maybe we'll even see a mass exodus to another planet.  Why?  Seth Lipsky, one of the best journalists in New York, has written a superb piece on this for the New York Post, answering the question.  A must read: 

So why are the Democrats so bitter?...Why the incessant weeping and wailing?

The most persuasive theory is that it has nothing to do with meddling by the Russians or James Comey or the crustiness of Trump’s campaign or his personal behavior. Rather, it’s something other than politics. It’s almost psychiatric.

This was an insight I first heard from one of my journalistic mentors, Robert Bartley, editor of the Wall Street Journal. Shortly before he died, he wrote two columns on the anger of the Democrats.

Bartley comprehended that the Democrats’ fury went beyond politics and “must have deeper, subconscious roots.” His theory was that they were unable to deal with a sense they were losing their “birthright.”

What he meant was that, as he put it, “base Democrats think of themselves as the best people: the most intelligent and informed, the most public spirited, the most morally pure.” If that’s what’s at stake, no wonder they’re so devastated.

At the time Bartley wrote those columns — late 2003 — the Democrats were gearing up to run John Kerry for president. They seemed as confident of impending victory then as Hillary Clinton was just three months ago.

But, as Bartley warned in a particularly prophetic column, that confidence belied the weakness of the glue that held together the party’s coalition. The Democratic Party, he wrote, “has descended into a collection of interest groups not bound together by any ideals.” It was floundering before the American people.

COMMENT:  Read the whole thing.  It's the best psychological analysis of the Democratic Party that I've seen recently.  It's not so much a party as a state of mind, not so much a set of beliefs as a new religion. 

One more major loss and we may well see the need for a new party, to take up where the Democrats are leaving off.

January 21, 2017       Permalink 

UNBELIEVABLE – AT 11:52 A.M. ET:   There is a massive "women's" march on Washington today.  But there's a problem:  Certain women aren't invited.  From RealClearPolitics:

As a young woman living in Washington, D.C., I could easily attend the Women’s March on Saturday if I wanted to.

Except that I am not invited, despite my unambiguous status as a member of the female sex. That’s because I am pro-life. As the organizers of the march made clear in a statement earlier this week, the Women’s March’s on Washington “platform is pro-choice” and “has been since day one.”

“We look forward to marching on behalf of individuals who share th[at] view,” they went on, and stated that the since-revoked partnership of New Wave Feminists, a secular group with pro-life values, was an “error.”

The march might as well have placed scare quotes around the word “Women’s,” or better yet, have renamed itself “The March for Abortion.” Then it would have cleared up any confusion about pretending to represent all women, when almost half of us self-identify as pro-life and would probably feel more at home at the March for Life, set to take place the following week. The March for Life is open to women of all political stripes and will include groups like Democrats for Life of America.

No doubt the so-called feminists organizing the Women’s March were further vexed by the headline news that Donald Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway, the first woman in history to run a successful presidential campaign, will also become the first official White House staff member to speak at the March for Life.

COMMENT:  That is spot on.  The left never quite understands why it loses elections, and in recent years it has lost elections at every level.  Far from being inclusive, the left excludes all those who won't follow the party line.  Compare please with the fact that some of President Trump's nominees to high office felt perfectly free to disagree with him on some issues during their confirmation hearings.  The sky did not fall. 

I spot-checked the "women's" march, which is being covered on TV.  Party line all the way.  Nothing new.  No attempt to reach out to anyone. 

January 21, 2017       Permalink

SECOND DAY – AT 11:31 A.M. ET:  It is the second day of the Trump administration.  The country has survived.  The Constitution is still in force.  Some liberals are bordering on hysteria.  The new administration tends to business.  From the Daily Mail: 

President Donald Trump is attending a national prayer service this morning with his family and Vice President Mike Pence.

The first and second families arrived at the Washington National Cathedral at 10:30 am to take part in the post-inauguration tradition.

It was the second time in two days that the Trumps and Pences had worshiped together.They began their first day in office with a church service, too, at St. John's, near the White House and the presidential guest house Trump spent his final night as president-elect in.

The national prayer service is an inauguration tradition that dates back to George Washington.

And...

Trump's inaugural committee said today's 'interfaith ceremony will be in keeping with the uniting and uplifting inaugural events, demonstrating President-elect Trump's commitment to be president for all Americans.'

Don Jr., his wife in a maroon coat, Jared Kushner and wife Ivanka, clad in a cranberry coat, entered first, taking their seats in the second row, the Kushner's on the right and the Trumps on the left. Tiffany Trump was seated in the third row on the left, as well, wearing a baby blue coat with white trim.

The Pences came in next, Karen Pence in a black outfit with a large, light pink collar, and the vice president in a black suit and maroon striped tie, taking their seats in the front row.

President Trump also wore a black suit to the prayer service, as did First Lady Melania Trump. His tie was dark blue with small white stripes. Melania wore a belted black coat and her brunette hair down, after an up-do at Friday's inauguration.

The president had a smile on his face as took his place in the front row beside his vice president. His expression became solemn soon after but returned to a smile as the congregation sang My Country, 'Tis of Thee at the beginning of the service.

COMMENT:  The Trumps and the Pences have conducted themselves superbly.  As have their supporters.  I'm curious to see how polls next week portray public opinion toward the new administration.  Of course, we'd have to examine how the polls are taken.   Oversampling Democrats seems to be a trend on the part of establishment pollsters, the better to soothe liberal feelings.

