OJ Simpson, Jeffrey Epstein, Israeli hospital bombers, Donald Trump...
Know a criminal psychopath who needs some legal assistance?
Call 1800-DERSH!
(Operators are standing by)
10
You got one right Maureen.
Congratulations.
Starr's career trajectory is typically "Republican" and suggests why Republican Congressmen have sold their consciences for a mess of pottage.
Special prosecutor for a bogus impeachment proceeding against a popular and effective President who was a little too supportive of black Americans, Dean of Law at Pepperdine (Church of Christ), President of Baylor (Baptist).
What a historical irony that Starr was ousted at Baylor over his mishandling of sexual assault cases, which were far more serious (nonconsensual) than whatever Bill was alleged to have done.
Starr's treatment of Monica, the putative "victim," was execrable--Monica was threatened with serious jail time for refusing to testify.
McConnell was canny enough to nix Jim Jordan and Trump Giuliani. Starr and Dershowitz have too much baggage.
Dershowtiz, someone I respected, is disappointing. His improbable relationship to Trump is likely defined by his more primary allegiance to Adelson and Adelson's Zionism.
Yes, it is a wonder why Nancy Pelosi never seems to have had any Presidential ambitions since she is ably shouldering the burden of being Speaker.
A decade younger and she would have been a shoo-in as the Democratic nominee and would have trounced Trump in the general, as she is doing now.
858
@Andrew Shin yes... I think Nancy Pelosi is ably shouldering the burden of being leader of the Free World these days.
173
@Andrew Shin I'm pretty sure that Nancy would still be a shoo-in for the Democratic nomination. She stands heads and tales above the other candidates, especially the female candidates and their "whingeing." There is no question that she would destroy Trump in 2020.
112
Starr and Dershowitz know in advance that this is a case they are guaranteed to win.
A crowning career achievement now awaits these two disreputable old hypocrites. Each of them will be able to say that he successfully defended the President of the United states.
But wouldn't it be a great surprise if it turned out that they are wrong.
716
@Spring
Yes, Trump probably will prevail in the trial, but that will have far more to do with spineless Republicans in the Senate than the efforts of Starr and Dershowitz.
129
The Trump impeachment trial is an historic sequel to his historic impeachment. He is only the third president to be impeached in the 231 years since our nation was formed with the ratification of the Constitution on June 21,1788. But Trump's impeachment trial will also be historic for several other reasons.
Trump's trial will be the first time a president's defense will attempt the nullification of the Constitution. Trump violated the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, but his defense will claim that is not a crime by a high office, nor a misdemeanor by a low president. Trump's defense wants to nullify the impeachment provisions of the Constitution, arguing that the impeachment of Trump is an abuse of power by Democrats who are mounting a coup to overthrow a president they hate and deny the will of the electorate in 2016. These are not arguments of facts, they are arguments of fools. Which brings us to a second reason Trump's impeachment trial will be historic.
Trump's defense team will put on an entertainment extravaganza, a la Ed Sullivan's "really big shew." The only thing missing is Ed as the emcee and Putin as a surprise guest witness. Otherwise, the show must go on and the Republican senators are only lamenting that they may not clap, laugh or give a standing ovation.
463
@JABarry Your comments capture this reader's sentiments, exactly. Suspect, as you said, the argument will be that the Democrats were the ones engaged in the abuse of power, not the president. Democrats will be accused of engaging in coup to overthrow the people's choice for president. But the majority of voters did not choose Trump as president. Trump is in the Oval Office because of the Electoral College, not because of the will of the people.
131
@Robert Stewart . . .and it will be interesting to see what the Supremes have to say about the case coming before them about whether electors are required to vote for the candidate that wins the majority vote in their area.
As I see it, the electoral college was implemented so that, based not on numbers of senators or the population of an area, but the voice of the majority of the people could be heard. I think the original purpose was to over come disproportionate representation. I'm no Electoral College Scholar, so await to hear what this court will say since many on the bench are wannabe purists on the Constitution.
31
@mouseone
You are mistaken about the purpose of the Electoral College. It was supposed to be a college of decent men (at that time) who would ensure that no corrupt, self-serving, or demagogic person became President. (I am not mentioning the political calculations behind the scenes, just the ostensible purpose.)
63
Ken Starr is worse than a political hack. He is a self righteous, crusading selective moralist whose rage points only to Democrats and excuses the least qualified, most undisciplined president in American history.
In between attacking Bill Clinton in a special prosecutor's office searching endlessly for anything to bring him down and his present reincarnation, Starr presided over a disaster at Baylor University. He decided they needed an aggressive football program to move up in the ranks of notable schools, so he decreed one and was so deeply involved he was seen on the sidelines at football games. Big problem. Sexual assaults occurred with minimal response in terms of investigations and punishments. Starr was FIRED!, to quote one of Trump's favorite terms of old.
Mueller's probe into Trump v. Russia stuck to the straight and narrow. Starr's rambling investigation of Clinton was like a search and destroy mission: find anything. Mueller allowed his and his staff's work to be shredded by Barr ,who came out early misrepresenting the results. Starr presented Congress with what was called a roadmap to impeachment.
Now we are to get the added treat of hearing Starr denounce impeachment as a Constitutional violation and a plague on the presidency. You can't make this stuff up.
847
@Doug Terry
And, don't forget who worked for Starr, Kavanaugh. He apparently was the champion of salacious writing. Nothing was overlooked in his descriptions. Seems like these GOP moralists just love to saver sexual misdeeds of others. However, they overlook their own....Starr, Kavanaugh, Gengrich, Hastert........
196
Back in the Clinton years, a key fact about Starr came to light. He is a PK, which is small town, Texas talk for preacher's kid. If ever there was a archetype in Southern Baptist America, the preacher's kid would at the top of the list.
A PK is known for scolding the other kids when they misbehave on the playground or at the local drive-in hamburger stand. He stands outside childhood society looking in with disdain and acting as his father's surrogate in trying to bring order to youthful chaos. The PK graduates near the top of his high school class and often goes off to Baylor, the university Starr would later lead, to complete his immersion in study of Biblical truths and earthly sins.
If you were Bill Clinton, a PK is the last sort of person you would want on your trail and Starr's excessive morality was on full display as Clinton was taken to the docks for his marital nonconformity. Starr's return to the public stage seems both truly weird and completely apiece of this strange era in which we live.
88
@Doug Terry
A most appropriate term for the ludicrous grounds of the Clinton impeachment, worth re-using: "marital nonconformity."
48
Trump's appeal to white men is much broader than working class men and extends to men of every economic class who "want their country back". They fear ethic diversity, competent women and LGBTQ people who threaten their stranglehold on power and privilege. And they will fight like tooth and nail to keep them. Not going to pretty.
35
Trump didn’t “hire” these guys. He cast them.
34
Well well I knew the left hasn't gotten over that Hillary loss, but it's sounds like they haven't gotten over the Bill Clinton impeachment either.
Ah the Clinton's can't they just go away?
6
My eyes, my eyes!
3
I hope you're right about the women's vote, so long as they VOTE for the Democratic nominee even if he is the wrong sex.
13
Very funny. Not as funny as Starr and Dershowitz defending Donnie DayGlo, but funny nonetheless.
13
Wouldn't it be great if some non-celebrity attorney, armed only with the facts, took down these two "fixers"? Repeat after me, "At long last, have you no decency?"
26
What's with the bait and switch? The headline promises to be about Trump and his zany band of kleptocrats and pervs, but as soon as you scroll past the picture, it's about how a woman should be president because some men have made some bad mistakes.
Women make mistakes too. Just read the next section that lists all the ways that Hillary messed up her campaign. If she ran her campaign that badly, maybe she wouldn't have been a very good president either (although infinitely better than Trump and his ilk).
It looks like Ms. Dowd is using the Trump fiasco to push a different agenda.
5
Trump has been scraping the proverbial bottom of the barrel for Administration hires ever since he took office. The very few decent and capable have resigned or been fired. The Trump Administration has the highest turnover in Cabinet and other key positions in the history of the United States. Neither Starr nor Dershowitz have practiced real law in quite some time. They are narcissistic media hounds and apparently morally bankrupt, just like their new defendant. What could possibly go wrong?
642
@Concerned MD "Neither Starr nor Dershowitz have practiced real law in quite some time." You are spot on with this comment!
61
@Concerned MD . . .perhaps the Senate rules will actually cripple their attempts and self promotion and stealing the limelight. There will be no press allowed to broadcast their every word. Mc Kentucky may be shooting himself in the foot with this and it won't be the extravaganza that 45 wants.
35
@Concerned MD Nothing can possibly go wrong (for Trump) because the Republicans on the Senate (criminals all) have already announced their decision.
3
Dershowitz and Starr are making ridiculous arguments. Dershowitz isn't disputing the facts in the case, he's arguing that the quid pro quo action by Trump isn't impeachable based upon his interpretation of the constitution.
Starr and Sekulow will argue that there's no evidence that 'quid pro quo' was taken.
What a joke we've become.
337
@Jaques, on the top of it the majority of Republican senators taking the position that Trump was pursuing anti-corruption measures and had not put personal agenda ahead of national interests. I think McConnell is well aware of this disconnect and will try to speed up to process as much as possible.
28
@Jacques I don't get their logic. These are seasoned lawyers so they should know that a quid pro quo doesn't have to come into play for a crime to have been committed. The law says it's a crime to solicit the help of a foreign government to interfere in a presidential election, which is exactly what Trump did, and they know it.
And they should recognize that the quid pro quo may in itself be a crime in this case since it was the vehicle used to deny lawful funds to Ukraine. Quid pro quo, extortion, bribery: A rose by any other name...
49
Trump and his minions are turning this very solemn procedure into his latest foray into reality television. The Trump team is trying to amp up the ratings with Fox News celebrities. Since it's all a hoax and a sham, he might as well max out his ratings. Where's Geraldo when you need him?
Of course the real sham are the Republican Senators, like Lindsay Graham, who publicly admit that they will refuse to consider any information, new, old or otherwise.
The less obvious oath breakers publicly state that the House did a lousy job by not including all relevant evidence when Trump blocked virtually all relevant evidence. They even write op-eds about it (Marco Rubio) and fully expect all of us to buy this as a legitimate argument.
Then there is the whopper of them all. Dershowitz will put his academic credentials on the line in an attempt to prove that a US president cannot be impeached for abuse of power because such abuses are not specifically defined and enumerated in the Constitution. Only treason and bribery are. Of course, Trump did attempt to bribe the Ukrainians in order to extract certain political favors. The House has included his bribery under the abuse of power charge because that's what bribery is. I've always said that a doctorate is often used as a license to make a complete fool of oneself in public and get away with it. Let's not let any of them get away with it.
488
@Bruce Rozenblit
This is all the TV version of Trump University School Of Law. Nothing more.
Seriously.
52
@Bruce Rozenbli
Agree. If Dershowitz prevails no president may ever be convicted of abuse of power no matter how egregious the abuse was. Dershowitz believes that if a previous senate decided against abuse of power in one instance then abuse of power could never apply. Why should that establish an absolute precedent? If one person was not convicted of murder does this mean that no person could be convicted? It would seem that each case of abuse of power will vary as well as each senate, especially the politics, and should be considered individually. Unless the constitution specifically says abuse of power cannot be considered.
30
@Bruce Rozenblit Thank you! Let's drop the timid euphemism 'quid pro quo,' and use the appropriate word, bribery. Or even extortion.
72
Best line in print this morning: "How did he miss Ted Bundy?"
31
@btcpdx
How did he miss Ted Bundy?
Bundy knew that Starr is a bigger sociopath than Bundy was.
10
Calling people names, Maureen, is not making an argument.
Childish and chicken.
11
OK. Ya got me. I had to look up "whingeing". (Scholars appear to disagree about dropping the "e" in the present participle, but my spell checker agrees with Maureen.)
I nearly filed it next to "covfefe" in my personal dictionary.
12
This was hilarious and energizing.
Here, Maureen Dowd shows why "No Term Limits For Columnists." She can write it--and write it this way--because she's been here the whole time. Perfection!
15
Ms Dowd - you rock! I had all but given up reading about the Apricot Toddler in the White House and his team of supporting miscreants. It was all just too depressing. But you provide hope by reminding us that there is a significant wave of disgust rising in America that has the capacity to wash this administration out like so much dirty laundry.
19
Trump: "Starr is a lunatic," "a disaster" and "off his rocker."
Trump: "We only hire the best people."
32
Am I correct that Starr was “let out “ of his position as dean of one of the nation’s university for not acting against abuse allegations by students???
He is such a sham and I for one an not interested in people like Starr. He is every bit the empty hypocrite that trump is, only smarter.
16
Well done Ms. M
10
Maureen Dowd mars an otherwise perceptive column with yet another unsupported dig at Hillary Clinton—that Clinton lost in 2016 because she ran “an entitled, joyless, nose-in-the air campaign.” Huh? I attended a Clinton campaign rally in 2016, held at a community college in Oakland, California. Seeing many young people in the audience, Clinton focused her comments on her proposals to reduce college costs. Nothing entitled or nose-in-the-air about that. Plenty of joy on hand that day among an overflow crowd. But even in the heavily Democratic Bay Area, I could find no press coverage of the event the following day.
Look, Hillary Clinton lacks the gift of charisma shared by her husband and President Obama. What she brought to her candidacy was outstanding experience in government and depth in her thinking about public policy. The mass media, including NYT and WaPo, and certainly Maureen Dowd, simply weren’t interested in covering the elements of Hillary Clinton’s campaign that highlighted the strengths that would have made her, in my opinion, an excellent president.
48
Sorry, worked on Hillary’s clueless campaign and Facts matter and truth hurts the column has it exactly correct.
4
Does it really matter whose Trump's lawyers are? The fix is in. The Republicans really wanted Clinton gone, that's why Starr was able to switch over from a crooked land deal that wasn't to a sex thing.
At this moment Republicans want Trump to stay, who knows why, but get ready for more lockstep from McConnell, Nunes et al.
Trump walks even if his lawyers were named Dopey, Sneezy and Grumpy.
17
Once again Maureen Dowd has basically nailed it. I would think any American with half a brain would realize both a woman can easily become President of the U.S.; if she has the vision, brains, and charisma to do so; and hearing the endless whining from the likes of Warren is not going to get her one more vote than she already has. The people who generally support both progressive and common sense issues ; but are totally put off with hyper Politically Correct fanaticism; will stay home if they feel there is no difference between Democratic and Republican fanaticism that pays no heed of the vast majority in the middle who only want to be rid of all this extremism that is killing your democracy. One wonders if John Kennedy or Dwight D. Eisenhower would ever get elected in this day and age. Kennedy and Ike would both be deemed NOT partisan enough for either extreme. And that sums up how fanatics are tearing the fabric of American society apart from within. The exact scenerio Lincoln warned about 1 1/2 centuries ago. As for a flea bag lawyer like Ken Starr and his equally compromised lawyer buddy Dershowitz are concerned; who else would defend the indefensible. One wonders if it is not already to late for the U.S. to ever regain some kind of respectability on the world stage after TRUMPOCRACY has poisoned society to the point of no return. Every day the damage is being done.
5
The Senate Republicans can allow no witnesses in President Trump’s impeachment trial because the nation would learn that his co-conspirators included his Vice President Pence, his Attorney General Barr, his Secretary of State Pompeo, his Acting Chief of Staff Mulvaney and his former Energy Secretary Perry. As Trump’s former thug Lev Parnas is documenting, everyone was in the loop.
Hack Republican Senators such as Martha McSally of Arizona will swallow whatever pride they have and quickly acquit Trump without witnesses or any new evidence from the Administration. The FIX is in, because it must be in if the Republicans are to have any chance of not being drowned in a Democratic Party tidal wave in the 2020 elections.
Best opinion piece from Maureen Dowd in many years.
19
The worse Trump gets in flipping morality and the Constitution upside down and drowning them in his polluted D.C. GOP swamp, the better Maureen’s writing gets. Much appreciated, as we can only bear witness to this corrupt Republican debacle—that is, until November 3, 2020 when we vote the rascals OUT!
10
If only as many woman voters felt the way you do, Maureen. The only way we're going to get rid of the clown bus in Washington is enough women force it off the road.
To revise an old sexist line:
"Ladies, start your engines!"
15
Getting ready to watch the football game. But I wonder what the over and under bet would be the next President get's impeached especially if he/she is from the opposite party of who controls the House?
3
Brilliant commentary. Dowd’s stiletto slices and dices in all the right places. The perversion in Starr’s obsession with Monica Lewinsky’s sexuality (see Dowd’s commentary from 1998), Dershowitz’s obsession with notoriety in defending the unrighteous, and the need for female politicians to stop playing nice, to recognize their majority status and to claim their right to lead through acts of inspiration and killer instinct toward those who reveal their mendacity and veniality.
9
Maureen Dowd has, as usual, hit a home run with this editorial. Trump's newest legal team members, Starr and Dershowitz, are a couple of morally bankrupt self-serving seekers of the media. They are trying to disguise their true character claiming to be experts in understanding and articulating the intended meaning of "high crimes and misdemeanors" referred to in the Constitution. In reality they are a couple of old hypocrite Trump lackeys trying to enhance their reputations in their waning careers.
13
Something in his closet? Really? This from a man whose closet is bigger than Grand Central Terminal and chuck full of abhorant secrets. Can't wait for eviction Marshalls to knock on his door.
7
Dershowitz doesn't care a fig about the Constitution. He's been mounting absurd defenses of Trump's outrages for three years. No doubt, he was auditioning himself for the role of Trump's lawyer in what was destined to be the Trial of the 21st Century, much as the OJ circus was the Trial of the 20th. Dershowitz is a showboat and a gun for hire. Trump thinks Dersh gives his defense team a bipartisan gloss ("Even that liberal from Harvard says I'm innocent"), but anyone who believes Dershowitz is a liberal in any sense of the word is a fool.
15
Thanks for putting almost amusing Republican hypocrisy front and center. Starr is a pathetic excuse for a human being, and frankly comparing the trivial circus that was the Clinton Impeachment trial to Trump's actual crime of trying to fix both the 2016 and the 2020 election thanks to Russian help is no doubt part of their defense strategy. Both Starr and Dershowitz are displaying their peacock feathers in a trial where McConnell and Republican senators have publicly pledged their fealty to their King Trump regardless of his crimes. It's a can't lose for their their resumes; drug dealers, bankrupt financiers, and mafia B-listers will be knocking down their doors for legal help.
9
I wouldn't be shocked if it turned out someone was holding something over Dershowitz's head, forcing him to join the team and like it. And you all know what that is.
7
@Edward P Smith Wasn't Dersh a frequent flyer on the Lolita Express as well as Bone Spurs? Birds of a feather.
13
Guess who wrote all the salacious stuff in the Starr Report!
Hint: His initials are BK, and his well known for his sober behavior and judicious temperament.
13
Trump on Ken Starr in 1999: “I bet he’s got something in his closet.”
Something from Victoria's Secret?
8
You nailed it Maureen. Let's hope that white suburban housewife and working woman who voted for our current part time resident taking up spacei n the WH vote the other way.
8
I just wish you wrote like this before the horrific election in 2016.
12
@Jasmine12
There is no popular vote.
I'm very sad that the impeachment of Trump has come down to this. It is a fools joke that the republicans as a whole have already made their minds up that this president is innocent without hearing all of the facts.
Can a person even fathom a trial when the defense cannot even defend himself but will not provide any evidence or witnesses? I know it is an attorney's job is to defend a client. Those two attorneys should be on trial as well as the president. I wonder where the hypocrisy of Dershowitz and Starr went.
4
@KLM These two will ultimately end up being on trial as well.
5
I hope Hillary read this piece. Remember when she waited weeks to concede the nomination to Obamain 2008, then left her supporters in 2016 waiting in vain while she did what? Huma never revealed what she did that night.
