Likely the first in a series.


I may have mentioned previously something like, “You paid for it, you own it.” Truth be known, I may have said that in haste and in the heat of passion. Regardless, it still holds true. Those who voted to elect Donald Trump appear to be getting what they paid for: a schlemiel-in-chief. As reported on ABC News yesterday, the person set in two weeks to be the commander-in-chief continues to be coming off as somewhat less. Comments by Trump, members of the nation’s intelligence services, and members of Congress reflect a dismaying situation. A few choice excerpts from the last night’s news program:

ABC News anchor David Muir: President elect Donald Trump has taken aim at the U.S. intelligence community after their unanimous finding that the Russians were behind the hacking during the election. Tonight the intelligence community, which has been silent, silent no longer.



David Muir: It was a few days ago, when asked about the Russian hacking, the President-elect said, “I know things other people don’t know,” and promised to reveal it. Nothing yet from Mr. Trump on that, but tonight we are now hearing from the intelligence community.

Donald Trump: They have no idea if it’s Russia, or China, or somebody. It could be somebody sitting in a bed someplace.

Mary Bruce, ABC news reporter: Doubling down on New Year’s Eve…

Trump: [Again says he knows things other people don’t know.]

Mary Bruce: But today Intelligence Director James Clapper said he’s now more sure than ever it was Russia.

Senator Clair McCaskill: Who actually is the benefactor of someone, who is about to become the commander-in-chief, trashing the intelligence community?

James Clapper: I think there is an important distinction here between healthy skepticism, which policy makers, to include policy maker number one, should always have for intelligence. But I think there is a difference between skepticism and disparagement.


Mary Bruce: As Trump questions American intelligence, he praises Russia’s Vladimir Putin, and he seized on comments from Julian Assange, the head of Wikileaks, who made public the hacked emails



Mary Bruce: [continuing] Trump tweeting, Julian Assange said a 14 year old could have been behind the hack. Also said Russians did not give him the info.


We are subjected to a subsequent tweet from Donald Trump:

The dishonest media likes saying that I am in Agreement with Julian Assange – wrong. I simply state what he states, it is for the people to make up their own minds as to the truth.


It is entirely possible the people, the American voters, are starting to make up their own minds as to what is the truth, and it is not encouraging for Snowflake-elect Donald Trump. We are seeing a habitual liar, elected with around 2.8 million votes short of a majority, who is perceived as getting cozy with one of America’s most treacherous adversaries and also with another person who daily demonstrates his disdain for the United States.

As each day passes, it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish the president-elect from a schlemiel-elect. This column awaits further developments and will comment on  them with great joy in the weeks to come.

Keep reading. And may Jesus have mercy on your soul.


5 thoughts on “Schlemiel-in-Chief

  1. The resurrection of the “Evil Empire” schtick is one of the more puzzling aspects of American policy in the new Millennium. If you look at the issue from the point of view of national interest or territorial conflicts it is perplexing because apart from the notorious meddling in the Ukraine (historically as much a part of Russia as Puerto Rico is part of the USA) which looks to be coming to a sad end, there is no reason to treat Russia as an adversary.

    Except, of course, for the maniacal determination that this Republic should assert “full spectrum dominance” and be the one and only superpower on the planet, an increasingly irrelevant and unlikely proposition. The fact that it has not been able to threaten Russia into submission (also a quixotic notion, considering the history of that stubborn, vast nation) is terribly perplexing (hairdo-without-a-brain John Kerry going to Moscow and “demanding” that they turn over Snowden) (and getting the stony-face in response).

    Looking at it logically both nations have precisely the same serious concern about a real live and dangerous enemy, namely, Islamist expansionism. Russia already has them in large numbers on its southern border; the USA is alarmed that its pampered Potemkin village of Saudi Arabia and its overbearing cousin next door (to whom all candidates must swear eternal fealty, above all, before getting blessed by media, banking, Deep State etc) are seriously threatened. Logically the two erstwhile superpowers (the one collapsed, the other drowning in debt and economic uncertainty) should be aiming their fine, expensive weaponry at the same bearded, wild-eyed desert demons.

    • Responding only to the Snowden episode…
      I’m sensing crocodile tears. Were I in Kerry’s position I would throw up my hands and proclaim, “Well, I tried.” Then I would get on about more important business. Do I want Snowden back? No way. Snowden is right where we need him to be. Cheaper than keeping him in a U.S. jail and much more effective.

    • @byronallenblack
      I, as a non-USAian have never quite comprehended this resurrection of the “Evil Empire” schtick . Thank you BTW, the term is so much better than anything I have come up with.

      It is almost as if the US political/military/intelligence communities have been unable to comprehend that the world has fundamentally changed since 1960, well okay, since the fall of the Berlin wall.

      As a quibble, I would disagree with the Ukraine (historically as much a part of Russia as Puerto Rico is part of the USA) .

      Historically the Ukraine has been an integral part of the a) Russian Empire, b) USSR since about the time the USA was drafting its constitution. It has never really been considered a self-governing colony, which is how someone like myself from the British Commonwealth tends to view Puerto Rico’s status.

      The transfer of the Crimea from Russia to Ukraine was, probably, in the USSR nothing more than an administrative act by Khrushchev to make some of his Ukranian friends happy. The USSR and, IIRC the Russian Empire before it, was much more likely to redraw the boundaries of administrative sub-units, though, perhaps not on the scale of the Ukraine. In US terms, one day your home county could be in Texas and the next day in Louisiana or Arizona.

      One also has to realize that the Ukraine remains Russia’s only ice-free access to the world’s oceans and its largest or second largest navel base.

      In US terms, losing the Ukraine would be more like losing Southern California including the San Diago navel base.

  2. Pingback: Schlemiel-in-Chief | Skeptical Analysis

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.