January 21,  2017     Permalink

JANUARY 20,  2017

SHORT TAKES ON THE DRIFTING WRECKAGE – AT 11:57 P.M. ET:

IT IS DONE – Donald Trump is now President Trump.  The day went remarkably well.  There were some demonstrations in Washington, but fewer than we'd feared.  The ceremony was smooth.  Nothing was disrupted, and the various speakers were appropriately forgettable.  Even the media, from the sampling I took, tried to be reasonably respectful.  That will change, but at least they controlled themselves for a day and night. 

The inaugural balls were done with taste and class, and the Trump family came through in style. 

As we noted earlier, the inaugural address was perhaps the only discordant note.  It was Trump being Trump, without apology, and was written more as a war chant against everything Trump wants to defeat rather than an inclusive, inspirational poem.  I would have preferred a bit more of the latter, and some needed reassurance to our allies, but the policies will be more important than the words. The media did not dwell on the address.  Trump's first State of the Union message will be more important.

WINNIE – FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER:   President Trump has returned a bust of former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill to the Oval Office, which had been removed by his predecessor in 2009.  Reporters first noticed that the bust had been placed back in the room on Friday, just as Trump was signing a series of executive orders at the Resolute desk.  Obama had moved the bust to the White House residence during his first few days in office and later installed separate busts of Martin Luther King Jr. and President Lincoln in its place.  A spokesperson for British Prime Minister Theresa May confirmed last week that Trump had personally asked if England would loan the bust of Churchill to the U.S. once he took office.  Winston deserves his place in that office.  A very flawed man who was perfect at one critical moment.

FOX WAY UP – FROM THE HILL:   Fox News had a huge night on the eve of President Trump's inauguration, scoring its highest ratings since the night after the 2016 election.  On Thursday night, Fox delivered an average of 4.818 million viewers in primetime between 8:00 pm and 11:00 pm, easily beating second-place MSNBC (1.58 million) and third-place CNN (1.462 million).  Fox also bested its competition in the key 25-54 demographic that advertisers covet most. The 21st Century-owned channel averaged 1.079 million viewers compared to 486,000 for CNN and 310,000 for MSNBC.   Trump has been a ratings boon for all the cable news networks. In 2016, all three cable news networks enjoyed record ratings, with CNN having its best year since 1995 and MSNBC capturing its largest audience ever for the year.  Fox News finished 2016 as the most-watched basic cable network for the first time in its 20-year history, beating even non-cable stations like ESPN and TBS.  Like Trump, the founders of Fox News detected something in the American people and responded to it.  What they detected was a wish that news organizations would report the stories of their lives and values, not just the perceptions originating in Washington and New York. 

January 20, 2017       Permalink

12:21 P.M. ET:  We have just heard President Trump's inaugural address.  Well, okay.  It was Trump.  It had about it a somewhat belligerent quality, but Trump tried, as best he could, to uplift the spirits of a beleaguered nation.  The speech lacked the elegance of John F. Kennedy's inaugural, which was reportedly Trump's inspiration.  There were no memorable lines.  But the new president did lay out his goal of making America great again by pointing to job creation, infrastructure development and higher-quality education.  He used the term "America first," which is somewhat controversial because it was the slogan of isolationists before World War II. 

I can't say it was a great speech.  It wasn't.  It was a defiant speech.  Now comes the action, which is much more important.

12:02 P.M. ET:  It is President Trump now.  He took the oath flawlessly.

11:54 A.M. ET:  Vice President Pence has just been sworn in by Associate Justice Clarence Thomas of the United States Supreme Court.  It was the first time an African American has sworn in one of the nation's two top officials.  I'm glad to see Clarence Thomas get this moment.  Mike Pence, of course, was absolutely smooth.  Knowing Pence, and how capable he is, he probably studied every word of that oath.

11:35 A.M. ET:  The president-elect enters to applause, and is greeted warmly on the platform by political figures, past and present, Dem and GOP.  As it should be.  The boycotters look more and more ridiculous.

11:26 A.M. ET:  All the big shots have come in to the inaugural ceremony, except Donald Trump and Mike Pence.  I've been watching Ivanka Trump.  (Who isn't?)  Some are already muttering about her political future.  I'm one of them.  There's just something about her...

10:59 A.M. ET:  Hillary and Bill Clinton have just arrived at the inauguration, and have received, appropriately, a friendly and warm round of applause.  Contrast please with the reception given President George W. Bush at President Obama's inauguration in 2009.  Bush was booed relentlessly, perhaps signaling the tone of the modern Democratic Party.

10:55 A.M. ET:  President Obama and President-elect Trump have left the White House and are heading for Capitol Hill.

INAUGURATION – AT 10:18 A..M. ET:  It really is the only story today, unless something else intervenes.

I'm watching the same screens you are.   I have seen this ritual on television since the inauguration of Dwight D. Eisenhower on January 20, 1953.  I still recall watching on a 12-inch Dumont black-and-white television set.  Only two swearings-in since then have been abnormal – the oath-taking of Lyndon B. Johnson on Air Force One after the assassination of President Kennedy on November 22, 1963, and the swearing-in of Gerald Ford after the resignation of Richard M. Nixon in 1974. 

An inauguration is, despite the traditional rituals, a remarkable event.  It signifies the peaceful transfer of power in the most powerful nation on Earth.  More than 60 House Democrats have chosen not to attend this ceremony, in protest against Donald Trump.  Frankly, they look like fools.  They were sent to Washington to participate in government, not to avoid it.  But most come from safe districts, and have lifetime jobs, and thus have no political worries.  No member of the Senate is boycotting, reaffirming the Senate's traditional role as a deliberative body.