Next day she arrives in purple to proclaim that she had the best campaign ever?
Thanks for reminding us of her failures in 2016. We'll see. I'm just sorry you're not on the Pete train and have yet to write much about him.
2
Because of the low level of intelligence of most of the Trump zealots, it is effortless for his "team" to espouse lies such as "they are trying to overturn the 2016 election, " or "there is no crime here". The ease with which these followers are manipulated is, once again, shocking.
7
Good column, Ms. Dowd.
I'd like to point out a couple of things - In the paragraph where you describe Starr's salacious Clinton report you forgot to mention that a sitting Supreme Court Justice, Brett Kavanaugh, was the main author of the salacious part.
#2 - regarding your reasons for Hillary's loss - your description is true, but you forgot to mention that she actually won. The Electoral College did the dirty work. 3 million more votes isn't small change - she won handily.
13
@Pat Boice I can't you people are still going on about the popular vote. You and so many other people here and elsewhere keep repeating that mantra. Please take up another tune. The popularity vote means absolutely nothing if you don't win the EC votes too. Please get yourselves back into reality and realize what's past is past. She let hubris get he best of her and she LOST. The hard work is getting the voters out in the all important states. Nothing else matters.
2
Don't fear Starr. He got run out of Baylor for incompetence. It is a conservative bastion. And he is boring to listen to.
Trump needs someone who the public will listen to and believe. Starr is definitely not the guy.
3
Can someone tell me why Jay Sekulow has not been forced to recuse himself. His fingerprints are right in the middle of this fiasco. If Mr. Parnas’ information had come out effort the House Impeachment investigation we would not have had to put up with hours of looking at the fool Devin Nunes.
13
Republican Hypocrisy # 32
We must go after all Democrats even if all for which they can be proven guilty is a violation of their marriage contracts, like Clinton certainly was. However, we must always totally defend our president even if he can be proven to be in violation of the decisions of congress which previous presidents had to abide by, can be proven to have made multiple violations of the emolument rules for president laid out in the constitution, have any number of relationships outside of any number of personal marriages even if he has to pay for the related coverups and lying, even if he can be proven to lie repeatedly and in excess of 10,000 lies. Each and every one of our White House attorneys must commit to do the same before they can represent any Republican in any way and for whatever reason and like the president they might defend they can also lie repeatedly.
5
I’m an attorney and former federal prosecutor, appointed by Bill Barr. It pains me to say this, but Messrs. Dershowitz, Starr, and Barr discredit a noble profession.
23
If I were Starr, I would call for immediate dismissal of the articles of impeachment before the senate deliberates on grounds of lack of proper and complete evidence and abuse of power by the house.
4
It looks like the real war on women has been joined by two exemplars of sexual assault and abuse. Trump's reputation speaks for itself when it comes to treatment of women. The question is, what are women going to do about it now?
5
I will hope that it is made clear that"extortion" (you do this thing or otherwise I do this) is the flip side of "bribery" (you do this thing and I give you this). There. In the Constitution. Dershowitz said it needed to be in the Constitution black and white. It is. This should be made clear. I cannot believe everyone does not beat a simple bribery drum. Am I missing something?
10
Since Trump corrupts all who work for him, choosing these two guys will save a lot of time.
11
Maybe not "any" woman but "many, many, many" women would be a better than President than Trump! The one who blew me away was Sen. Kamala Harris who is out. So, so wish she did not, but I know nothing. It should not be about money, and it is possible i.e. Jimmy Carter.
3
Trump to suburban women voters: Machine guns will remain legal and plentiful. Decades of regs that limit air and water pollution? Gone, but we're bringing back daily burgers and fries at school. Climate change? Not that it exists, but your children and grandchildren might as well learn to adapt anyway. If that's not enough to earn your vote, remember that I like to grab and cheated on my third wife.
9
Hillary Clinton did not lose. She won the popular vote. The only reason she isn't president is a faulty Electoral College system, rooted in slavery and reinforced by a GOP strategy that appeals to less educated white Americans.
10
@Anne-Marie O’Connor
Yours is the same comment by about half here. Please try another angle to your collective arguments. She did in fact lose the election due to our antiquated system. She let her ego get in the way and she did in fact lose. She lost the all important states. Until the EC is gone forever every Blue candidate needs to put boots on the ground in the states that bone spurs won and take them back. Pleaes stop using the EC as the go to excuse. It's more than tiresome and ignorant at this point in time.
4
Crime or not, I am waiting for someone to ask Trump's defense team how an upcoming election can be a remedy for a President who is rigging the election.
9
Brilliant, Maureen Dowd. Moving, honest and so necessary. All women meed to read this today. Thank you.
3
Starr and Dershowitz. How befitting that they represent Trump. They are both can readily be described as shoddy as is their client.
America has reached a new low and we are going to see it get worse. How terribly sad.
9
@Steve It will get even lower when Trump tries to appear on his own behalf as well. Wait for it.
3
I disagree with your comment about Warren and Klobuchar whining. They both made a strong case about their past experience running against conservative white males. I think that’s an argument for electability not whining.
10
Starr and Dershowitz make two very unseemly but very fitting choices to defend Trump. They will no doubt aim to make the impeachment trial a distorted reality to feed to Fox but I hope they do not succeed. And, as Ms. Dowd so correctly says, women must rise up against Trump and his henchmen, which includes McConnell, this November and put an end to their twisted, selfish form of power and governance, at least for a time.
5
Spot on, Maureen! Well written and insightful. I completely agree with your assessment about women and the presidency. My only disagreement about the reason HIllary lost is that the Russians and Cambridge Analytica also had a hand in Trump’s win.
I nearly lost my cookies when I saw Trump’s legal “dream team.” The nation has had enough of them. Starr and Dershowitz have wasted millions of taxpayer dollars to support their rightwing ideologies at the expense of the people.
Thank you!
6
There may be one thing good for the Democrats and bad for Republicans in Trump's defense picks. Starr's presence will remind voters that Bill Clinton was impeached at his behest for lying about something most red-blooded heterosexual married men in America fantasize about doing. If covering up a tawdry sexual affair can bring down a president, heaven help all the other philandering husbands. If Starr's defense tries to argue that what Trump did is no big deal, let us hope somebody on the Democratic team will draw a contrast with what Clinton did.
5
You nailed it with your characterization of Hillary's campaign as joyless and uninspired. It felt like a march to inevitability rather than a movement, and that cost her the electoral college victory. The women who either didn't vote or lodged a "protest" vote for third party candidates know that they don't have that luxury this time around. The impeachment circus is a fitting way to start a year that will either culminate in a legitimate removal of Trump from office by the voters or a coronation of King Donald John.
1
Hillary made campaign mistakes but “lost” the election because of our outdated and unfair electoral college system. Let’s not forget that she won the popular vote by 3 million.
6
@Kim Haegele
Hint: It's NOT A POPULARITY CONTEST.
Dear Maureen, I surely hope you are right. Time for Eilzabeth, Amy and Kamala, all tremendous Senators, to show the US their leadership. Zoe Lofgren, Val Demings and Sylvia Garcia are more than a match for these misogynistic creeps defending Trump. The vote is a foregone conclusion. This is political and the women’s vote is key to winning not only the Presidency but the Senate in 2020.
5
Maureen, we must stop meeting this way. It is so bizarre! As rare as Impeachment is, we are 2 women (and we have lots of company; both male and female) who are well into observing the second of our lifetimes. You helped keep me sane during the first one; your columns were killer, especially one in particular that I couldn't get out of my head for days. It is beyond strange that Ken Starr is playing a role in this one also. That he is playing defense for Trump just proves many of your analyses correct from years ago when he was prosecuting Clinton. This should prove interesting with Starr and Dershowitch each trying to be TV hero in the saving of a person not qualified to be a dog catcher, with my apologies to pooches everywhere. But speaking of dogs, that is exactly what Trump's "dream team" will ultimately become...a dog fight. With such egos and arrogance it's a slam dunk. And they will put "baby" in a corner because now it is their show unless baby catches on that he is no longer the center of attention and throws the mother of all tantrums. Maureen, I honestly hope this is our last Impeachment to slough through. Otherwise, we might have to insist that research be done to analyse just how many an individual (or country) can bear before we are "stable geniuses" also.
6
First Hillary did not lose, she had 3 million more votes then Trump. She won the popular vote. She did not forget the working class.almost all her speeches talked about the reality of their problems . She lost the EC by 70,000 and Wisconsin by 23,000 only. 10 EC votes ignored she won and voted Trump on their own.
She was facing a unbelievable campaign of lies and fear mongering by the Right and Russia.
Lots of voter suppression in the states she lost. A woman can win the pop vote but can she win those 6 states that control the EC? They seem to fear a woman because they have been programmed since birth to only think a man is capable, even a flawed lying man like Trump.
7
@Richard Head
Yes she did lose, had this been a contest in school she woudl have won most popular, but it wasn't and it isn't.
Please stop with the popular vote, it's meaningless without the EC vote as well.
Crikey it's exhausting . I thought Times readers were smarter than this. I assumed wrongly.
3
The president has the best men he can muster. The men with checkered pasts, potential skeletons in the closet, and an affinity to help most despicable of the rich and famous.
Yeah, finding the best people is something Trump will never be doing. The best people are on the other side of the aisle where they are attempting to limit Trump's damage.
8
Ms. Dowd asserts "Hillary Clinton did not lose because she was a woman."
No, Hillary Clinton lost because the Electoral Collage, which gives more weight to land mass than it gives to voters, awarded the Presidency to the popular vote loser.
The mere existence of the phrase "popular vote" should offend you. Where democracy exists, in every other country and in every other era, it's known simply as "the vote."
12
In my book, this is a brilliant analysis. Thank you.
2
Thank you for the most concise and perceptive and unblinking analysis as to why Hillary lost. Sure hope the 2020 candidates read it...and sure hope Trump gets out the women's vote.
GSTD
1
Ms. Dowd,
This is one of your most powerful and timely articles. I am excited to see you're using your talents and expertise exposing all that is "Trumpism". Good advice to Liz & Amy!
2
It is very possible the responsible attorneys in D.C didn't want the stain of representing Trump on their resume. That left the bottom of the barrel to defend Trump. How fitting, all with the same code of morality.
7
Shakespeare is rolling over and wishing he were still alive to write this modern tradgecomedy. Trump would mortgage his soul ( if he had one) for this Brand of reality television. Whatever he is drinking they should make it illegal. But “trumped” the broadway smash running for three years now is about to do its final curtain call. Charles foster Kane, you all will have a new drinking buddy. Just don’t get stuck with the tab.
3
It's an empirical question whose answer we don't know.
It's not the same as whether a woman should be President. Recounting the qualifications of possible future female Presidents, and the weaknesses of our actual, and possible future, male Presidents doesn't address that question. That may guide our vote, but doesn't address the question.
1
Dead on, Dowd. Not a wasted word.
8
I'd call Vietnam, Watergate, Afghanistan, and Iraq more than screw-ups---they are tragedies in every sense.
14
Excellent points, Ms. Dowd. I won't vote for a woman just because she's a woman, I want someone who is best for the job. But much of the media treats women candidates differently from the men. Imagine a reporter asking Joe Biden about his 'skin care routine', as someone did Elizabeth Warren.
11
Yes,
Dershowitz is protecting the constitution. He does have freedom of speech!
He can offer his opinion about Trump's transgressions. It's his obligation to protect his client. To do so, he can lie when not under oath if he doesn't know he's lying.
3
Well, first and foremost, I am delighted that Ms. Dowd has placed the blame for the 2016 debacle squarely where it deserves to be -- on Mrs. Clinton and her fellow travelers on the Inevitability Express. We, or our candidate, did this to us, folks. Trump is only the short-fingered beneficiary of the hubris of the Clintonistas and their hacks at the DNC.
I say let's fight fire with fire. Oprah for President!
8
A man’s face and eyes are windows to his soul (or lack thereof). Take a good look at Trump, Starr and Dershowitz. Every Picture Tells A Story, Don’t It?
13
"You can bet that Trump and his buddies will continue to turn out the women’s vote."
from your typewriter to God's ears.
As long as women vote in their self-interest, as white males have done for decades.
10
Dershowitz and Starr were not Trump’s first choices to defend the integrity of the Constitution. However, Roy Cohn was not available.
18
Neither was Johnny Cochran
3
Everyone is entitled to choose their attorneys. Trump’s defense team perfectly reflects the man he is. Or maybe “pervectly” is a better word.
13
I don’t know what explains Dershowitz’s behavior. In all the cases mentioned by Maureen Dowd he performed one of the highest duties of the legal profession: that of providing the best possible defense to an accused criminal no matter how weak the case or how reviled the fondant in the eyes of the public. John Adams did the same thing when he defended British soldiers after a massacre. (Admittedly, the disposition of the Epstein case wreaks of political corruption. I don’t know how much responsibility Dershowitz bears for that.)
But when he came into Trump’s orbit, everything changed. He became an enabler, not giving legal advice to an accused in a criminal trial, but to further the political machinations of a clearly corrupt charlatan. Even in the impeachment trial, he is not defending an accused criminal but seeking to perpetuate in office a clear danger to the national security and our democracy.
He has already outlined his theory for the defense. He knows it is pure nonsense. It’s sole purpose is to give Republican Senators an excuse for not doing their duty. His own colleague, Lawrence Tribe, has described his argument as ‘whacko.”
Maybe it is vanity. Maybe it is to encourage Trump’s far right political agenda in Israel, which is close to his heart.
Whatever it is, he has strayed far from the high calling of the legal profession and become a disgrace. Constantly saying he is a liberal Democrat who voted for Hillary Clinton is nauseating.
8
I’m no lover of Trump, but I take issue with the assertion that you equate the ethics and morals of the vile and despicable with those lawyers that our Constitution gives them the right to have represent them.
3
Bill Clinton was impeached for trying to hide his "affair" with Monica Lewinsky while President when he was deposed for trying to hide his "affair with Paula Jones when he was governor of Arkansas and committed perjury.
Among Clinton's "judges" were the Republican Party adulterers Henry Hyde and Newt Gingrich. Clinton's defenders were the adulterers Jesse Jackson and Ted Kennedy.
Bill Clinton was judged and impeached for what was and should have been a private matter between him and Hillary. Clinton wasn't the first nor will he be the last American President to be an adulterer before, during and after they were in the office.
Donald Trump has exposed the hypocrisy and stupidity of investigating and impeaching any American President for being an adulterer. Separating personal behavior that has nothing to do with public governing political duties is foolish. Without any impact or significance in relationship to performing their Article II executive office duties as President to faithfully execute their duties, the law while preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution.
Donald Trump has been impeached for his 'affair' with the President of Ukraine in an effort to manufacture negative information with regard to a potential 2020 Presidential political opponent. By using his position as President to withhold a White House meeting, attendance by the Vice President at his inauguration and withholding American military aid authorized by Congress.
8
You and Amy Chozick chose to focus on times when Hillary rubbed shoulders with the wealthy in the Hamptons. There was a lot, a lot more to Hillary than that! Joyless? There were serious issues which Hillary helped articulate. The "basket of deplorables", like Obama's "clinging to guns and bibles" phrase, was correct. We were about to witness appalling xenophobia, Islamophobia, misogyny, racism, never before seen in civil society in the USA. Trump creepily stalking Hillary on stage while she won her debate; Trump stacking four front seats of the debate with Bill's accusers; Trump seducing Evangelicals, while it was Hillary who had the quiet and long history with the Methodist church; Trump exploiting Hillary's apparent faint, mocking her, lying about health issues: all this amounted to Trump playing dirty from a playbook of a gangster. During the whole campaign Trump apparently had the Russians aiding and abetting him. They wanted him to win and he openly welcomed their support. It does not take an elite voter to assess that Hillary's experience, knowledge, steady and faithful service would have given us comfort instead of heart ache these last three years. We would have strong relations with our NATO allies, we would still have the Iran deal, we would not be childishly repealing every law the Obama administration put in place. We would be building on top of the Obama achievements, instead of tearing them down. The arc would have continued to bend toward justice!
19
@Leonie ~
Thank you for your great summary.
8
By all means expand the pool of qualified candidates but stop, please stop demeaning working class AMERICANS who want stability and the opportunity to make enough money to have a home, feed the kids, pay for health care and see their kids move up the ladder. The scream you hear is a cry for fairness and less corporate power. You do realize that the working class in this country is made up of workers of all genders, races and creed, don’t you?
I watched a young intelligent while woman candidate apologize for being white at a gathering that was supposed to be unifying and anti racism. I’m not interested in exchanging one nasty hypocritical form of blood guilt for another.
Trump and his gang are disgusting. There is enough to chew over with that lot without bashing working class AMERICANS.
4
Starr is a pompous, righteous, right-wing Christian who abused his power as INDEPENDENT counsel. In 1994 Starr was tasked only with looking into the White Water real estate matter. But Starr spent $70 Million and 5 YEARS zealously investigating every personal detail of Bill Clinton's life.
Starr reported to nobody and IMO abused his unlimited power to investigate. He is why the Independent Counsel statute was not renewed.
In 2016 Starr lost his job as President and later resigned as Chancellor of Baylor (a Christian school) after accusations that it mishandled a sexual assault accusation against its football team. Under Starr, Baylor failed to take female students' assault claims seriously allowing potential predators to remain on campus.
In 2007, Starr joined the legal team defending Palm Beach billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, a long-time friend as associate of Trump. Epstein was found guilty of the statutory rape of numerous underage high school girls. (BTW, Dershowitz was also Jeffrey Epstein's lawyer.)
Starr is another of Trump's nightmarish partisan extremists willing to bend the rule of law and the Constitution to give Trump approval for the abusive dictatorial power he's already wielding.
16
Maureen, this will go down in history as one of your better columns. Unfortunately, given that recent history seems to be written by Trump cultists, there may well be no history beyond "recent history" for anyone to notice.
Sadly, but I'm glad I'm in my 60s.
8
The biggest threat is if the Senator will crown Trump king. Trump is asking them to do no less.
4
Excellent column. Maureen at her best. Makes you wonder why Nancy isn’t running for president.
2
Because Nancy Pelosi is wielding real power right now. The power behind the throne is power indeed.
6
after reading this and seeing Nancy Pelosi on Real Time Friday night, I wish she was on my ballot.
9
Donald Trump...."represents a last gasp primal scream..", that's perfect Maureen!
And Warren and Klobuchar "whingeing..", also very good. Pelosi would have knocked both Biden and Sanders out of the box by now if she was running.
Where is our Barbara Stanwyck now? She had Fred MacMurray begging for forgiveness. She would'a had Trump begging for retirement to Mar a Lago.
5
Mrs. Clinton didn't lose because she had her nose in the air, as Ms. Dowd claims. Clinton lost because of the electoral college. She won the popular vote by 3 million.
10
Focus your efforts on abolishing the electoral college. Good luck.
4
@Linda
There is no popular vote.
1
Trump wants a quickie trial to limit public's exposure to truth and facts and McConnell is curbing the what, when, where and how trial will be broadcast to limit audience exposure to revelatory proceedings (truth and facts). Don't they know they've just sexed up an otherwise joyless impeachment hearing (aside from Pelosi's pen badging ceremony) by adding 'perverty-wierdo' Starr and showtime Dershowitz to the defense line up? That more people are going to want to tune in, curious to see the sequel episode to Clinton's impeachment? Genius minds work in mysterious ways. Is Michael Avenatti available? Will help defense lineup -has good face and races cars.
1
No mention of any "electrifying" women candidates in this year's field??? I guess we will have to wait for 2024.
Bubba was convicted of perjury and lost his law license. Dems protected him just as GOP'ers are doing for Trump. They are, however, despite Ms. Dowd's efforts, defining impeachment ever more downwards.
Pity our country.
2
Hope they got their money upfront.
5
How does a man get along with women? Let them be the bosses until it becomes matters of extreme importance such as what game to watch on TV.
