Peggy Noonan at her nastiest

• MISS PEGGY WRITES HER UGLIEST COLUMN YET
• NO DEMOCRAT, INCUMBENT OR OTHERWISE, NOR THOSE WHO VOTED FOR THEM, HAS HAD HEAPED ON THEM SUCH SNIDENESS BY HER

Beneath her ‘elegant’ prose, “Miss Peggy” harbors a deep resentment…and it has never come through as openly than in this bitter attack on President Trump

I believe that Ms. Noonan has had, for a long time, a thinly concealed bitterness toward the Republican Party in general, and many of its conservative members.

She seems to have always overvalued her contributions to the nation, especially as “special assistant” and speechwriter for President Reagan.

A gifted writer, she penned some of Reagan’s best known speeches. As chief speechwriter for President G H W Bush’s campaign, however, she will alway’s be remembered as the creator of the line Mr. Bush probably wished he had never uttered, “Read my lips; No new taxes!”

At any rate, with her work for Reagan and Bush the Elder, ‘Ms. Peggy’, in our view it seems, expected to be a key player in the George W. Bush administration, but her talents were somehow overlooked.

To my knowledge, “Margaret Ellen” never thereafter uttered a kind word for GW, and, for the most part, any Republican or GOP president since.

Her Dislike for Donald Trump is palpable And today’s column in the Wall Street journal may be her ‘eloquent’ nastiest yet!

In it, she writes that, in her modest opinion, Michael Cohen’s testimony before the House Oversight and Reform committee, was “credible overall”!

And, in an old rhetorical trick, the 68 year old “conservative” (only attested to in her bio) columnist told readers that she “suspected” that “most everyone in America…(also found it credible overall”)... because no one, friend of the president or foe, love him or hate him, thinks Mr. Trump has a high personal character or an especially admirable back story.”

“Democrats say the purpose of the hearing was to get at the truth, Republicans say it was to disrupt the Trump presidency , and both are correct.” (I believe that few of Ms. Noonan’s “fellow conservatives” would agree with her assertion that the purpose of the hearing had anything at all to do about getting “at the truth”!)

It’s hard to miss the glee that Noonan must have felt as she penned the following:

“But history, which is a real and actual thing, was also at the table, and this is what history was told by a man who was for 10 years the president’s personal lawyer and confidante, an intimate who was present at the creation:

“Mr. Cohen implied the president’s Russian policies are not and never have been on the up-and-up: “Mr. Trump knew of and directed the Trump-Moscow negotiations throughout the campaign, and lied about it. He lied because he never expected to win the election. He also lied about it because he stood to make hundreds of millions of dollars on the Moscow real-estate project.” Mr. Cohen said he came to see the president’s true character: “Since taking office he has become the worst version of himself. . . . Donald Trump is a man who ran for office to make his brand great, not to make our country great. He had no desire or intention to lead this nation—only to market himself and to build his wealth and power. Mr. Trump would often say, the campaign is going to be the ‘greatest infomercial in political history.’ He never expected to win the primary. He never expected to win the general election. The campaign—for him—was always a marketing opportunity.”

This is what the eminent Peggy Noonan thinks is “credible overall”!!

“None of these charges were new, precisely. They have been made in books, investigations and interviews both on and off the record. What is amazing though is that such a rebuke—such an attack on the essential nature of a president, and by an intimate—has no equal in our history. I don’t think, as we talk about Mr. Cohen’s testimony, we fully appreciate this. John Dean said there was a cancer growing in the presidency. He didn’t say Richard Nixon was the cancer. He didn’t say the president was wicked and a fraud.

“This is bigger than we think, and history won’t miss the import of this testimony.

“Were the hearings step one in an ultimate impeachment attempt? We’ll see. The 7½ hours came across like the artillery bombardment before the charge. Older Democrats will counsel that the way forward is to spend the next year weakening the president—2020 is coming, a move to impeach will cause grave national trouble. Will they prevail?

“Everyone focuses on the always-upcoming Mueller report, but the action seems to be in Manhattan. When Mr. Cohen was asked if there were any illegal acts regarding Donald Trump that hadn’t come up in the hearings, he said yes.” “Those are a part of the investigation that’s currently being looked at by the Southern District of New York,” meaning the U.S. attorney there. What did the president or one of his agents communicate to Mr. Cohen the last time they had contact? “This topic is actually something that’s being investigated right now by the Southern District of New York.”

We are intrigued particularly by this little tidbit: “What did the president or one of his agents communicate to Mr. Cohen the last time they had contact?” Admittedly , with only a layman’s understanding of the law, our question is, “Isn’t there anymore the concept of ‘lawyer-client privilege’? Yes, we’re aware of the stipulation re: if criminal acts are involved…but must there not be at least some credible proof of such, other than a convicted perjurers hearsay?

Oh well. I’m sure Ms. Noonan will sort it all out for us benighted Trump voters. DLH

Michael Cohen Makes History 
There’s no precedent for such an attack on the essential nature of an American president

0

0