2
Yes, Hillary lost because she refused to take advice from her husband, an experienced pol who had proven how to win. Is that what Warren would do, be a sexist president like Trump has been? Each had, and have, good starts with the sexist mantra. (Warren's ambush of Bernie in the presence of an obvious open mike reeks of a sexist woman who thinks an unsupported attack on an honorable man will win a point. By the way, I won't vote for Bernie either. Think of George McGovern who was thrashed by Nixon. ) Let's forget about the "she's" and the "he's". Things are way too serious to think in those terms. Beat Trump; beat Trump. He is a menace.
1
Dershowitz’ argument provides the escape hatch for GOP....and women may be « half the audience », but unless they buy the tickets their voices don’t matter.
Women need to turnout in November in records numbers if they wish to assert their claim to be equal to men in the workplace and the political realm. Gay men will never be accepted until women are considered the equal to men as the case vs gay men has always been their identity of being feminine. That case has been weakened in the last couple of decades as it's been disclosed that Marines, FBI agents ,biz leaders and women fighter pilots come on the scene. Trump is old school school yard bully being a huge violent womanizer and narcissist self absorbed throwback to cave men except when the military called for him he had his daddy buy him a deferment a coward leading our military is a disaster.
2
Criticizing Dershowitz for representing Jeffrey Epstein, Claus von Bülow, O.J. Simpson and Harvey Weinstein as a criminal defense attorney is unfair. A vigorous advocate for the accused is fundamental to due process. Associating the advocate with the alleged conduct of the accused is a smear and an attack on the criminal defense bar as a whole. Ms. Dowd may recall that same foul tactic was used against Hillary Clinton who, in her younger days, did some criminal defense.
4
Why is it unfair? No lawyer is obligated to defend wealthy and/or clearly guilty clients. His obligation begins only when he agrees to represent them. See the difference?
6
Ah. The “clearly” guilty. See, I bet a lot of the folks on death row who have later been exonerated we’re “clearly” guilty too. Defense lawyers are necessary for EVERYONE. Even if they’re horrific animals, because that’s what makes us better and more just. You get a fair trial.
1
John Adams may have defended British soldiers after the Boston Massacre, but he didn’t make a career of it. And he had a lot of other accomplishments as well.
4
Just want to say this is one of the all-time great sentences..."...Starr, who once clutched his pearls over Bill Clinton’s sexual high jinks, is now going to bat for President “Access Hollywood.”."
It does demonstrate how we've had weirdos in power for decades... so from this I'm guessing the 'bell curve' pays the taxes and the tails spend the money.
6
Please stop the constant criticism of Hilary Clinton, who won the popular vote by a considerable margin, and was a dedicated public servant for many years. It appears spiteful and vindictive.
13
It's impressive how Starr and Dershowitz always gravitate toward the bottom. Well, they've found the bottom now. No lower can they go. There are mitigating factors: Money. Publicity. Things like that.
4
"Hillary Clinton did not lose because she was a woman. She faced sexism, of course, just as Barack Obama faced racism. She lost because she ran an entitled, joyless, nose-in-the air campaign and because she didn’t emulate her husband’s ethos of campaign ’til the last dog dies and the last bowling alley closes, and always make it about the voters."
Thank you Maureen! This is probably the most concise "post-mortem" of Hilary's failure to beat Trump that I've read.
Now, if only the Clinton apologists could absorb this, perhaps they would be able to stop blaming that "infamous misogynist" Bernie and his Bernie Bros who cost Hilary the election, and get behind whichever candidate they think is best, independent of gender, race, sexual orientation, age, or whatever other demographic litmus test there might be.
And unless that candidate is Joe Biden, they'd be wise to quit giving legs to the media-made catfight between Liz and Bernie. Getting all a-twitter about something that happened 18 months ago, that at best is a "She said; He said" contretemps, plays right into the hands of the corporate-controlled media who would love nothing more than to see their two worst nightmares take each other down.
As you noted Maureen, there are those who complain about unfairness, and those who win anyway. And when you blame others for your failure, you never learn the lessons you need to learn. It's clear that Nancy learned hers.
4
And if I don’t think Bernie is best, will you stay home if you don’t like MY preferred candidate? I don’t think sexism was the Bernie bros problem. Sour grapes was.
3
Yes. And they should stop all the whining about the electoral college as well.
1
When Steve Bannon called Pelosi a “total assassin,”
Yes, Madame Speaker Pelosi is an assassin. She's also a good wife, mother and a devout Catholic. You don't have to have faith to admire her. She simply uses her belief system to tap into love for her country and the human race.
Mrs. Pelosi has both great strength and great compassion. I think she is a paragon of a public servant.
14
Maureen, the most cogent column you’ve ever written. An excellent description of how Hillary blew it. Maybe some of your detractors will let it go. Thanks for highlighting Starr’s hypocrisy, I would expect no less from today’s gop who wear that title like a medal of honor. Too bad the senate wants to run away and hide from cadet bone spurs’ high crimes and misdemeanors.
4
I enjoyed this 'un.
I just hope women vote in record numbers.
Is anybody else embarrassed about this administration?
6
"So please, Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar, stop whining about sexism and just show how you could wield power like a boss. Ibid: Nancy Pelosi."
Thank you, Maureen! I'm particularly in agreement in the case of Sen. Klobuchar as she attacked Mayor Pete basically just for being a man! If you don't think the mayor has enough experience just say so in pain English.
Hey lady, if you think it's hard running for president as a woman, try it as an married gay man! Klobuchar is picking on the wrong guy, once again showing her well-reported propensity for mean spiritedness.
Elizabeth Warren, whom I LOVE, needs to focus on funding issues regarding her Medicar for All. Instead, I think she might have started following Sen. K's lead by attacking Bernie Sanders on his attitude toward women. Bernie is another man who is no enemy of women, women's reproductive rights or having a woman in the White House. Bernie's been a champion of the discriminated elements of our society for his entire life.
Want a man to kick around? Try one who deserves. I don't know maybe Rosie O'Donnell can give you some ideas.
3
As soon as i see comments about The American People my eyes glaze over. The American people are two solid camps politically, left and right. And Never the Twain Shall Meet. After listening to Hannity i now see the errors of my ways. MAGA
3
When I was a kid I saw this awful sci-fi movie where the villains were the "monsters from the id" spoken in terror when named (my sister had to tell me what the Id was. All these years later I learned from an Op Ed column in the NYT who the Monster of the Id really is. it's Donald Trump! So that's not my take away from this fine article from my favorite writer on the NYT, but I couldn't resist.
BTW Hillary didn't lose, she won - the popular vote. Get rid of the Electoral Collage now.
6
Slayed. As usual Ms. Dowd. It’s no surprise that Trump has surrounded himself with bottom feeder lawyers - it’s in concert with every other trashy, reality star, thug-like individual in his Hyde/ Parnas world. Which is why it’s shocking we can’t find a woman who can rise above. Seems the atmosphere has been primed since Access Hollywood, then Stormy, then Brett Kavanaugh. But I agree with you: Clinton, Warren, Klobauchar, and Harris haven’t had the “it” factor a la JFK and Bill - and it’s sad that the bar has to be so much higher for a woman.
2
With all due respect to those criticizing Dowd for her columns about Hillary in 2016, this seems akin to stating that since one viewed a supposed Russian ad on Facebook, that caused the voter to turn to Trump.
Or, since you saw one of those Roger Ailes inspired "Willy Horton" ads in 1988, you decided to vote for Bush 41 instead of Dukakis.
I guess the Republican All-Star hypocrisy team is in place. Let’s enjoy the show.
Whingeing......a favorite word. Describes perfectly. Alan D keeps saying he is not a part of the team but just to speak in terms of constitutionality. So he was asked if he was a witness, No, says he, but still not a member of Trump’s team. Hummmmm!
1
Ms. Dowd please put to rest your hostility toward Hillary Clinton. It is tiresome and in my opinion, misplaced. Hillary won the election by about 3 million votes. She lost the election due to a hostile, foreign government that interfered in the election to advance their interests of disrupting the world order. It is so disturbing each and every time someone with your journalistic gravitas omits these details when discussing the election.
11
Please stop claiming that Hillary “won” the election by three million votes. You know better. We don’t have a direct democracy in this country. There have been very few direct democracies in human history. Alexander Hamilton rightly thought the decision to pick a president by popular vote would eventually erode democracy. He though “the people” weren’t smart enough to trusted. He was right, then, and would be even more right now. That’s why we call it the United States of America, not just America.
1
Bravo Maureen. You nailed this one like a boss.
1
I knew Starr and Dershowitz were slime defending slimy characters without really knowing how much. Thank you for the roster of all shady people they've defended. But now I'm really worried the Trump mob will win considering their winning record.
2
One of your best Ms. Dowd. Thank you.
1
Starr, Dershowitz and Trump are sensationalists who live off of headlines and false advertising. Sex, money and manipulation have be their bread and butter.
One thing is certain, the truth will not be served by any of them and if it means trashing the Constitution to get what they want, so be it.
4
Maureen still has a great deal of atoning to do for her enthusiastic promotion of Trump and denigration of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign. Her zeitgeist is that of short term popularity contest. Which way is the wind blowing?
9
Does the statement, 'I don't think a woman can be elected' President (Chairman of the Board or anything else, for that matter), really mean 'I don't think a woman should be President or Chair of the Board'? I am reminded of a statement made by the character Dot Lintot (played by Frances DeLatour) in History Boys to the effect that throughout history women have been left to clean up the mistakes made by powerful men, reminding the Oxbridge candidates whether it ever occurred to any of them that among the Dons who would be interviewing them for their admissions and scholarships would be a woman? The character Lockwood considers this and, at some point says, "the world is everything that is the case", meaning, I guess, that what we see and have is what we must address.
There is, of course, no rational answer to the question, can a woman be elected President other than, yes, of course. But, the world being everything that is the case, we have to work without surcease to ensure that prejudices against the woman CEO and the woman President, incorrect and entirely ill-conceived, do not prevent us from repeating the mistakes that the study of history makes glaringly plain simply because a worldview has been prevented from leading, with everything that implies. Left to clean up the mistakes made because women systematically were denied access to leadership is no longer good enough.
1
Trump's legal team has nothing to do with "legal" or "team."
Starr and Dershowitz are engaged for the mutually beneficial purpose of their appearances on Fox News and other deeply respected media. They get the relevance they so desperately need and Trump's base (and vile) voters will get the "evidence" they need to continue wearing their little red hats.
The Senators are not the audience. Starr and Dershowitz are just high profile campaign aides.
192
The Nation's anxiety about the upcoming impeachment trial emanates from our doubts the Senate can know and recognize the truth and has the courage to respond decisively and with integrity. Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Paper No. 65 noted the British House of Lords served as a model for the Senate. So, as regards the Impeachment Trial, he finds the Senate to be the unique government body possessing both the required dignity and independence. Hamilton asks, "What other body would be likely to feel confidence enough in its own situation, to preserve, unawed and uninfluenced, the necessary impartiality between an individual accused, and the representatives of the people, his accusers?" And we wonder is he describing the Senate we know or some ideal body politic like Plato's "Republic" governed by the philosopher kings. Many Senators already indicated how they will likely answer the Articles of Impeachment. So firm were their statements made, not even Dr. Jason Bull could change their hearts and minds. Discouraging.
3
History will judge these Republican Senators. Will they vote on the evidence or will they vote to keep from being voted out in their states' primaries?
But a way out presents itself. They can vote to convict on the charges, but on the second vote to remove Trump from office they can refrain -- on the belief that the American voters should decided to remove him from office.
2
“She lost because she ran an entitled, joyless, nose-in-the air campaign and because she didn’t emulate her husband’s ethos of campaign ’til the last dog dies and the last bowling alley closes, and always make it about the voters.”
I agree and she showed no grace in defeat, lashing out at everyone and everything was not a good look. (Gore never blamed others, although he had even more reason to do so.) When Clinton said she “knew they would never let me win” was the last straw in self-pity, showing her not to be a liberated feminist but someone expecting to be taken care of by others.
Can anyone imagine Pelosi saying that?
Pelosi doesn’t expect anyone to stand aside for her. She creates her own path with confidence and intelligence adeptly deployed in the service of strategy, not displayed like an ornament in a “good girl” contest.
Angela Merkel and Christine Legarde are very capable leaders who happen to be female. They don’t ask men for permission.
This time we cannot allow the Washington elites to usher in their best friend. We cannot afford a prom queen; we need a warrior. Trump and his minions understand nothing else.
6
@nora m
If you could point out one, single example, where President Trump has shown any grace.
4
@nora m ~
"We cannot afford a prom queen;..."
Are you implying that Warren and/or Klobuchar are prom queens?
My view of Sec. Clinton differs from yours. Considering the circumstances and her profound disappointment, I think Hillary conducted herself with dignity after her historic loss to a much lesser person.
About lashing out. "An unfounded rumor held that Hillary Clinton threw a tantrum, and a water glass, after NBC's "Commander-in-Chief" Forum in September 2016." (Snopes)
We have a president who routinely lashes out with vicious name-calling etc. and Hillary Clinton is still accused of bad behavior. Our so called president isn't half the man Hillary is.
9
Perfect. One of her best. When people start moaning about how "partisan" the impeachment of Donald Trump is, they should be reminded of the "partisan witch hunt" against Bill Clinton. There is no greater proof of that than the appearance of Ken Starr in Trump's defense team. He was a partisan hack then, and nothing has changed. Thanks, Maureen, for being one of the few columnists to point that out.
8
Hilary Clinton because the Trump campaign was helped by Russia interference in the 2016 election. Trump had no intention of winning and much to his surprise and everyone else’s he “won” but not fair and square. Since the election Trump has tried to block all information and witnesses about just about everything he’s done.
6
Slightly off your point, Maureen, but then, this is not one of your best-focused articles: I wonder what you will think of women running the world or even just the United States when a few of them are named Kellyanne Conway, Stephanie Grisham, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Ivanka Trump, Susan Collins, Elaine Chao, Betsy DeVos, Nikki Haley... the list goes on. I totally believe in equal pay for equal work, equal representation, reproductive freedom... But please let's stop playacting about the inherent superiority of all women to all women. Remember mansplaining? The opposite is no improvement.
9
Here's hoping Giuliani gets called as a witness. Still can't quite figure out how any of these characters, Trump included, managed to rise to the roles they have served. This will be a real-life creep show.
8
Every pundit dances around this, but it's been the core of the problem for decades now. Right-wing media, especially Fox News but also Rush Limbaugh and others, does not serve to inform and educate. Rather, it's a racist, often un-American propaganda machine that plays on the prejudices and, too often, lack of education of people whose biases allow them to be easy marks. They are the perfect audience for Trump. For Ken Starr's hypocrisy. And more. Because it's Rupert Murdoch who's really in charge, and until that somehow changes, we're in trouble.
12
I usually enjoy Maureen's commentaries but this one I found lacking.As one writer pointed out, every person is entitled to a defense in our legal system. Maureen would appear to deny accused persons the best possible defense.
I remember Mo's commentaries about Hillary during the campaign in 2016. She was insightful and at times scathing in her criticism of Hillary's demeanor and campaign activities. Mo was correct in part but fails to understand that her loss in the election wasn't because of not taking Bill's advice but the fact that half of the population not only hated Hillary they loathed her. That's why she won Cali's votes but lost the electoral college that represented those people Hillary despised but disliked her more !
1
Commenters here have noted that there will be an election in November 2020, and that will be that. As I read our recent history, if we wait until November to act, the 2020 election may be a farce due to direct and indirect foreign influence, corrupt disenfranchisement of voters, and general dirty tricks.
A lot of people died to get us the vote. Lots of people appear not to care, especially if they are already in power.
11
We have to remember that Hillary did not lose to Trump. She beat him rather handily by nearly 3 million votes. She lost to the Electoral College, which backfired spectacularly by putting Trump into the White House when it was meant to prevent such louts from taking office.
But I disagree with Ms. Dowd that she lost because she ran an elitist campaign that ignored the people who actually vote. She did, in fact, do that, but snob Hillary did not lose the election. "Crooked Hillary" did. The vast right wing conspiracy, aided by the Russians, ran a massive, pervasive social media campaign against her which proved to be deadly effective. The once most admired woman in the world became the most hated for corruption, shady ventures and crooked dealings. By the time the right got done with her a sizable number of Obama voters went for Trump because he was considered the lesser evil.
The lesser evil? You've got to be kidding. But that's what they thought.
Other than that, a great column by Ms. Dowd. I enjoyed it.
9
Starr, Gingrich, McConnell and the GOP Senate seem to be making the case for un-impeaching Bill Clinton with their arguments.
Their tortured logic makes that case better than defending the guy who is actively shopping for foreign help to win the 2020 election.
5
Trump did not change the Republican Party. He was a perfect fit. They will not convict him. Why would they?
173
Brava!
And thank you for putting words to how I’ve been feeling about Warren and Kloubachar’ s whining about sexism. It doesn’t help move anything forward, nor does it hold any inspiration. It’s a waste of time, and only weakens the agenda here: winning.
3
Yes everyone should vote blue. But how would you know if your vote is counted.
3
Trump has said he wants 'TV lawyers'.
I wonder what Michael Avenetti would do to get on the payroll?
2
To answer a question you posed about Dershowitz’s clients, as to why he did on represent Ted Bundy, the obvious answer is money. One thing all of Dershowitz’s famous clients have in common is cash.
8
I heard Elizabeth Warren make a strong case for her electability at the debate, and not once did I hear any "whingeing." No need to "both sides" this, Ms. Dowd.
10
Question for Maureen Dowd: Why didn't Nancy Pelosi help out the disenfranchised of this nation when she herself heard the "last-gasp primal scream from working-class Americans threatened by the changes transforming the country?"
The country will go through a mind bending transformation in the next 20 years as the older generations die out. Google, Apple, Microsoft Facebook Twitter will run the world. I'm not sure this will be any better in the long run because greed and power are such powerful drugs.
5
One of your best, Maureen. Reminds me of a character in the book “Ciderhouse Rules” by John Irving. Maybe not an exact quote, but this is the essence—“she could slice you open and remove your guts before you realize she even has a knife.”
A Sanders supporter here and one in his age cohort, but I will be a most enthusiastic Warren supporter, or Klobuchar for that matter should they be the nominee.
It would be most gratifying to watch an Elizabeth Warren or Nancy Pelosi finally pull these guys down and toss them into history's trash bin, where they belong. Pulitzer quality here. Thank you.
4
This is a rambling column which asks the question Professor Higgins posited: why can’t a female politician be more like a man? Sidestepping the Warren-Sanders exigent rift, we are lead through the history of sleeze and the use of the impeachment process as a chance for one political party to wreak vengeance on the other and hope to eliminate an incumbent on inflammatory grounds. Rather than discuss the apparent amplification of the sensationalizing of what America is about to be entertained by, Ma. Dowd seemingly tries to resurrect Hillary and bemoans the chance lost to have Pelosi President. Everyone should get their popcorn ready and put on their seatbelts, the trial begins soon.
1
Thanks as usual for your astringent and thought provoking comments. You are right on about Starr and company, about the curdled puritanism of America, and about the failure of any of the lawyers to take the real treachery and threat of Trump into account. I don't want prejudgment on this trial, but I do want a thorough examination of issues, witnesses, and dangers. Then if the senate fails to step up to it's task, voters should punish them at the poles.
1
Epstein and Weinstein (and I'll bet scores of other predators as well). voted for Clinton. Dershowitz argument is no argument.
Spot on Ms. Dowd. For irrelevant forgotten old men, left behind by progress, who want one more sweet taste of glory and fame, Trump offers the most potent of drugs: media exposure and a fleeting bogus relevance.
5
When I heard Ken Starr was chosen, out of all possible attorneys, to be on Trumpo’s remarkably unimpressive legal team, I thought of the choice as simply a continuation of Trumpo’s obsession with denigrating all things Clinton.
He thinks he’s tweaking Hillary by resurrecting Starr’s weird and misogynistic career.
Truth is, Starr did a D+ job in prosecuting William Jefferson, and but for his incompetence Al Gore would have been prez.
Oh well...
2
"After playing an avenging Javert about foreplay in the Oval, Starr will now do his utmost to prove that a real abuse of power undermining Congress and American foreign policy is piffle."
That's it in a nutshell.
4
Every person who thinks that Hillary Clinton was somehow cheated out of a victory in the 2016 presidential race needs to read and re-read the essential truth of the matter that Mo has given us:
"Hillary Clinton did not lose because she was a woman. She faced sexism, of course, just as Barack Obama faced racism. She lost because she ran an entitled, joyless, nose-in-the air campaign and because she didn’t emulate her husband’s ethos of campaign ’til the last dog dies and the last bowling alley closes, and always make it about the voters. She lost because she and her campaign manager, Robby Mook, didn’t listen to Bill Clinton, the world’s leading expert on the white, male, rural vote, when he warned them that there was trouble and offered to help out."
Whether by luck or design, Trump and his minions found the key to winning the Electoral College vote (it's been in the rulebook since 1787 so you all had time to figure it out) and now we are stuck with him. Whether he's convicted in the Senate or defeated in 2020, he needs to go, to be replaced by someone who gives a hoot about more than his (or her!) own ego.
1
Every single aspect of Trump's Presidency has been a three ring clown show meticulously tweaked to excite the mostly uninformed electorate.
Starr and Dershowitz were media hacks fundamental to a couple of the more intense showtime media frenzies of our history.
Sex sells, and Starr apparently knew that and set out to aggrandize himself and destroy Bill Clinton based on lurid details that had nothing whatsoever with the security of our country. Even Clinton's lie to the Grand Jury is a ridiculously minor offense compared to Trump's illegal campaign to make himself rich and become a dictator, like Putin. No one talked about Starr's felony release of Grand Jury testimony to the press.
Dershowitz rose to fame in the OJ Simpson Hollywood showtime trial. The judge, Lance Ito, not only allowed but encouraged blatant participation in a televised show trial. It was ridiculous to the extend that Leno's late night show routinely featured a dance troupe, the Dancing Ito's, which was a group of black robed judges who danced for the monologue. Dershowitz and the prosecution, for that matter, loved it.
Yet in both cases, Clinton and Simpson, the vastly uninformed electorate were riveted to their screens.
And so with the Trump Impeachment, we're there again. Showtime! with Starr and Dershowitz a media team to help delude the masses who shun facts and revel in red meat and juice.
3
"the bloviating builder told me back in 1999"
How would you describe yourself in those conversations?
2
You are right on about these lawyers - birds of a feather, etc. But, I am sick of the Hillary bashing. Bill had "the gift of gab". He was a born hustler, would have made a great revivalist preacher, a crackerjack salesman, etc. Hillary had the brains in the family. People are different, have different personality traits, skill sets, etc. Hillary would have made the better president.
3
This article seems to be a mix of two things: Trump and his outfit are a bunch of clowns and pervs, and because of this we should put women in charge.
One doesn't necessarily lead to the other, and I find the attempt to conflate them clumsy.
Given how she ran her campaign, perhaps Ms. Clinton wouldn't have been the best president either. No doubt she would have been better than Trump, but what about Obama, Clinton, Kennedy and FDR? If that particular woman had been on her toes, she would be president and Trump would be a ranting TV personality, if he could stay out of jail.
I voted for Ms. Clinton, and I'll vote for whoever the Democrats nominate. There's a good chance it will be a woman, and I might vote for Warren in the primaries. But I won't vote for a woman to show that women should be in charge, or that men should not.
" ... he [Trump] represents a last-gasp primal scream from working-class Americans threatened by the changes transforming the country."
That's WHITE working-class Americans, Maureen. There are millions of working-class Americans for whom DJT represents nothing but ignorant bigotry.
3
"We acquitted Trump!" - That's the headline both Starr and Dershowitz now crave and currently chase. They want it carved large onto their tombstones when they die.
The truth is that Trump will most likely be acquitted not because of Starr or Dershowitz but because of the cowardly members of Congress who continue to support "Trump the Gangster".
5
George W. Bush and Hate for Hillary.
Both on your resume.
You bear a share of the blame for both W and Trump’s White House tenures.
We live with your mistakes.
Every day.
9
Dershowitz will only appear briefly to explain why the charges against Trump do not meet the constitutional criteria of high crimes and misdemeanors. They do not, though Trump's behavior was stupid.
Maureen and the rest of you would know of Dershowitz's very limited role if you watched the "evil" Fox News. Fox, especially in the daytime, is much more objective and fair than the total partisan 24 hour advocates at CNN or MSNBC.
One obvious example: Abby Phillip's questions to Warren and Sanders during the last debate. A new low in TV journalism.
2
Every defendant deserves competent legal counsel and Trump was not impeached for sexual misconduct. If Starr can overcome his revulsion, I suppose he can try to defend Trump.
Ken Starr protecting the mob boss in office two decades after he tried to excoriate a president for lying about an extramarital affair. Hypocrisy on steroids.
4
Evidently the entire male world must have forgotten the women leaders who are recognized like Madonna by one name. Anybody remember Golda, or Indira or Margaret.
4
I hope you are right that woman will continue to assert themselves. The entitlement of these 3 sleazy men is through the roof.
1
There is no doubting that a woman can be president. Without question a woman can perform the duties as well as, and likely better than, any man who has held the office. What is uncertain is whether a woman in 2020 can defeat the sexist creep that is Donald Trump. There was no hiding his inner pig in 2016, and yet that did not stop him from carrying 30 states. When he was revealed as the Unstoppable Grabber, and in debate called Clinton "such a nasty woman," I believed no self-respecting people would elect the beast. I foolishly thought Trump's slimy sexism was a weakness. In America, sadly, it's a strength.
4
Regarding the addition of a bloviating and narcissistic w-ore and a pretentious and pious bore to Trump's legal team, all I can think of is: "Tell me whom you walk with and I'll tell you what you are." These foul creatures deserve each other.
2
Trump should not forget to add the NY judge who, most recently, gave the serial sexual offender of Vivienne Wang a sentence amounting to next to nothing (enabling him to assault more women) and Epstein a sweetheart deal after his conviction in 2012 (I think that is the correct year) and many others.
There appear to be far too many of these dirty old men who have erected a phalanx of sanctimonious power around themselves.
Surely they will drop dead soon, but not before grooming and installing he next generation of amoral miscreants (Brett Kavanaugh, Devin Nunes (sic), Steven Miller and others.
The young people have to makes their voices heard at the polls or this cycle will continue.
2
I wonder if things might be actually worse now if Hillary was indeed elected President. Trump is obviously mentally unfit to hold the office and nobody detests him more than I do. But, if you think that Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, Devin Nunes, Jim Jordan, Rush Limbaugh, Alex Jones, Fox News are godawful now, multiply that by 10 to get an idea of a Hillary presidency. We wouldn't have had 5 minutes of peace in this country since Nov. 2016. The Republicans and their militias would be foaming at the mouth on a daily basis. And that's not even taking into account what type of shenanigans Trump himself would be up to.
2
As a true believer in the importance of the subject of history I was oddly encouraged by this piece. The turgid bucket of hypocrisy and corruption that is the Trump administration and its supporters is really, really interesting. In the future American history will be our kids' favorite class!
1
One needs little more than canine intelligence to find the impeachment evidence against Donald Trump compelling, in violation of the constitution, and an abuse of his office. Of course, when it comes to Starr and Dershowitz, not to mention the entire GOP, I fear I just insulted most dogs.
3
Right on target. Be a boss. And, one thing Trump is right about is Ken Starr, as painful as it is to admit. Just ask the folks at Baylor. The stench and hypocrisy are appalling.
1
When will there be justice for Jeffry Epstein's victims? Never and now Des... who was never held accountable for his own actions gets to show off legal skills that have no interest in truth. I understand that everyone is entitled to counsel - but just once use the skills for the good...just once.
I'm disappointed Rudy Giuliani didn't join Trump's legal team. That'd have completed the clown show. Perhaps there was no room in the clown car.
It'd interesting to see how Team Trump will argue their way out of the impeachment charges. The GAO says Trump violated the law. How Trump did it is detailed in the text messages and records of phone call released by Lev Parnas. Parnas' chronicles implicate the POTUS, VP, Secretaries of State and Energy, AG, Rep. Nunes and others.
Then there is a videotape of Trump saying, “If they [Ukraine] were honest about it, they would start a major investigation into the Bidens. Likewise, China should start an investigation into the Bidens. Because what happened in China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine.”
This prompted Trump's buddy Sen. Graham to say, “As to asking China to look into Biden, that was stupid."
Team Trump's first response, detailed in the Times, is not reassuring. The second line of the response reads: "This is a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election — now just months away."
This reminds me of Trump's rejoinder to Mrs. Clinton when she said Trump is Putin's puppet: “No puppet. No puppet, You’re the puppet.”
Team Trump is saying Trump didn't interfere with the 2020 election but Congress is. That takes chutzpah.
If Bolton and Mick "Get over it" Mulvaney is compelled to testify, Team Trump better up their game.
1
Sadly sadly this s
He is-again- in FL this weekend.
Why Speaker Pelosi never threaten to withhold funding on his weekly extravaganza going on strong for three years?
It took Obama eight years to spend 97 mils on travel.
Trump is estimated to pass 200 million already in less than three years.
And there is no beep from anyone about it.
Why?
It's our tax money.
11
I don't hear Amy Klobuchar whining about gender. I hear her talking about all the ways that she can beat Trump and all the evidence to back it up. The male establishment tried to nip her campaign in the bud on Day One with all the garbage about how she's mean to her staff. If ever there was a sexist trope, that was it in spades. "Nevertheless, she persisted..." as the saying goes. My blood boils when I hear women whine about how they don't support her because a woman can't beat Trump. Physicians, heal thyselves.
3
That was the best explanation of Hillary's 2016 defeat that I have ever read.
It has been said that white evangelicals have made a bargain with the devil by letting this megalomaniac take power for the price of a few conservative judges. Surely the devil played a role in arranging that Trump got to run against the only opponent with higher negatives than him.
1
This is the worst of all possible worlds.
Dershowitz and Starr defending the impossible, that a President that used his power to attempt to bribe a vulnerable ally to help him politically by illegally withholding military aid did nothing impeachable. This is at best an absurdity.
I expect their legal defense will be specious, long winded, dishonest, and full of hot air. All about witch hunts, partisanship, a rushed investigation while ignoring Trump’s complete stonewalling of the inquiry. They will pretend Trump was interested in fighting corruption in Ukraine while ignoring the facts and that telephone call that says quite the opposite. They will assert that Trump’s executive power is unlimited in national security matters- a belief the Republicans hold but only when the President is a Republican like them. So in short they will claim on that basis that all his actions are lawful since they involve national security and thus logically he cannot be impeached for dealing with these urgent matters. That will be their defense! They will shout and scream and undoubtedly Fox News will cheer them on and the Republican Senators will agree with their reasoning! It will be a complete farce and the rules of a fair trial and our Constitution will be violated savagely.
1
And let us not forget Justice Kavanaugh’s role in urging Ken Starr to turn up the heat on the bodice ripping, Oval Office sex scenes.
4
Ken Starr seems not so much a puritan than a voyeur, getting his vicarious jollies from a preoccupation of the sexual proclivities of others, be it Clinton, Epstein, jocks, or Trump. He'll defend either side so long as these characters are willing to occupy his sick mind. Let's not forget his fervent, perverted, prolific cheerleader in the Clinton saga... now Justice of the Supreme Court Brett Kavanaugh.
4
Dershowitz - is very, very good at believing his own spin. It makes him something of a kindred spirit to Trump. Sad.
3
In 1998, Starr and his ilk were like the old lady who calls the police to complain that there's a man in the apartment building across from hers who's walking around naked.
The cop arrives and looks out the window and says, "How do you know he's naked? You can only see him from the waist up."
"Stand on this chair, stand on this chair!" she cries.
1
Bill Maher calls Nancy Pelosi “our Iron Lady,” and its the truth. Right now she’s the best politician in the land. Next to her, Starr, Dershowitz, Trump and company look small. But they will be operating in a chamber—the Senate—where being small is an advantage.
6
Dershowitz and Starr...two guys well past their legal and moral prime who will do anything for a buck and a little attention on Fox News.
The question is : how low will these two has-beens go to defend DJT?
3
Ms. Dowd ignores the NY Times and her own responsibility for Hillary Clinton's loss in 2016.
First, in service of (false) equivalence, articles in the Times almost always stated that Hillary was a "very flawed candidate" every time they said anything positive about her.
Second, almost all news coverage, including the coverage in the Times focused on the candidates' abilities as sales people selling their campaigns, instead of on their ability to effectively run a government. Reading Ms. Dowd's columns and the other articles in the NY Times, we might have thought that we would be voting for sales person of the year instead of President of the United States.
5
Star and Dershowitz are publicity hounds, sound bite magnets; nothing more, nothing less. They could care less about Trump. As for women, why in God's name are they waiting, get on with it.
1
Ken Starr was a disgrace, spent millions chasing a sexual escapade and got Clinton to deny it. 45 has done all that and worse. Among the reason witnesses are needed is that there has not been a years worth of investigation on the current president and new relevant revolutions are appearing daily. Nancy Pelosi is the best of the bunch, more courage than the entire republican party. The democratic women are the best, not sniveling like Collins and Blackburn from Tennessee is among the vile and narrow minded.
5
Dershowitz is such an effective lawyer that only people who are very obviously guilty feel the need to hire him.
I wish he would stop telling everyone he is a liberal, .....except for whatever issue he is being asked to comment on. In the past decade, has he ever made an argument for anything progressive?
It's a great con.
5
Forget The Starr Chamber, this is The Dream Team, Part Deux, baby! They are working hard to make sure President O.J. Jr. keeps The Crown.
What irony that Starr is representing Trump at trial for his removal from office. That he, in particular, is willing to stand behind the defense's statement that the House's impeachment is a "brazen and unlawful" attempt to unseat a duly elected president is laughable considering his role in trying to remove from office a man who had done nothing to endanger the nation's national security but was merely a priapic jerk.
This whole thing is a cosmic joke. At this point I really don't care if the Senate fails to remove Trump. Let's just get some decent people to fill their seats come November so we can feel proud again to have elected one of the least corrupt governments on the planet.
2
Two quick takes.
As regards Ken Starr--the prudes are always the prurient. Wonder what his fantasies involve.
As regards Alan Dershowitz, we do happen to know what his fantasies involve. Piles and piles of greenbacks, with which he hopes to buy his some well fortified and guarded compound so that when the pitchforks and torches crowd starts gathering they see the moats and electrified fences and go somewhere else.
5
How fitting. Trump teams up with two sleaze masters, self-proclaimed champions of our Constitution. Read the account by Susan McDonald of her barbaric treatment by Starr while he had her under lock and key. Dershowitz? He needs to adorn himself with a sandwich board that reads "For Sale."
3
Dershowitz defending the integrity of the Constitution? Dershowitz is no doubt talented, but he increasingly seems to be more of a legal gadfly than a legal scholar. His schtick is contrarianism, which he uses (I think) in an effort to stay relevant.
4
Starr's willful and wanton negligence in his handling of the Baylor Bear football rape and sexual harassment case was troubling and repugnant.
When you look at the damage to individuals and society at Baylor, that was a much bigger deal than the crime Bill Clinton was impeached for.
Starr's brazen, cavalier presence in public is like a villain in a Frank Capra movie, or an entry in a diagnostic book for sociopaths.
Dershowitz' name should be made into a verb for when chutzpah is employed for the bad. The most prominent antecedent was O.J. Simpson. Now Donald Trump.
Then there was the spam of Jeffrey Epstein between those two pieces of bread. Of course, Dershowitz has been a hired gun for a slew of blackguards. By the means of the demimonde of power & depravity, Starr got a piece of Epstein too.
I really don't know why any sane, scrupulous human would be so mercenary. Oh, I forgot, the lawyer's code of professional responsibility to zealously represent a client.
A lust for power trumps real conservative values with these men. Otherwise Starr and Dershowitz would have grave misgivings about indirectly assisting an aggressive foreign enemy, the Russians.
One would hope that journalists and John Bolton will come forth will a critical mass of evidence to quash this "Bizarro World" sequel to Dr. Strangelove, where the fantastic is executed to help the Russians.
“Steve Bannon called Pelosi a ‘total assassin’”
Translation: She’s authentic. I find it at once astounding and totally consistent that this would be the response from someone who is, well, exactly the opposite.
1
As you mention him many times in your column it's the seven degrees of separation and it all goes back to Bill Clinton and his eight years in office.
First we have to go back to Draft dodger, check; then we proceed with crooked land deals and lying under oath, check; of course we throw in a few extra martial affairs, check (didn't know about the rape then); and of course we had the lying under oath which brings us to the blue dress and stain in the Oval office that finally caught him in his lying tracks, check.
The press gave him the benefit of the doubt as did the Women's movement and all of his party and looked the other way.
Seems like nothing is different here we have heard it all before, except Hillary was conniving and enabling him all along the way.
Trump's going to win another election thanks to Bill and Hillary and despite the liberal Press coverage that is out of their shoes against Trump.
We out here just watch and laugh at the antics of all of you who haven't gotten over the last Presidential election.
History just seems to repeat itself, just like the NY Times have been writing the same bash Trump news for the last four years.
Excellent column, should be mandatory reading for every Hillary Clinton supporter on how not to lose an election.
Just like in rehab, keep drilling it into their heads until they get it.
The future of America depends on it, if they do not want to help re elect the ego maniac demagogue Trump.
2
Am I to understand the Impeachment trial shall be carried live? Imagine watching Senators deprived of their cell phones; having to pay attention out of fear of being caught sleeping and outed on social media.
Worse yet, if the trial interrupts soap operas and other daytime programming too long, you may totally drive such viewers into the Trump camp.
Facetious thinking? Only partially so.
1
Does anyone think that Trump supporters will give the slightest credence to any of the evidence presented by the Democrats? Anyone who has talked to a Trump supporter knows they are blind to Trump's faults and completely entranced by the Fox News spell. As for the lawyers on both sides, they may be political, but beyond that, they are enjoying the intellectual jousting over constitutional points of view. The tragedy is that so much is at stake, and whatever is decided, one side inevitably will feel that justice was not done.
2
Do we really think that if Hillary Clinton had simply gone to Wisconsin and kissed everyone's you-know-what she would've won the election?
Nevermind the double standards and false equivalencies.
What exactly were you looking for in a candidate? Someone with 40 years of public service experience, who helped secure insurance for children and firefighters, who has a deep understanding of foreign affairs through their work as Secretary of State (among many other qualifying attributes) wasn't enough? Did she also have to walk on water and make it rain $100 bills from the sky?
19
For once I agree with virtually everything you say in this piece, Maureen. My only quibble is that you fail to mention as one of the reasons Hillary Clinton lost was the $2 billion in free advertising the media gave to her opponent, now known as impeached but unindicted individual 1.
Your depiction of Starr as "a complete partisan hack who doesn’t give a damn about sexual assault" is dead on. And I'm beginning to think that Dershowitz has no real understanding of either the Constitution or the law.
14
As for Ms. Dowd's assertion that the impure puritan Kenneth Starr is "a complete partisan hack who doesn’t give a damn about sexual assault," oh, he is so much more than that.
Starr is a hypocrite of the highest order, as is the whole, blighted lot of Bible-thumping cabal of hate-mongers who wouldn't recognize a single one of Christ's true teachings if it walked up and kicked them in the shins.
18
Starr and Dershpwitz are attorneys for hire, preferably the more cash the better, so expect stalling and time wasting. And, they could choose ethics over cash and not represent criminals, but they don't.
2
Thank you, Maureen for another great one. When I saw the headline, I was prepared to see a skillful and intelligent eviscerating of Starr, and you certainly did not disappoint. Go Warren!
3
You can't make this up. The history of these miscreants needed to be written by Joseph Heller. But this was an excellent column. If we had a Heller to write the book, this article would serve well for the jackets.
2
Hillary did win the popular vote so I’m not sure I agree w/ MD on some of this. I still think we don’t know the true strength of the Russian influence. But she is on point w/ Starr and Dershowitz.
5
Spot on! Thank you! You could have added little Brett, too, as it was he who pushed for adding the lurid Bill and Monica details to the Starr Report.
5
Trump didn’t hire these lawyers because they’re any good. It’s because they have familiar names that his base will recognize. Everything is a headline to Trump.
1
It should come as no surprise that Donald Trump is cosseting himself with the likes of Giuliani, Starr, and Dershowitz. He has long palled around with such questionable characters, and this time is no different. Any day now, we might expect Trump to engineer a photo op with pugilistic promoter Don King, marrying the fortunes of the orange-haired self-promoter of a president to the wild-haired boxing booster.
Trump has always played to win, but this time he's playing with fire in the court of public opinion, choosing losers who are likely to cost him much needed support among the general public. There are already polls that show erosion of his fan base.
Trump's supporters and even Republican Senators are all doing their very best to eschew the notion that Fact Lives Matter, preferring instead to traffic in untruths of convenient, if totally baseless, fabrication.
Republicans are engaged in what may get turn into a waltz of no return, squandering what little integrity they might have had, only to be kind about it, by becoming full-throated apologists for Trump's inexcusable behavior. Thanks to them, he may win in the Senate.
More thankfully, however, he may not win in November's election. There may yet be, as Bill Clinton used to say, a place called hope.
1
The reality TV President whose former lawyer-fixer is in prison, and whose subsequent legal helpers have mostly fled back to the anonymity of corporate law, now goes for name recognition.
Starr and Dershowitz are known to the viewers of the Trump/GOP official in all but name network,Faux"News". That's to keep his base interested and not pouting as they would be if two capable but unknown "suits" showed up as his counsel. That both have real or alleged skeletons in the closet means nothing to the base.
McConnell for all his partisanship and self-interest ("KY. Republicans won't primary me--I'm a warrior for the big guy") doesn't want a circus. Jim Jordan won't be present. Decorum will reign even if it is a farce of a proceeding.
Ms. Dowd, bravo on the observations about women at the ballot box and their power and as well on the incompetence of the HRC 2016 campaign.
TV lawyers defending a reality show TV businessman. The revolution will be televised, but where will it end up?
3
Remember that we are about to witness is unlike a criminal proceeding to trial after indictment. In a criminal trial, jurors are selected in voir dire - questioning - by attorneys, who may move to excuse or accept them.
In the second stage of impeachment, the senators are given the right to vote guilty or not guilty because they were elected. It then becomes obvious that they will vote in a way that best serves to get them elected again. That is "impartial" in that the individual's view of his or her own political survival is personal.
There are 30 Republican Senators who do not face election in 2020...so there are no foregone conclusions to the process.
2
It's true that Hillary didn't run the smartest campaign - but she lost because our presidential election system is rigged - i.e. the electoral college, which is nothing but a numbers game that every presidential candidate, regardless of merit or the lack thereof, has to win. Hillary won the popular vote - let's codify it and restore one person, one vote as our national standard. Abolish the electoral college.
9
@Susan
Good idea, but the only realistic way that happens is if a new constitutional convention occurs to REFRAME the rules and protocols concordant to a world of travel by automobiles, trains, airplanes, and communication by telephone and internet, and information gained through press, radio and television.
And change term limits so that Representatives can serve three two-year terms, Senators two four year terms and the President ONE SIX YEAR TERM.
3
Excellent column. It will be interesting to see the way the female vote breaks down per nominee across different demographics in November 2020. Hopefully Trump will continue to do his part to maximize the number of women voting.
Ask yourself this: If, by some surreal dawning of conscience the Senate voted to convict and to expel Trump from office: What would happen next?
1. Would Trump actually vacate 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?
Who would enforce his eviction? Do the capital police and secret service and Justice Dept (don't ask) not work for him?
He would, I believe, simply ignore conviction and keep on tweeting.
2. If Trump did leave, why would you think he would not simply run for President in 2020? And if he is poised to win now, why not then? And if he has not served a full 2 terms, could he not run again in 2024 and service until 2028?
This election may be a last chance for women to vote in their own self interst which if looked at through open eyes is also in the world's best interest.
We men have created a long and less than illustrious record of destruction which, given the toys with which we have now armed ourselves, should give any person of any age and any sex pause.
Any of the women who have appeared onstage in the Democratic debates would make an equally, and probably a more thoughtful President than any of the men crowding them.
May read as alarmist, but the men now in charge, here and throughout the world have few if any qualms when it comes to offering their citizenry on the altars they maintain for their gods of war.
3
Maureen, you're being a bit hard on Warren and Klobuchar. Those women are certainly pulling their weight and wielding authority in their roles as senators. But that has nothing to do with having crossover appeal as a Presidential candidate.
Nancy Pelosi is terrific, but how many people consider her to be divisive and partisan? Lots of Nancy haters out there. How many people ever considered her to be presidential material?
IMO, Elizabeth was right to address the issue of women candidates. It's not that women candidates don't make mistakes, it's that they're judged more harshly for them. Can you imagine what the response to Bernie's churlish and grudging concession in 2016 would have been like had he been the female candidate instead of a male one?
Elizabeth Warren has made a point of refusing to engage in the issue of electability regarding the other Democratic candidates. She believes that you need to fight for who you believe is the right person.
I certainly don't think it makes Bernie a sexist to say that a woman would have a harder time getting elected. But if Warren's sex was a factor in his deciding to get into the race, then it shows that in some respects he is not the revolutionary he says he is.
4
Interesting that you included back-in-the-day quotes from Trump about Starr. Just curious: Do you and other reporters who gave him column inches and airtime ever feel any sense of responsibility? He wasn’t a different person then than he is now. Asking for a friend.
3
It's high time for a woman to put some order in our society, as they did at home (for ever); we men had our chances...and blew it. If women could unite, they would be invincible; if only!
7
You left out the worst part of Starr's pursuit of the Clintons. The Whitewater matter that Starr was charged with investigating was an obvious crock, so Starr spent years and millions of dollars trying to find something to prosecute. Clinton was compelled to testify in a private matter that had nothing to do with his conduct as president, but supposedly secret grand jury testimony was leaked on a daily basis by Starr and his gang. The whole lot could likely have been disbarred. The judge in charge of the case in Little Rock did nothing, and the press, particularly the NYTs and WP, said nothing since they were the beneficiaries of the unethical behavior. If Republicans were held to the same standards as Democrats, the grand jury leaks would have finished Starr's career. As is, he is an appropriate addition to the defense team for a president who holds the law in contempt.
14
I pretty much agree with everything Maureen has to say about Trump's so-called defense team. Yes, Starr is just another Republican hypocrite and Dershowitz, for whatever reason, has sold his soul to Trump cabal. It seems their defense is "it's not a crime if we say it's not a crime." I'd say that if this is the first string of the Trump defense team, and they succeed, so much for the Republican version of the U.S. Senate and so much for their concept of justice.
I can't help but notice that Maureen continues to give us vocabulary lessons, this time with "whingeing" and "Pharisaic." She always manages to slip in a word or two that I have to look up. And of course, she cannot resist one more knock on Hillary.
4
From the unreality show of Trump comes the "Night of the Undead Lawyers" looking to boost their own ratings in a case where the defense has a Hollywood dream jury, packed with swooning jurors.
2
At the risk of sounding sexist I am becoming more and more convinced that a female President is exactly what this country needs.
9
She always hits the mark.
What a cast of characters
2
So predictable...Trump cannot stand a minute of what we normal people would call adhering to rules or procedures. How boring. Trump always wants a show, and what better show than to hire a guy who was a pal of Epstein and another guy whose expertise extends into art forms that align well with Trump's prurient interests. And, waiting in the background, the grandmaster of this defense fiasco is of course Rudy, the Ukrainian magician with his hat full of thugs. Now this show will even light up C-Span's ratings--which of course Trump will take credit for.
2
Trump - not McConnell, as should be - has lined up the Senate Managers for the President -
Trump has lined up HIS team - totally for Fox TV viewers who are his base of support - he is using this Senate Impeachment as HIS campaign strategy - free TV marketing - brilliant!
What will ruin Trump's brilliant campaign Impeachment marketing is - Witnesses: Bolton, Duffy, Parnas and others.
Am focusing on - Bolton appearing - and - actually honestly sharing his 'hands on' - 'direct' knowledge of Trump's 'Bogus Drug Deal' with Ukraine.
1
I much enjoyed the return to 1998 to read Maureen's "Liberties; Legacy of Lust" again. President Clinton won over the nation when we learned about a room full of Starr's men confronting and quizzing the very young Monica Lewinsky about her sex life. Even thinking about that scene today fills me with disgust and dismay that ordinarily intelligent, functioning men could stoop so low and lust loom so high.
Today I realize what a total innocent I was! The men so driven by lewdness and lasciviousness now inhabit the highest levels of our government. Their one saving grace is that they have possibly reached a post-sexual obsession with women age so that money is now their thing.
It surely isn't their legacy, their great concern for others, their undying love of country that drives them. Watching men like Barr, Starr, Bannon, Dershowitz, Sessions, McConnell, Graham, et. al, grovel before Mr. Trump makes me wonder if they have belatedly discovered their gay side.
8
As speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi is next in line if both Trump and the Pence are removed from office simultaneously.
Keep your fingers crossed, folks.
10
just for the record: hillary won the popular vote and but for our crazy electorial college, would have been president.
one could argue, that the shortcomings of hillary's campaign that dowd puts forth, gave the electorial college away (to everyone's surprise).
and yes, i am as outraged as everyone that trump can get away with murder of the constitution.
"Trump "represents a last-gasp primal scream from working-class Americans threatened by the changes transforming the country?"
Arrogant elite belittles enough of the voters to lose, then reassures itself that they don't count anyway, won't count next time. Of course that attitude loses, and it will keep on losing too.
2
So Trump is guilty.... and it sort of sounds like Pence is as well.
Let's just get them out and move Nancy in... she has proven herself capable.
Quickly people.
7
Let's get out our microscopes to examine the frailities of our adversaries and willingly blind ourselves to the blatant crimes of our allies.
Mr. Starr, like so many of his Republican contemporaries, is a living monument to duplicity and hypocrisy.
9
The two things Maureen got right in her Yet again take on how bad Hillary is , is her take on Mook as a weak campaign manager, and yes Bill should have been listened to if what he’s claimed to have advised was in fact a fact.
Had even one of the other numerous perfect storm Hillary derailments, such as the Comey letter- not happened - Hillary would be in the White House today.
That said, women especially must not Fear voting for a woman- our female candidates are just as capable, to take on Trump, if not more so than several of the males.
Nancy Pelosi is the only person who unequivocally takes Trump on, our guiding light.
Both Elizabeth and Amy can do the same.
2
Dershowitz and Starr are a perfect team for Trump. They both carry plenty of baggage of absolute hypocrisy and the history of defending some very unsavoury characters . They themselves have set themselves as targets whose integrity and trustworthiness could be torn to shreds by any opposing counsel of any ability. Let the circus commence. It will probably rate much better than Trump’s “THE APPRENTICE”, although it is doubtful that he will get fired.
1
And of course it's our faults that the Democratic candidates are entirely lackluster and uninspiring, signaling their virtues snd checking their boxes and whining about how rotten we are all.
The truth is that Dems have brilliantly missed the moment, trying to galvanize us all by hating Trump, rather than rising above it all and explaining this moment in time, what their big plans are and where they'd like to take us, legislatively and emotionally as a nation. That is as about as far-sighted and energizing as asking everyone at a picnic to vote loudly against the flies.
1
It is absolutely time for a woman president. We need a woman to straighten out the messes of this president.
I’d be happy with Senator Klobuchar or Senator Warren even though one is a moderate and the other is more progressive. These woman are planners, organized, hard working, intelligent and thoughtful. These are qualities that every president should have.
Look what we have now.
Our president lacks all the qualities that these two women possess.
He’s a bully, thoughtless, impulsive and thinks about how someone looks on TV.
That’s why Trump chose Starr and Dershowitz to represent him in the senate trial. Trump likes how they look on TV. His decision to choose these two men show us all how his judgment is significantly impaired.
If Trump can’t see the craziness of choosing Dershowitz and Starr then how did he decide thoughtfully whether an Iranian general should be killed in Iraq.
Most of his decisions are impulsive and without any planning. Getting out of the nuclear deal, the Climate Paris Accord, dismantling Obamacare and even ending healthy school lunches for children some examples of Trump’s impulsive and thoughtless decisions.
Now is the perfect time to vote for Madam president in Nov 2020.
3
A rogues’ gallery of misogyny and straight white male privilege. Even Robert Ray was charged with stalking a former girlfriend, in 2006. Most of us wouldn’t have been able to continue high-level, lucrative, professional careers after the misdeeds all these men have committed, personally and professionally. But if Trump weren’t in office, at least the rest of us wouldn’t be affected directly by their hypocrisy and lies.
1
As a (retired) lawyer, I would not tar attorneys on the basis of their clientele -- even the devil deserves representation. But Starr's behavior as independent counsel and as head of Baylor is telling. As for Dershowitz -- never get between him and a television camera. But his defense of Trump, while legally unsound if not fanciful, will give cover to the craven and cowardly in the Senate.
6
The framers depended on what they saw as the high integrity of the Senators , as opposed to what you might find in thr House ( their opinion, not mine ) to judge an impeachment with the understating that the gravity of the office of President must uphold and protect thr Constitution and our Democracy accordingly .
Unfortunately they could not have foreseen just how partisan Republican Senators could be and how they could actually vote against the best interest of our sacred freedoms . The framers counted on the Senators in an impeachment proceeding to judge the president holding him to the highest standard of conduct. Republican Senators should be shamed if such overwhelming evidence is presented to prove Trump’s violation of his oath and they just skirt around it . The Constitution didn’t spell out precisely“ high crimes “ but Trump did commit a crime according to thr OMB by withholding Congressionally appointed funds for no other reason than to benefit Trump the man , not Trump the president and caretaker of our Constitution .
How in the world Dershowitz ever could claim to be a constitutional expert is beyond me . He’s an ambulance chaser as far as I can see; crass and arrogant . It’s going to be a sickening process with these two clowns up there defending thr indefensible .
3
Ms. Dowd makes a fantastic point that Starr is a partisan hack. How can a man that once attacked Clinton for sexual exploitation offer to defend Trump? But, to be fair to Starr, the entire conservative world has conveniently forgotten that Trump has done horrific sexual acts. Most conservatives believe that Trump is innocent and that only angry liberals accuse him of these things. Evidence doesn't matter to the GOP.
Ms. Dowd seems encouraged that women will vote to get Trump out but I don't see that in my world. A few people get it but most have been worn down by the 24-hour news cycle. They don't know what or who to believe. They don't understand economics, law, and history. They have given in to the Russian and Fox Opinion campaign of confusion.
The women in cities may challenge Trump but their votes do not matter as much as rural women due to the Electoral College. The women in the midwest that know Trump is a conman will have their votes suppressed or not matter. I am not as encouraged as Ms. Dowd. We have seen three years of Trump and still, people support him. It doesn't make any sense.
2
The additions of Starr and Dershowitz to Trump's legal team make me optimistic that the Democrats will prevail in the eyes of the only audience that matters: the prospective voters. Starr is transparently a buffoon, and has a bad past to boot, while Dershowitz is already distancing himself from Trump, stating publicly that he's only going to be defending the Constitution "for about an hour".
1
Dershowitz’s claim to defend the constitution is laughable and sad at the same time. He is yet another example of a guy sacrificing his reputation and credibility for a few more minutes in the public spotlight. Trump’s corruption tarnishes any and all who venture into the toxic, noxious cloud around him. Dershowitz will regret his decision to defend Trump.
2
Perhaps Mr. Starr was selected to throw in the Clinton impeachment as a distraction. The differences between the two as I see it:
Bill Clinton betrayed his marriage and lied about it.
Donald Trump appears to have betrayed his country and he lies pathologically all the time.
Which is the more serious when one is in the Oval Office? The Senate will have to decide.
2
Maureen Dowd nails it with this takedown of uber-hypocrites Dershowitz and Starr. Apparently both of these men would do anything to stay in the limelight. And her assessment of Hillary and her arrogant campaign rings true. But the drive-by of Amy Klobuchar seems forced. She might lack the reptilian genius that propels Trump, but she’s held her own in a tough business and seems seriously dug-in to fight it out to the end. Dismissing her as a whiner is the kind of competitive, petulant assessment that has so often undermined even Ms. Dowd’s best work.
1
Ms. Dowd your gift for snark has met its message. There is no better way than irony to describe the resumes of Dershowitz and Starr. No doubt Dershowitz will credit his lunatic ravings in the well of the Senate as having exonerated Trump. Rest assured it will be covered endlessly by Fox. Our problem is the jurors who will look to those ratings to signal an all clear for acquittal. Trump is counting that the joke is on us.
I really wish people should drop the "can a woman be the president" talk - from any perspective. Sure, President Obama has to deal with racism but he has done two tours to the White House nonetheless.
With regard to latest additions to the Trump's impeachment team, please excuse me while I throw up. Of all the sanctimonious holier than thou rhetoric Republicans and evangelicals, The Baylor affairs cut the cake!
But no one should be surprised by the picking of these people, including Trump's other choices in his cabinets and government, including the Federal Reserve, call them dubious is an understatement. When George HW Bush picked Dan Quayle as his VP, some theorized Bush was too insecure to pick someone his equal or better. On the other hand, Trump has been picking people either unqualified or whose past has been as questionable as his. The only criterion they are a brown noser.
You think about it, it is rather sad. Some of these people may be shady but they are not dumb. The people who are suppose to lead the nation are a bunch of yes-men, or yes-people. How sad is that!
One of her best columns because she wrote it with a head of steam percolating. Nice, attacking an attorney for the clients he keeps. As for Ke, c'mon, Bill brought in on himself, and, anyway, they make a nice couple.
1
great article!! ms. dowd, please keep your knives very sharp. we are so going to need you in our country's time of great time of need.
Maureen Dowd seems to have forgotten that Hillary Clinton won the election by receiving the most votes but trump became President by the unethical action of the republicans in the Electoral College. Only in America (and certain third world countries) doe the loser win the election.
3
Would love a US whose President can turn citizens the way wanted by the thoughts words can generate in the various people of the world
Struggle to comprehend Trump’s ideas which may another time in other language be accepted as good
"That assertion may fly in Foxworld."
Rational people need to be aware that Foxworld and its variants (Limbaugh, Newsmax, etc.) are the primary anti-reality forces which made a president Trump possible in the first place. Those malignant forces need to be repudiated in the strongest terms. They indicate a desire of a major segment of the U.S. electorate to commit intellectual suicide.
1
A tour de force. Best thing Maureen’s written in ages. And the most prescient take I’ve seen regarding the current unpleasantness.
1
Mrs. Pelosi reminds me a teacher of mine back in the Sixties when I was in graduate school who called me into her office one day and told me in no uncertain terms that I had nice long hair in the fashion of the day, but needed to visit a barber shop that day and get it cut down to some presentable length so as to protect myself from further days of looking stupid.
Her honesty, logic and concern for my well being appealed to me, so I immediately followed up on her advice and still think of her with pleasure and fondness, and keep my hair trimmed down, even to this day.
Women make up a great majority of the practical realistic people in this world who think about the future.
If the country somehow manages to survive this awful time, it will be mostly due to the efforts of women hoping to save their children.
Thank you again, Dr. W.
1
Thank you again Dr. W. for caring about me.
1
The photo of the Starr is more than enough to know the purpose of his intent.
He likes to watch.
And with his twin A.D., it should be a spectacle, fit for a king.
1
If it didn't bother me to look completely crazy, I would stand up in my pajamas and cheer. When you are on, you are ON, girl.
1
This right here is why I continue to stay subscribed to and support the New York Times.
Thank you Maureen!
1
You conveniently left out the fact that Russians convinced a large portion of the American people that Hillary Clinton was the most corrupt politician EVER. On the contrary Bill & Hillary Clinton are the most investigated political couple in history.
Bill was investigated for several years by Ken Starr. In the end he couldn't find any financial improprieties, political missteps, or any criminal behavior. He was able to unearth a Presidential affair with a young intern & then Clinton lied about the affair.
No one has ever discovered anything illegal, unethical, or improper about Hillary. Every investigation found Hillary had done nothing wrong.
Hillary lost because of the incredibly negative & false campaign by the Russians in an attempt to help elect Trump. If you think Hillary Clinton was & is a corrupt individual who only lived to enrich herself, then you are parroting the Russian propaganda line.
Your criticism of Hillary's campaign are probably correct. There were serious shortcomings in her effort. But, Hillary lost because the Russians convinced a large portion of the American electorate that there was no difference between Trump & Hillary.
We're now all painfully aware that there are massive differences between Hillary & Trump. Hillary is a life-long public servant who has never been found to do anything illegal or unethical.
Trump is personally corrupt, a compulsive liar, a fraud, a con man & the worst President in American history.
4
If Trump has been anything, he has been an inspiration, not only to the good but also the worst of us. When people are desperately searching for someone, anyone who can defeat Trump, you know you’ve hit rock bottom. A bag of rocks should be able to beat Trump but the Democrats are working very hard to figure out a way to loose and maybe that’s the worst of all of it.
Starr is defending Trump. And they say irony is dead.
1
And where are all those defendants Dershowitz defended? Certainly not fine upstanding citizens. Some dead, disgraced. Some disgraced and stuck playing golf. Career and legacy in shambles. And another beginning trial pushing a walker around. And Clinton. Living the good life in Scarsdale. He could run against Trump and win. Imagine what that race would be like? The one thing about defense lawyers is no matter what happens to their client, they get paid. They will say absolutely anything to get their client off. I bet OJ is absolutely thrilled with his life. The shoe is on the other foot now though. If the transcript fits, you must convict. Unfortunately this time we won't get to watch Trump riding wildly all around the golf course and all over the greens from the news helicopters overhead, the police in hot pursuit. That's why he will lose. No entertainment aspect to this one.
1
Trump's defense team is made up of the same kind of sleazy, incompetent people who have surrounded him (many who have been indicted and jailed, etc) since he took office. Their presentation will be a spectacle to the thrill of the Fox crowd. They are not a serious bunch, yet they have to be fought tooth and nail because they wield a megaphone through Fox.
2
I've been laughing, uncontrollably, since this All-Starr cast was announced.. to think that the leader of the free world, the transcendent one, a gift from the gods, could have his pick.. and picked these two! The 'baggage' is a lift too heavy!
2
Difficult to comprehend the enthusiasm the Republicans demonstrated during the Clinton impeachment compared to what is happening now. Maureen, you said it so well--as you always do.
1
The one statement that democrats cling to is "whites are heading toward a minority status". That is the Democrats play on locking in Racial minorities the way they have locked in African Americans to a permanent majority.
That is only true if you consider Hispanic racially different. And two facts - Latinos look Mediterranean European (the author being Northern European might have problems with this). They look and act like Spanish, Italian and Greek, and many of the prejudices they face are the same as the Italians from 100 years ago.
The second point is that Latino inter marry (it's close to 40-50%). Even if you discount the first point - That means in 1-2 generations Latinos will be assimilated.
Then you have 2 visions of the future - California or Texas. Interestingly enough - only 1 has a Hispanic Senator.
Since we all know how much Trump gets advised via television, it’s easy to imagine how he decided to pick Starr and Dershowitz for his legal team: he saw them on TV! Other, more rational individuals would have avoided the selection of these two men—they both come to the table with enormously questionable pasts, to say the least. But Trump saw them on TV and that’s a good enough endorsement for the entertainer/TV junkie in the White House.
1
Pelosi has mismanaged this impeachment. She charges that McConnell is a Russian operative. Trump will be acquitted. And continue his blundering nasty term. I just hope Pelosi doesn't try to interfere in the primaries to bring back Hillary Clinton or short circuit progressive candidates because the Democratic establishment has deemed them unelectable.
Good start Maureen;
Your task, should you choose to accept it, is to vilify and shame every one of trump's defense team; assure that they cringe every time they hear or read their name in the news and fear for their career. Turnabout...
1
Thank you, Ms Dowd, for reminding me how much we all owe Robby Mook. I don't want to forget.
1
"You can bet that Trump and his buddies will continue to turn out the women’s vote."
Plenty of republican women love going to Cult45 rallies to wave their ta-ta's at him.
Ms. Dowd asserts "Hillary Clinton did not lose because she was a woman."
(I *HATE* that I misspelled the word "College" in my original submission!)
No, Hillary Clinton lost because the Electoral College, which gives more weight to land mass than it gives to voters, awarded the Presidency to the popular vote loser.
The mere existence of the phrase "popular vote" should offend you. Where democracy exists, in every other country and in every other era, it's known simply as "the vote."
2
If only Roy Cohn were alive today Trump could add him to his list of distinguished defense attorneys. Cohn, who was Trump's personal attorney during his early business career, was chief counsel to Joe McCarthy during the 1954 McCarthy hearings and went on, over a long career, to be disbarred in 1986.
1
The title of this column would have been more simplistic and accurate had it read: “President Trump reaches to the bottom of the barrel for his defense team.” Perhaps this is not politically correct but why should it be if this is true?
1
If only Roy Cohn were alive today Trump could add him to his list of distinguished defense attorneys. Cohn, who was Trump's personal attorney during his early business career, was chief counsel to Joe McCarty during the 1954 McCarthy hearings and went on, over a long career, to be disbarred in 1986.
What's in it for them? At this stage of their life they must have enough money, enough standing within the group they hang with, a present and future with enough self-satisfying sustenance of their ego that they don't need fifteen more minutes of fame, I would think. So, what's in it for them?
Well, being part of the Starr chamber hasn't hurt Brett Kavanaugh's career. And I understand he's the guy who wanted to publicly press Bill Clinton on the most salacious details.
What a world.
3
The democrats have to start taking these elections as seriously as the republicans do. Democrats tend to be whiners within their own circle. Know it alls who can tell you about the ills of the country. Trump makes an effort to get coal miners their jobs back. PUBLICLY. Redo NAFTA so jobs come back to America. PUBLICLY. Drill baby drill so America has oil and jobs. PUBLICLY. Take on China who took manufacturing jobs away from America. PUBLICLY. Meanwhile i have to hear about reparations, minimum wages, voting rights..... Who has more traction?
Ken Starr the sequel with a cameo featuring Alan Dershowitz — perhaps Woody Allen could direct and Bill O’Reilly pen the script.
Al Gore also did not want Clinton's advice, and look what happened to him.
3
The casting of Starr, Dershowitz, and Trump for the impeachment trial sounds like something that Fox News put together. Those that value fiction as their favorite genre will certainly get their fill of this literary form when the trial goes live.
1
Great read Maureen! Indeed, the results of the 2018 election and the fact that 26 Republicans in the House are not running for re-election prove that Mr/Ms Republican are in trouble.
Everyone knows Trump won by a quirk of the electoral college system. That play isn't going to happen again. Trump knows that too. He's got to do something more this time around than merely blame the Mexicans, our Allies, China, Obama, environmentalists, Democrats, the Media, a dysfunctional government, and the deep state for all our ills.
So what's Trump's play now? Who's he gonna blame? He needs something new and fresh. Something that hasn't happened yet.
Trump lives in the world of reality TV and audience ratings. The impeachment trial is likely to be a yawn even with Pervs like Starr and Dershowitz coming to his defense. No spark there. He needs something really big and really eye catching. Look out folks, maybe he's gonna call a war?
What a strange bunch of bedfellows Trump has chosen for his rilly big show, "My Fantastic Impeachment Trial!", starring The Trump. We'll be seeing Ken Starr, Alan Dershowitz, and a raft of other telegenic oldies and baddies and legal honchos among Trump's Senatorial enablers. Mitch McConnell will be on display. So will a bunch of Democratic Senators who are out for blood even though there may be no witnesses, no documents provided by the G.O.P Senators who just want to apply some whitewash and get the impeachment trial over asap. Lord have mercy on us for the next couple of weeks, for the next couple of years.
There is now a separate, plutocrat-funded, GOP-industrial complex that only hires from within its ranks. To be a serving Republican member of Congress and to thwart them means you have closed the door on a vast avenue of future employment options. Be their willing stooge, brazen hypocrite, and rabid TV bulldog, and you've assured yourself a job as a college president, a lobbyist, think tank gnome, or Fox commentator. When we see these people bloviate and frame their alternate reality in lockstep, what we are really seeing are audition tapes for their next gig.
'Better Call Saul!'
Makes perfect sense: need to defend unethical behavior?, hire unethical lawyers - a la Ragano, Cutler, Goodman, et.al
Trump may as well round out his nuthouse defense team with Giuliani. Acquittal is a foregone conclusion in the chamber of perjurers and cheats known as the US Senate.
Trump's impeachment trial is no hoax, it's a farce!
1
Alan Dershowitz has distanced himself from the Trump legal team “to defend the integrity of the Constitution.”
If he is there as an expert witness on the constitution, then why can't the Democrats call real fact witnesses?
Donald will get his TV show, but he's only seen his people on Fox. The coverage of this trial won't look like Trump TV's daily apologia.
Sekulow, Ray, Starr, Bondi, Dersh and the others will be laid bare in the real world of direct argument - something they don't get on Fox.
How long before Trump adds Saul Goodman to his legal team?
2
If Hillary ran such a terrible campaign, why did she win the popular vote?
I fault her for inexplicably not paying enough attention to Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pa., but it was really the non-voters, third party dreamers, and fake "independents" who squeaked Trump into the WH.
We've had chaos and corruption ever since.
1
I wish Nancy Pelosi were running for president. The Democrats would be smart to draft her!
Dowd is far too kind when she refers to Starr "looking the other way" as President of Baylor when his thuggish ath-a-letes kept being accused and occasionally convicted of sexual felonies. He was repeatedly running interference for them, using his influence to get complaints ignored and charges dropped. My mother graduated from Baylor with majors in math, English and history in the early 1940's and she was not pleased.
Dowd may also be too optimistic. There are tens of millions of Americans, many of them women, who do not begrudge Trump his sexual perversions or bullying or other misbehaviors. They aspire to them.
1
Remember Ann Richards? A woman, a Democrat, was effective enough to stand for "progressive" ideas and become Governor of TEXAS. Maureen is certainly correct that HRC did not lose the 2016 Election because she was a woman. Contrast her with Richards and you begin to understand what it takes to win. Then look at the field vying for the opportunity to take on Trump and cry.
I thank you for the comment about the underlying reason for Hillary's loss. I had friends who were acted in Hillary Clinton's campaign in northern Wisconsin. after the convention, and on through election day, they were begging Clinton to campaign there. One or two days and she would have likely won Wisconsin. instead she focused on the racking up the Electoral College, only to lose it all.
1
The big question for me is will Trump turn the Senate part of the impeachment into a circus or will House managers be able to keep the law and the Constitution at the forefront of the proceedings. Limiting televised coverage does not help the American viewer understand what is happening in the Senate chambers starting on Wednesday.
While investigating Clinton Mr. Starr gravely declared "No one is above the law". He now seems to have changed his mind.
6
We mustn’t forget that Starr relied most heavily on the younger Brett Cavanaugh to pen the most prurient and lurid sex passages in Bill Clinton’s impeachment, so there’s an erstwhile ally on the Supreme Court. That may come in handy down the road.
498
@Michael Flynn
A factoid that had settled to the bottom of my brain. Thanks for dredging it up.
28
@Michael Flynn . . .written with the voice of experience, no doubt.
17
Is there no one who has not represented Jeffery Epstein? Interesting that so many alumni of the same law firm that represented Epstein are now representing Trump. High crimes and misdemeanors indeed! Also interesting is Justice Roberts who has been making it his mission to limit the scope of prosecutions for those very same high crimes and misdemeanors - watch closely the "Bridgegate" SCOTUS proceedings for clues to how the impeachment trial will most likely pan out.
2
"And then there’s Dershowitz, whose past clients have included such sterling fellows as Epstein, Claus von Bülow, O.J. Simpson and Harvey Weinstein. How did he miss Ted Bundy?"
Wow. It's been a while since I've read contempt for an attorney representing folks who are unpopular. Kinda like reading about Gerry Spence. Or Clarence Darrow.
But I suppose the only attorney who liberals admire who represented the unpopular is Atticus Finch. I guess liberals appreciate fictitious lawyers to the detriment of the real deal.
But if you don't like Dershowitz, you can always play reruns of CNN anointing attorney Michael Avenatti as a Dem presidential contender, until his imprisonment this week on bail revocation.
As to the opinion of the GAO, you must be kidding. That's the same Office which declared Obama's Bergdahl prisoner exchange illegal (the Times had no problem with that).
https://www.npr.org/2014/08/22/342335099/gao-bergdahl-exchange-violated-law
The GAO also filed suit against Obama's executive order including the US in the Paris Climate Accord, and for not obtaining treaty approval from Congress. You think the NYT cited the GAO approvingly for its opinion? Think again.
https://govoversight.org/index.php/2019/11/04/gao-files-lawsuit-over-paris-accord-not-a-treaty-obama-shenanigans/
Anyway, if Trump's attorneys get out of hand, the Dems can always call in Michael Avenatti.
4
How many times can Ms Dowd write essentially the same column? For a change can you talk about the positives from the candidates running against DT? She never misses an opportunity to condemn with faint praise.
6
A woman can definitely be president. Can she be *elected* president? Yes, but it is a high bar. She essentially cannot make mistakes. Is it reasonable to expect that *any* presidential candidate can run an entire campaign without any major gaffes? Probably not. In that sense, it's possible that a woman cannot be elected president just yet.
Consider Hillary Clinton. There are obviously many variables, but a few key episodes stand out in my mind. The first is "deplorables." That was a huge blunder. Another is bad campaigning (not visiting key states) at the end of the race. The last is fainting at 9/11. I think that was it for her. HRC did the nation a great service in showing us how the combination of her impressive credentials and her mistakes allowed her to win the popular vote but lose the Electoral College.
How about Elizabeth Warren? The "lost" debate handshake with Bernie and the associated hearsay revelation constitute a major mistake. The DNA test indicating that she is effectively not Native American will be used mercilessly against her. And she should never have raised her hand to take away private (i.e., employer-based) health insurance.
I am hoping beyond hope that America will finally elect a woman president. But I just don't see that happening this year.
44
It’s interesting how I see these things you mention about Warren’s diminished chances differently. I am impressed that she listened and had the ability to reconsider and change her approach to universal health care—medicare for all—she didn’t change her determination to achieve that, rather she revamped her plan in order for it to work for more people while finding a way to achieve it in this country, so that none among us has to suffer or die because they can’t afford healthcare. To me it was a relief that she was willing to make that adjustment, that she didn’t have to be all macho and uncompromising, even though she surely knew she would get a lot of blowback. As for the Bernie controversy, I think she was right to stand up for herself in the face of him saying to a national audience that he didn’t say what she said he said. She took care of it right away. I applaud that. As for her having Native American ancestry, so many people I know believe they do too—but formal records were often not kept in registries of those relationships because they weren’t considered Americans, even though this was originally their land. So family stories are all people have. Why would a kid question a parent or grandparent who says they have some Native American blood? They don’t think oh, that’s too far back to count, they think, wow, cool.
44
@Ma
Warren waffling on M4A is not a sign of strength but more a sign that she doesn't have her head together on the major issue of her campaign; maybe she should have thought things through a lot more from the outset?
But back to the crux of my comment.
Romney makes his "47 percent" comment and spirals down the drain. What does HRC do? "Deplorables." Romney manages to alienate half the electorate, then HRC does the same. Both wind up losing. Warren wants to take away private insurance, which funds more than half of America. Could there be a lesson here in not doing/saying things that alienate a majority of voters? Apparently Warren didn't learn that lesson. Trump ads will decimate her on M4A this year. Actually, it's a lot worse than what Trump is doing with the ACA. The ACA is mainly Medicaid expansion; only a small cohort of the population is actually in the Marketplace.
And Trump would never have taken the DNA test (in response to a bet from his opponent!) Meanwhile, Warren (a lawyer) brings up hearsay in a national debate?
Look, Trump attacks individuals (politicians, Rosie O.) and institutions (the free press). But he is smart enough to know never to attack huge voting blocks. Not *directly* anyway.
Sorry, Warren is in deep trouble.
10
@Ma From the time Warren came on the scene in the senate, I thought she was a powerhouse and really wanted her to be the Dem pres. candidate in the last election. But in the past two months, I've come to like her less.
Her adjustment on M4A rings a little hollow after being so outspoken for so long about no private insurance. But it was the conflict with Sanders that struck me as peculiar--too many odd variables.
The conversation took place a year ago, so why is such an inflammatory statement being leaked in the last week or so? And it was first told to reporters by people who weren't there, so it seemed like a preplanned tactic.
Then Warren confirmed--Sanders denied--Warren made it seem as if he was saying no woman could be president, period. Sanders said the conversation had to do w the ways in which DT would be particularly hateful to a woman candidate.
And then after the debate in which each stood her/his ground, her crossing of the stage, refusing to shake hands, and trying to engage him in a scene (when she would know that the press were watching and listening closely) also seemed more like a ploy than something spontaneous.
It's hard to believe that Sanders said that a woman couldn't be president, especially given that he tried to get Warren to run in 2016.
Maybe there was a miscommunication, but it seems out of character for her to want to confront an old friend publicly about a year-old private conversation.
4
The usefulness to Trump of having Dershowitz on his defense team is that Dershowitz lends academic respectability as a retired Harvard law professor. Dershowitz has lots of experience doing this, as the article explains - defending people like Epstein and Weintstein; lawyers do have control over the kind of cases they take on. Notwithstanding his reputation, there are at least similarly experienced and well-educated legal minds saying that his legal analysis of this case can be easily eviscerated. It becomes incumbent on the media and the people hoping for a fair trial to drill down into these opposing positions and explain to the public who's correct and what Dershowitz, at this stage of his life, is really trying to achieve here.
3
Ms. Dowd concludes her column with the assertion that Dershowitz's tweet that he is participating "to defend the integrity of the Constitution" is ridiculous in light of the fact that he is joining up with Bill's persecutor, Ken Starr, while inconsistently citing his past support of both Bill and Hillary Clinton.
It is actually no more inconsistent than Ms. Dowd's present stance as a champion of women in the political arena after her history of relentless attacks on both Bill and Hillary Clinton, during the former's impeachment and the latter's presidential campaign.
Once again she is resurrecting the tired talking points of her old columns, still attacking Hillary, just as Trump is still running against the candidate who won the popular vote by a three million margin. Dowd conveniently omits in her litany of why Hillary lost the electoral, not the popular vote, Comey's interference, the presses' false equivalency of her emails with Trump's actual crimes, and most significantly, the role her columns played in contributing to Trump's victory.
6
Presietn Trump's base is like having a good Defense, and usually Defense wins Super Bowls. We, President Trump's Defense will defend him until "the last dog has died and the last bowling alley has closed." For as long as he has been in Office, Prsident Trump has helped to take back the Country for us real, regular, homegrown Americans. All others need not apply.
Could Dowd have given a smidgen of credit and blame to both the Russians and Comey for Clinton's loss in 2016 instead of attributing it to her "entitled, joyless, nose-in-the air campaign" ? It is best to stick to the facts here instead of showing claws while turning green.
Besides Americans have spent the last three years hearing the so-called-in-the-know dissect rural voters who voted for Trump and what I have learned from all this noise is that they do not even know why they voted for him nor can they explain any of his policies or interventions that he has taken regarding domestic and foreign affairs. They often quote the stock market but everyone knows that does not reflect the state of the U.S. economy.
There are two groups who voted for him that are finally seeing the light: farmers and U.S. manufacturers. Unfortunately for them they were the unknowing pawns in Trump's ill-advised trade wars along with the trillions-dollar hit that U.S. consumers were taxed on imported goods and to realign supply-chains for U.S. manufacturers. Add that to the taxpayer-funded billions dollar bailouts to farmers and we are down for the count.
22
Hey, it wasn’t Starr who threw Monica to the wolves; it was Hillary.
We shouldn’t ever forget that fact.
9
@Meg
Actually it was Linda Tripp.
I know this has made the endless talking point-rounds on Fox, but Come On.
Seriously, how many of your divorced friends are expected by you to be champions of the cheaters in their marriages? This has always seemed like a weird requirement of Clinton to me.
6
@Meg And we all know how innocent Lewinsky was during the whole affair. Geeze.
1
@Meg
Well - - no, Hillary did not send the FBI to pick up Monica Lewinsky as if SHE had committed a criminal act, and then hold her in custody to make her give up evidence.
Actually, she was not given the basic protections as someone under arrest: no reading of rights, no opportunity to call for legal representation. She was held for 10 staight hours of questioning on her own; she was made to believe that an armed sniper was watching her movements.
And disgustingly, she was threatened with multiple criminal charges and prosecution if she should refuse to fully cooperate with the Starr investigation.
One should get the details straight. This was a story of an insane determination to get Clinton using any means necessary, no matter who might be hurt. Starr owns the responsibility for her horrible treatment.
3
Dershowitz and Starr. Why didn't trump go and pick Jack McCoy from "Law and Order".
5
"Even Trump was appalled. “Starr’s a freak,” the bloviating builder told me back in 1999. "
Shows how when the wolves are at the door any loaded gun will work.
10
It might have been the only one he could find.
What is this? One more chance to attack Hillary Clinton quite viciously, or an opportunity to use Donald Trump as a character witness against Ken Starr?
Or wait, is it a lesson on what women should do to win the Presidency?
I read the whole thing, and still not sure where all the mud slinging is aimed. Dowd is capable of being (marginally) better.
4
Bravo Maureen. You nailed it, once again.
4
Mr Dershowitz is like a character in Cinderella who has stayed at the ball past past midnight only to reveal his true identity.
2
"So please, Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar, stop whingeing about sexism and just show how you could wield power like a boss. Ibid: Nancy Pelosi."
With all due respect, Amy's not whinging. At a recent debate, her reply to the question (paraphrased), "Can a woman beat Donald Trump?" was, "Nancy Pelosi does it every day."
Give Amy credit where credit is due.
27
Kenneth Starr has that rare ability to make the observer's skin crawl. Hard to say exactly what it is -- a certain unctuous quality that carries reptilian overtones but not in an overtly threatening way. More like a creature emerging from the swampy ooze improbably doused in sickly sweet aftershave, not so much exuding danger as inducing an involuntary shudder of revulsion. The slick surface barely obscures the rot lying just below.
Anyway, early in the Kavanaugh saga I remember trying to get a sense of the nominee. The element that seemed most unforgivable was the enthusiastic work Kavanaugh performed in producing Starr's encyclopedic soft-core pornography Clinton impeachment report. It was impossible not to view the Blasey Ford testimony through this lens of hypocritical denial and distortion.
Starr is a brilliant choice for the Trump defense team. He helps connect the dots. It's hard to believe that Barr didn't play a role here. They seem like soul mates. The dark forces of the national psyche are aligned. Let the dance begin.
14
Capo di tutti, 'Don' Trump, The Godfather, has demonstrated that he is nothing more than a crime boss. He's not truly the boss of bosses, that is, il capo di tutti i capi. That title belongs to Putin, but the Don rules his American 'family' - his kin and the Republican party - without question. He has called in all the consiglieri to defend him. Because the syndicate controls the Senate and key states in the electoral college, and because capo di tutti i capi, Don Putin, wields so much power, having the boss of Facebook and others in his pocket, he controls the election.
We take a big chance if we wait until November. The rule of law and the Constitution must be defended or, I fear, we will have lost our country and all that it stands for. I don't believe America, as we have known it, can withstand another 4 (or more) years of Trump and his ilk.
8
Maureen, thank you for alerting me to brace myself for the repugnant displays of Starr's hypocrisy and of Dershowitz's dishonesty, which will permeate the Senate trial starting next week. How I wish your words could reach far more audiences in this country.
3
Trump is the post-Cold War warrior America needed.
Yes that can be President of the United States. Apparently it will be Hillary Rodham Clinton!
I agreed with everything MD says. Then set aside the cat to get another cup of coffee and walking to the kitchen I got angry all over again at Bill Clinton for approaching the AG on the tarmac which led to the AG recusing herself which led to James Comey’s ascension which led to his “announcement” and all I can do is shake my head.
5
Even now you have to let your dislike of Hillary appear in a column. Cheech! Get over it.
Hillary lost because of Russian interference and the way the electoral college works, not because of the way she ran her campaign or anything else that's been said about her. You helped her lose, too. How you can write that women can be president and knock the first woman who almost was is very hypocritical. I guess only women you like qualify.
Insofar as Trump, he needs no defense since he "did nothing wrong." So Starr or Clarence Darrow or maybe St. Michael wouldn't make a difference since McConnell promised acquittal before the trail began. The whole thing is a sham run by people who gave up honor the day they swore an oath of office.
If you want to help this situation, Maureen, please keep your opinions grounded in the present. We all well know how you feel about the past.
14
Let’s not forget that our newest Supreme Court Justice spent three years going down the rabbit hole with Starr. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/20/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-clinton-starr.html
His sanctimonious denials at his confirmation hearing add yet another layer to this cabal of hypocrisy.
9
One has to wonder how any woman in America could support Donald Trump. He's assaulted them, ridiculed them, and has a passel of women who seem almost brainwashed – Sarah Huckabee, McSally, Stephanie Grisham, Kellyanne Conway and so many others. What has replaced their minds with the fealty towards a man who regularly assaults their integrity? Which of course brings up Ken Starr whose Holier than Thou posture towards the (sexual) crimes of Clinton were some kind of Church sanctioned poses to guard the morality of the nation – all the while making for non-stop tee vee talk show fodder. What does Starr make of Stormy? My guess is that will be a few hours worth of talk show chatter. Then of course Republicans will pull the covers over this nude violation of the Çonstitution.
10
@MATTHEW ROSE
I, too, have wondered how such women can support Trump. And I guess that, in search of attorneys for his impeachment defense must have looked for lawyers who specialize in men who devalue women. I am amazed that women can support such men.
Ms. Dowd seems not to have heard about Hunter Biden, the central character in this drama.
3
@Eugene Windchy. Hunter Biden? Really, the central character in the impeachment trial of DJT for attempting to bribe a leader of a foreign country to dig up dirt on a political opponent who is beating him in the polls for the 2020 election? You give way too much credence to Trump having any moral, ethical compass at all. His history shows he lacks standing in all areas of right and wrong.
A recent fact-finding document that will tell you how Trump is approaching the 2020 election is the Mueller Report.
2
Central character? Only in Foxworld.
2
You are back in my good graces, Maureen.
Don't you think it's strange that Trump has so many extreme religious people clamoring to be at his side?
1
The real Star Chamber is the grand jury system in the United States. THAT should be abolished.
I’m paying homage. The sentence beginning with “The Starr chamber was a shameful period of American history...” is one of the most delicious I’ve ever read. Pharisaic?? The best! Maureen, you are a master wielder of the language. Thank you for making my morning!
Dear Ms. Dowd,
Welcome back to the real world after last week's sojourn into the la-la-land of the British Prince and Hollywood ho-hum actress. Nice to see you back on form.
I’m hoping beyond hope that if mr Dershowitz speaks at the impeachment hearing one of the democratic senators is allowed to ask him a question..... so what you are saying professor is that you don’t think the glove fits right?
2
Trump and Starr deserve each other.
3
Nothing surprising in hiring Starr and Dershowitz—Trump is manipulating (and thus politicizing) “the law,” almost daily. This is precisely what Dershowitz and Starr are known for.
Gee! I’m glad people don’t get “tried in the media” anymore.
Hmmmm, maybe I’m wrong about that, as Starr and Dershowitz seem likely to prove soon.
1
Agree with everything except I dont think Von Bulow was ever guilty!
It's amazing that so many people are still willing to vilify Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton got robbed, and a lot of us know it. I was a Bernie Sanders fan at the outset, but never for one minute did occur to me to either not vote or to vote for a despicable man like Donald Trump. Nobody has ever been a perfect candidate for president, but the garbage still being heaped on Hillary Clinton says something really horrible about the depth of misogyny in this country. We would rather have a narcissistic raging bully in the White House than an accomplished hard-working woman.
14
This is the team that Nancy Pat D'Alesandro Pelosi wanted.
Jay Seculow, the Presiden't personal counsel, is a potential witness. Reference Parnas. Reference Giuliani. He could have a conflict of interests. It's to be seen whether he will contest the issue. If he does, he should be voir dired publicly.
Dershowitz is engaged in his own litigation... His theory of the case is pie in the sky. He says abuse of office is not an impeachable offense. IMHO it has about a 5% chance. To accept that philospphy, we live in a dictatorship.
Ken Starr's value has diminished with time. He had to apologize for the Baylor abuses, much as Trump is supposed to do under the terms of a NY settlement of his fake Trump family charity. Have he, Pat Cipollone, and the rest had contact with Giuliani re Ukraine? They are not his lawyers and therefore if so, there is no executive or lawyer/client relationship privilege. The suspense must be killing the entire team.
Don't know much about Jane Raskin. She and Bob Ray seem to be the only trial lawyers in this group. If they're smart, the rest will keep their mouths shut.
Nancy Perlosi is the daugher and sister of street fighters who dominated Maryland politics for several decades. Remember the fates of Spiro Agnew et al. Sic semper tyranus.
11
Too bad Nancy Pelosi isn't running for President.
3
So, by the logic of this opinion piece the lowest of the low-lifes must be public defenders! After all, they represent accused murderers, rapists, child abusers, thieves, and arsonists. When we impugn lawyers and conflate them with the alleged or real deeds of their clients our legal system and Democracy is in serious trouble, Ms. Dowd knows this (or at least should), so the demagoguery and sophistry of her rant is simply shameful.
1
And Republican hypocrisy continues apace…
3
Ken Starr would be the perfect defense lawyer for Mike Pence. They're cut from the same religious cloth. In the movie version of this impeachment trial, Alan Dershowitz will be played by Woody Allen.
7
Dershowitz is really, really not going to that invitation to the next big party at Martha’s Vineyard.
5
I'm not at all surprised by Trump's picks. He wants to turn his impeachment trial into a TV reality show in very bad taste. That's all he really knows how to do.
10
By putting Dershowitz and Starr on his team, Trump himself is turning his impeachment proceedings into the very circus he accused Democrats of creating.
342
@NM — Just another version of trump’s proclivity for projection. In the case of his impeachment, a media circus is what he wants, a way to undermine the seriousness of the proceedings.
44
@NM
When you have no real defense deny everything and make vociferous counter-charges. Even accuse them of the very thing you're guilty of! LOL
26
@NM
True. Trump loves circuses.
19
Starr, Dershowitz, and Trump - birds of a feather flock together. And by the way who is footing the bill for Trump’s legal team? I doubt that it is Trump. OJ had his dream team. Now Trump has his seamy team.
19
This is all so true. I’m convinced that Trump will not get elected in November simply because he has managed to infuriate just about every woman in the country with his utter disregard for them. Women to him are nothing more than eye candy and sex objects.
12
@Ted Siebert unless he gets away with purging of democratic voter rolls and other forms of voter suppression,not to mention misinformation campaigns.
4
@Ted Siebert Alas, Ted, our countrywomen's tolerance for Trumpian disregard (if that is the right word) is quite high: 51%+ of white college educated female voters plumped for Trump in 2016--despite the Hollywood Access tapes which revealed, from his own mouth, the depth of the candidate's contempt for the fairer sex. And his opponent--was a woman! "S'blood, there were something more than natural here, if philosophy could find it out."
Even though Disney dropped “Fox” from it’s name in its entertainment division, FoxWorld continues to dominate the political landscape.
2
This is just a partial list of cast of characters and institutions with a common theme in our recent political news: Trump, Starr, Dershowitz, Ray, Kavanaugh, Epstein, Roy Moore, US Attorney (Florida), Manhattan DA, Baylor, Columbia, Ohio State, Fox News, US Senate.
Maybe, at long last, it’s time for a major gender change in our political leadership to bring a stop to what’s obvious here. Perhaps, the worm has finally turned and our citizens will actually vote.
8
Dershi's contribution to the OJ defense was what exactly? It was Barry Schecht who took the prosecution's case apart. Gloves, Mark Fuhrman? Icing on the Schecht cake. I would be worried in Schecht were on Trump's team.
1
When Maureen hits her stride, I suffocate laughing. This is one of the best ever.
3
The White male won’t rest until every last one of these Trump enablers are thrown out of office. And yes, you can see from my surname that I am a (very) distant relative of a celebrity attorney that has brought disgrace upon this nation!
9
Ken Starr is coming to save the republic from frivolous impeachments, and he cannot abide a liar in the White House--God save our souls! (At least, not if the frivolously impeached liar happens to be a Democrat, say, Bill Clinton).
Ms Dowd left out one cardinal miscreant in her rogues' gallery of Dershowitz's clients, perhaps the worst of all: Bernard Bergman, the corrupt nursing home operator who preyed upon the aged for profit and was convicted of his crimes, despite the best (and worst) efforts of his legal team, headed by Mr. Dershowitz.
If this sad chapter in our nation's history can be put to any good use, let it be as a lesson to our children that fame and fortune are worthless unless acquired by honesty and hard work.
5
Shame on Ms. Dowd for not realizing that who a lawyer represents has nothing to with the lawyer's character. I thought she was more sophisticated than that.
We don't criticize physicians for treating scoundrels. Why not treat lawyers similarly?
3
This is a case of false equivalency. While there is an underlying truth to what you say, doctors take an oath to treat an injury or disease and thus have an obligation to do so. Attorneys take an oath to defend someone to the best of their abilities, but have no obligation to take a case. The doctor who treats a criminal is not defending the criminal while the attorney is. Everyone is entitled a competent defense, but not every lawyer makes their name defending rich and powerful criminals.
3
@Matthew --- A public defender MUST take a case or get another job. If a lawyer likes criminal work more power to him. Does not mean the lawyer approves the conduct of the accused. The experience a lawyer gains by working for an accused (even if guilty) helps the lawyer in the next case where the accused is NOT guilty.
1
@frankie boy when the doctor performs site-specific operations over and over again, they get a reputation for being that kind of doctor. When an attorney represents the most high-profile baddies again and again, well...
One thing I'd say about Dershowitz is that he loves notoriety and basks in being known as the contrarian of constitutional law. He can surely handle Dowd's comments.
As always, the comments are most revealing. Other than universal Trump loathing, the fixation is on Dowd's history and of course, the Clintons.
Precious little about the impeachment.
Characterizing Starr's -- or anyone's -- disgust at Bill Clinton's abuse of an intern as "pearl clutching" seems tone deaf.
2
@PE Spends pages and pages outlining the tawdry behavior and actions of his political foe, but was not disgusted enough by the shameful actions that took place at Baylor under his watch? Pearl clutching sounds about right.
1
Prurient: having or encouraging an excessive interest in sexual matters.
This is Starr and many other 'conservative' leaders. The Moral Majority is 'moral', right? So, the idea of sexual relations is put in an especially lurid light. Or maybe they'd call it darkness.
The game is economics, the winners are the few at the top, and sex is just another game to distract from economics. We talk about so much as wealth and power concentrate. That's what they want. Starr's a good, smart provocateur. We're fools.
2
If Trump is wondering "where is my Roy Cohn?", let me remind him that Roy was run out of Washington on a rail for incompetence.
He did pretty good in New York depending on your definition of "pretty good".
Moscow Mitch to Red State America: "I've got this"
4
Why the surprise? John Dean and Carl Bernstein have been screaming this is "worse than Watergate" on CNN since Trump got elected. About everything from Russia collusion to firing Comey. So now we are forced to relive the sordid Lewinsky sexual harassment saga as Ken Starr joins the fray. And. Dershowitz' Jeffrey Epstein connection. Ibid. Bill Clinton.
Can't wait.
4
Trump setting up his Reality TV trial. With the most Egotistical media darlings he could get .
Senators if you value freedom and safe travels in the country after this debacle is over , especially with your freedom caucus in Russia’s pocket please just force resignations of all the men and women involved.
The trump team will make us an OJ Simpson redux nation. That era and media coverage was ridiculous. Trump destroyed our republic. He is King now if the senate folds in for his team.
I have been predicting this time since day one and contacting my representatives weekly. The Ct. delegation has no teeth cuz our state doesn’t matter thanks to having the electoral college. No one visits and our governor chooses who gets Ct. support. Ridiculous as well. Despondency is seeping I to my heart. We had potential in 1989 to be the Peace dividend nation. Instead we decided to let our military and global corporatists run us into the ground with Oil Wars. This beltway crowd killed our sons and daughters and those of other nations. After WW2 America was respected and thriving. We had a chance until the “ commie scare “started with McCarthyism and John Bircher , Goldwater broke into the sanity beginning to grow and reestablished segregation. They did this thru voter suppression and destruction of majority black southern communities in the south. Look up the history of Eatonville Fl. Best schools in the state until the late 1940’s. After the vets returned the white population destroyed it
3
Trump’s defense gambit will predictably play out like a classic Greek tragedy, replete with enough reversals of fortune and upendings among the hubristic ensemble of characters to fill The Library of Poetic Justice.
The irony of a legal strategy that marries the dubious talents of a puritanical yet prurient sexual martinet like Starr to those of a fanatical defender, if not practitioner, of sexually deviance like Dershowitz — who risibly elevates his perverse niche expertise in profanity to the status of sacred Constitution-worship — is at once both piquant and absurd.
Implausibly, a perverse symmetry of collective denouement doubtless will unfold. Where Donald Trump started is roughly where he will ineluctably end — not as some cheap simulacrum of an existentialist philosopher but as an etiolated sociopathic narcissist who spent his silver-spooned life wasting and denaturing his absurd and undeserved leg-up.
3
If Schiff needs to meet with trump's lawyers, he'll need to wear a hazmat suit.
10
'You won’t find Pelosi keening about gender; she’s too busy taking care of business.'
Yeah. Sure, Mo. The Democratic party has taken care of so much business since Trump was elected. There was, uh... Russian interference.... there was the Meuller Report.... there was the impeachment hearings... oh -- and there was giving Donald Trump every last thing he asked for -- judges and war budgets included.
2
@Jerry Westerby FYI, the house had passed a lot of legislation. Your boy McConnell is the one who decided not to put any of it to a vote.
1
I wish Cher had run.
2
The malleable reptile Alan Dershowitz , a witness for Clinton in his impeachment, in an CNN interview right now, is going to argue that there’s no need for witnesses in the Trump impeachment because he feels that there are no impeachable crimes committed Which is like saying he’s not a pedophile because under age girls agreed to have relations with him. BTW, many of his past “famous” cases involve defending people who violated women, one way or another. Go figure.
4
I'm surprised trump and his lawyers haven't exhumed the rotten corpse of Roy Cohn, Trump's attorney in the 1970's and '80's, to prop up at the defense table in the Senate. It would be an apt addition to trump's team of rancidly corrupt defenders.
4
Ms. Dowd - you’re blaming Hillary’s loss on not listening to Bill? Yet Putin gets no shoutout?! Come on.
3
Donald Trump, together with Kenneth Starr and Alan Dershowitz.....
For anyone of an age to have witnessed the 1960's and beyond, this combination of three man can not be described any better than with the single word "rich".
1
There is only one plausible defense Dershowitz and Starr can use: Trump is innocent by reason of insanity and ignorance.
4
Well said Maureen, without too much "whingeing." You definitely have the "scarlet letter A" team in the peep and the pervert rushing to defend the predator. I only wish that Nancy Pelosi or Michelle Obama would decide to run for president.
It is unkind & more than belittling to refer to Trump’s legal team as “pervs”. Attorneys regularly accept unpopular cases & clients. Your argument is diluted when your use the tactics used by Trump.
The Equal Pay Act passed in 1963. Now it’s 2020.
Women are still paid on average 80 cents on the dollar.
Black women 61 cents.
Native American women 58 cents.
Latinas 53 cents.
But sure, a woman must never dare mention sexism, because that’s just “wingeing”.
6
Starr is a rat going forward and backward. I remember how angry I was during President Clinton's trials. It started with a bank deal that ended up finding the Clintons lost $30,000 on that deal. How many others in Congress would come out that clean. And it ended up with Kavanaugh's baby, to remove President Clinton because of two cigars and consenting adults where pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease spread were almost impossible. Strictly in a court where damages are paramount, I think it might be correct to say that these were not sexual relations; they were more like a few limited and temporary physical contacts two consenting adults might elect to do. I listened to little news during that time, because I was so disgusted with the lawsuit's premises, the way it was all over the news, and the way it ruined an excellent presidency. They went out of their way to loudly publicize Clinton's trial. In Trump's case, he is his own loud speaker via twitter, his most extreme pronouncements without expert input, his so to speak being a bull in a china shop, and continual lying. Everyday he keeps his show loudly going. People, including me, are sick and tired of it. Several legal experts have stated that the House may continue with more Impeachments, even if Trump wins another term as President. There are numerous criminal lawsuits awaiting Trump, and legal experts have stated that even while Trump is US President, he is not immune to criminal prosecution of major crimes.
5
Top to bottom, BRAVO!
Everyone knows reruns are money in the bank for advertisers
1
Don't sugarcoat it, Maureen. I laughed and laughed, until I realized your every word was true. Then, it wasn't funny anymore.
2
Pelosi has won even if the severely impaired and cowed Senate majority, rigs the trial, denies testimony from witnesses, plugs their ears and votes to dismiss the charges against Trump. They will have ducked, avoided, ignored and thumbed their noses at the constitution. Pelosi, constitution firmly in hand, has given us a civics lesson in country before party. With her members holding together behind her she has shown how one fulfills their responsibility and oath of office despite being personally attacked, name called, threatened and confronted with a mile high stone wall of obstruction and defiance from the executive branch. She came to the decision to initiate the impeachment of Trump after carefully examining his actions as well of those of his henchmen. Their behavior was, she determined, so egregious and undermining of the most sacred doctrine establishing our form of government, she had no choice but to proceed down the road of impeachment. Anything less, would be a violation of her oath. And, In so doing, Pelosi manifests, personal integrity combined with political grit. As such, even if the Republican dominated Senate keeps it's tail between it's legs, with eyes and ears covered, she wins. Starr and Dershowitz's arguments will long be quickly forgotten but Pelosi's determination will not be.
11
Very funny, even though it's shooting fish in a barrel. There may be one point that is being missed in the whole discussion of this legal dream team: the point of adding them to the team is to deliberately enhance the circus sideshow aspect of the whole thing; part of the strategy of making the impeachment not a serious matter. There is some danger that this could be effective, as we see from the very credible threat of Trump's reelection, despite three years of reality-TV theatrics throughout the administration.
14
No quarrel with any of the opinions and conclusions here. But as a lawyer, I worry about this tendency to identify lawyers with their clients. Even a bad guy gets a defense lawyer. That's how our system works. Doesn't mean the lawyer is a bad guy, too.
12
@Ben As you know this is not a "trial" where a jury has yet to be selected, so to defer to "how our system works" seems off-point. Defense lawyers don't, preceding jury selection, provide long interviews on national TV to proclaim their clients innocence. The jury here is the media and any resulting "Justice" depends on how skillfully (or underhandedly) it is manipulated.
1
@Ben Yes, everyone, even a bad guy, is entitled to representation. But is everyone entitled to an absurd defense? At some point a lawyer should have the decency to say "no," both on ethical and moral grounds, if his client wants to present an untenable defense. And, in Dershowitz's case, a lawyer who prides himself on being a champion of the Constitution, this is particularly appalling.
2
@Lauren I'm talking about a broader tendency, not simply the impeachment situation (which I agree isn't a trial in the usual sense). I recall when John Roberts was nominated to the Supreme Court, people were all too willing to ascribe to him the views of clients he represented when he was in practice. That's nuts. I've represented plenty of clients who took positions I personally would never have advanced. But the positions were arguable, and I was paid to argue them. That's what lawyers do.
3
There are some real gems in here.
Excellent advice for Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar to stop whingeing about sexism and wield the big stick.
The prediction that a woman who can electrify Democrats will be able to win.
And, of course, the fact that Trump’s popularity with the MAGA crowd is that he operates from the id.
These should serve as an advice list to the present female candidates. Warren is becoming absolutely shrill now that her poll numbers are declining. Not a good look. Stay in control, be like Pelosi.
16
@Em Ind Your calling Elizabeth Warren "shrill" says more than you may know. That is an adjective that rarely gets used in describing male behavior. A man would be considered "bold" using the same tack in campaigning. Further, any attempt by a woman to "wield a big stick" shows her as brazen and unstable. Trump, as a man, can (and does) do it all day long. I personally would take a shrill woman, a Democratic Socialist, a gay Rhodes scholar...nearly anyone over what is occurring now.
1
Hillary got 3 million more votes than trump. There's a little more that went into her loss and trump's supposed win than her "not lighting up" the electorate.
37
Among the many factors that went into causing the Trump disaster in 2016, two stand out to me. One is that the media failed to report Trump's history of lawsuits for cheating people, his huge bankruptcy, and his deep unpopularity in New York City. I hope the damage done by Trump will cure voters of the delusion that being rich and a business owner means a person will be a good president (see also George W Bush, Harvard MBA, and failed president).
Second is Clinton fatigue, a product of both Bill and Hillary's years in the public sphere. I am a liberal who supported Bill Clinton, but I remember when they said the country was getting "two for the price of one," feeling uncomfortable with the idea of an unelected "co-president." Then Hillary didn't get anywhere with her health care plan. I thought it was a mistake for her to be the Democratic candidate in 2016, given that she had lost to Obama in 2008, and that I was probably not the only person in the US tired of the competitive tension between Hillary and Bill. (see David Maraniss' excellent biography of Bill, and discussion of the Clinton marriage). Her own campaign staff were reported to be concerned that if she spoke at the same event as Bill did, the contrast between her lecturing and his persuasiveness would be too painfully clear.
26
@Bonnie
I must take issue with (part of) one of your statements: ". . . the media failed to report Trump's history of lawsuits for cheating people . . ."
As a faithful, lifelong reader of newspapers, I was completely aware of this flaw in Trump's character, way before the 2016 election. I was appalled, therefore, that anyone would support the man after knowing he shafted so many owners of small businesses. While I never saw such reports in TV news, I can attest that the subject was well-documented in print media. Maybe more citizens need to read their news.
But perhaps a bigger question now, after three years of in-your-face, Trumpian kakistocracy, is why so many Americans continue to support this vile man--the worst president in our history?
5
Thanks for this. I thought I was the only one who felt like disinfecting my house after hearing about some in this group I wouldn’t come near with a ten foot pole that the President embraces. Hypocrites, ready to do anything for fame and money and we have the presidents dream legal team. Doesn’t this group of lawyers have members with clouds of ethics violations hanging over them? It’s not going to be easy to trust what they say, but they are following in Michael Cohen and Rudy’s footsteps, so they’ve got that. Welcome to the presidents impeachment circus.
37
@R. Pasricha - How about Stuffy Starr (or alternatively Conspiratorial Ken) & Asaltacunas Alan? Not to mention Trickster Trump, Black Market Barr & Profane Pence? Just for starters.
1
@R. Pasricha Probably no decent lawyers would want a client like Trump, with his more than 15,000 lies on record.
1
Giving nicknames to your opponents is considered infantile, but in the age of Trump, Dems should be indulged with the use of a handful. Moscow Mitch was a good start. In honor of Ms Dowd, can we add Prissy Ken? Wish his name was Paul!
16
@Tex - How about Stuffy Starr (or alternatively Conspiratorial Ken) & Asaltacunas Alan? Not to mention Trickster Trump, Black Market Barr & Profane Pence? Just for starters.
Once again, Ms. Dowd, you have nailed it. I wish I had your gift for prose. You have succinctly and stingingly smacked the rich white boys club upside the head so well that I am gobsmacked by your literary prowess. Perfection. Another 5 star column. One of your best.
32
In the recent shout-off on CNN between Toobin and Dershowitz the latter dominated the exchange, frequently speaking over Toobin. He should have asked Dershowitz the following question: Would you agree that Trump is the most incompetent president in our history and that he poses not only a threat to the world's peace and order, he also threatens to destroy beyond repair the legacy of liberty and respect for for law the founders willed to us? Before you answer I call upon the audience to be alert and note how you will evade the question with your usual bag of sophistries.
47
Kenneth Starr “clutched his pearls?” That’s hilarious! Maureen Dowd has nailed it again. Mark Twain would love her commentaries were he alive today.
Humor and ridicule are most effective for me exposing tyrants and hypocrites.
39
So glad to see your opinion here, Ms Dowd. What you've said has brought me some relief from concern about a woman president's chances but your description of Starr as a creep is spot-on also. I suspect he has not changed one bit......
21
To catch rats, what better bait than an invitation to defend Trump?
Starr, Giuliani and Dershowitz seek bright lights, because they have no shame.
Undermining the public good has earned them fortune, fame and the association of murderers, rapists and gangsters.
As the worst of examples, they perpetuation our plague.
The one that fell Rome and Germany.
The bell has rung, our battle has begun.
Let us all do our duty.
20
Though I am able to get senior discounts, I admit I didn't follow politics much in the 90's. Therefore when I saw a certain slime ball on television a few years ago I didn't know anything about him until I looked up Ken Starr on the internet. My stepdaughter is graduating from Baylor in May. Mr. Starr is not spoken of very fondly on the Baylor campus. But it makes perfect sense that the man who helped get Epstein a slap on the wrist and a revolving door at the jail, would now defend a man accused of sexual abuse by 19 different women. And paid off a porn star. And referred to his wife in a tweet as Melanie.
There are many capable women coming up through the ranks now in Congress. I have to confess I'm not a Warren fan though I have respect for intelligence and passion. Perhaps one or more of the capable women in Congress will be present in the 2024 election. Perhaps a poster (or maybe a dartboard) with the images of Trump, Dershowitz, Starr, and Epstein displayed next to the bathroom mirror could serve as a reminder of what happens when immoral men are allowed to attain positions of high influence.
20
@Joe I think you are on to something. But we also need a video connecting Starr and Dershowitz to all of the women abused by their clients. Start with O.J. or Van Bulow and take it all the way to Epstein, Weinstein, Prince Andrew, and now Trump. Maybe we can get Mike Bloomberg to pay for it.
1
White women were trump’s biggest cohort in the 2016 election. If white women vote for a man like trump over a woman like Hilary men will always win the election. Women are their own worst enemy. Black women did not vote for trump. God bless them. Be like the Black women.
30
@Jeanne 357 A whole bunch of white women didn't vote for Trump either. They voted for Hillary. I certainly did.
3
I find it appalling that the author is attempting to slime attorneys representing Trump. Dershowitz successfully represented most of the people he offered legal counsel to. Does Dowd assume they were guilty, regardless of the verdicts? That would make him a very good lawyer. She can hate that Starr presented very detailed evidence of what Bill Clinton did while president. Is a prosecutor supposed to edit testimony and evidence because it is disturbing? Are juries supposed to make serious decisions of guilt or innocence based on edited for television Cliff Notes? Dowd now wants to connect defense attorneys histories to their client. Shameful.
3
Everyone deserves legal representation. But attorneys always have a choice of client. Whatever criteria they use, they can’t then say, ‘I’m just the attorney’. To this day, as much as I admire the ACLU, I will never forget their representing the neo-Nazis marching in Chicago neighborhoods decades ago. Nazis may have deserved representation, but not by them.
The, company they keep, the client’s they choose- does rebound.
Yeah, funny this one.
The real reason Starr and Dershowitz are stepping up is because they're like moths in the klieg lights. Here's one last hurrah to appear relevant before the cameras.
Both awful people.
41
Wow! Maureen, you have really captured it perfectly. This administration, this whole experience of Trump-dumb, will go down in history as one of the sleaziest soap operas ever. Could hypocrisy have been illustrated so brightly?
22
If anyone knows what Trump has on Dershowitz please share.
It seems it has to be something similar to what Putin has on Trump.
24
Great column, Ms Dowd. I must disagree with one thing- I don't think it's a last-gasp primal scream.
I think these toadies, racists, and sexual and political perverts are in their first gasp. Oh, they are going down, I agree, but there will be a lot more coming up for air and gasping before they slide under.
25
Unbelievable. Is there a warehouse of washed up Republicans in deep freeze waiting for redeployment in the most hypocritical way possible? Who will they trot out next? Dan Quayle? This is worse than watching re-runs of The Apprentice.
34
Maureen. Great article. I share your sense of disgust with the inhabitants of Trumpworld. It’s just not worth it to be angry with them. They are just plain disgusting and the sooner they fade into history the better.
15
I heard Dershowitz describe himself as a “liberal Democrat” on NPR and wondered, in what world? You nailed it in this column, Ms Dowd, and props to the hilarious subtitle.
23
As a woman with a long history of being a woman--I've reached a breaking point. I've had it with the pious pontificating, the grabbing, the condescension, the whole boys club, because I said so, Father knows bestness of the whole dang lot of them. Let's hear it for Nancy Pelosi, Stacey Abrams, AOC, Greta Thunberg and RBG--and a future where the question of a woman's "electability" seems quaint.
57
@teach
Please - Senators Warren and Klobuchar, who are bearing the full brunt of sexism, overt as well as subtle right now.
Can’t you see it? We women are being told “this one isn’t good enough, wait for the next election”. Like Dowd campaigning against Hillary, and now against these women candidates, we’re told that some day in the future the ideal women candidate will come along. Wait for 2024 we are told, we can nominate Abrams, e.g. And then watch as the machinery tears her down, and we are told she’s not good enough... but wait for 2028!...if our country lasts that long.
3
On the plus side, Starr's involvement here puts a star next to Clinton's impeachment...
8
In current times, President Clinton would have been convicted "me too" style in the Senate.
At the time, leading feminists rolled over and played dead- except to take a bite out of Ms. Lewinski.
7
“How did he miss Ted Bundy?” Bundy was neither rich nor powerful. Dershowitz cares about the Constitution, so long as doing so entails fame and fortune. Dershowitz really, really cares about defending the glitter of his name in headlines. The law and all that other stuff? Not so much. If you ain’t got the Do Re Mi (as Woody Guthrie liked to say) you an’t got Dershowitz on your defense team.
19
This is one of Dowd's great articles, in which she again offers brilliant insights into the leading figures of American society.
15
The very worst is Dershowitz, one of the slimiest characters of our time.
We know what Epstein's friends are.
23
Maureen Dowd shows how to be over-the-top funny--and right on target.
15
Tell me who your lawyers are, and I will tell you who you are...
10
The infamy will end. Nothing moldwarp can stay.
1
For years we tried to forget the atrocities of Newt Gingrich, Bill Clinton, and Ken Starr, but thanks to the #metoo movement and Donald Trump/Epstein, we can now remember and place their names among the Hall of Shame men who colored our past. Dershowitz thinks he can rehabilitate his reputation, but these serial sex offenders won’t be forgotten again!
6
Well said Maureen! You definitely have nailed the "scarlet letter" A-team in the peep and the pervert rushing to defend the predator. I only wish that Nancy Pelosi or Michelle Obama would decide to run for president. Like me [Disclosure: Another Dowd-y Word Wealth moment that I looked up], they don't even know the meaning of "whingeing."
9
“President Trump, have you no sense of decency?”
“Decency? No! No decency! What’s decency anyway to the fake news opinion writers?”
4
While Dowd is reveling here reliving her glory years of op-ed writing hectoring the Clintons and delving into the whole of the Monica sex scandal, she over looks the fact that Trump is not being impeached for anything having to do with a sex scandal so her pre-occupation with it now comes across as living on past glories.
Remember, white married women will vote in 2020, as they did in 2016, in the majority for Trump.
Women have met the enemy, and it is themselves.
4
"Hillary Clinton did not lose because she was a woman."
Hillary Clinton did not lose.
There, I fixed it for you.
22
The contempt that Starr, McConnell, Trump and the GOP have for the zombies in MAGA hats is even below my own.
17
I’m not sure what upsets the unhinged left more: Dershowitz being on team Trump or the very real fact that the first female president could be Nikki Hailey.
6
Beautiful, Maureen. When examining a creepy specimen like Donald Trump, who, as you accurately stated, 'operates from the id', one can't help but wonder if the superego was misnamed. The most inflated, narcissistic, deluded guy in the room is completely lacking.
5
"Why Hillary Clinton Lost" is Number 2 or 3 on Trump's Greatest Hits list. I'm sorry to see it rehearsed in 2020 by Maureen Dowd.
3
I rarely have high praise (or any praise) for Ms. Dowd but this is simply a masterpiece of a column and I congratulate her for it!
For once, her criticisms of Hillary Clinton and her loss are pure perfect analysis, rather than the usual snark, condensed into a single, perfect paragraph that explained how she turned a should-have-been landslide into a loss.
And there IS a woman who has the charisma, the passion and the ability to excite voters like a JFK or a Barack Obama. Unfortunately, she's still to young to run for President, and, of course, that's Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Tough, smart, fearless, lets NOBODY get the better of her, not even Trump or even Speaker Pelosi. But she's not (yet) 35.
There's one TINY omission from Trump's perv pack of lawyers. Robert Ray. He, too, has his sexual dirty closet--charged with stalking a former girlfriend. He cut a deal and it was all sealed. But that just rounds out Trump's habit of surrounding himself with predators and assaulters of women, and his friendships with them. From Bannon to Epstein to Giuliani to Rob Porter, and now, to his 3 new TV lawyers.
Trump said he would drain the swamp. He turned it into a toxic waste dump!
And everyone of them denies it and says they are ALL lying--in Trump's case, now 64 women!
15
I’m in no doubt that Starr, Dershowitz are everything this article says they are. However, I feel it’s complacent to write Trumps legal to off as a joke because his lawyers are creepy, sleazy and defend some awful people.
Dershowitz helped OJ to walk free
Starr & Dershowitz got Epstein a sweetheart deal in 2008
Starr turned a property deal investigation into Clinton’s impeachment over a lie about oral sex
Pam Bondi managed to make a fraud case against Trump University disappear
Jay Sekulow helped Trump dodge the Mueller Report
They may be unpleasant people who make ridiculous assertions on tv but they know how to abuse the legal system to allow very very guilty people to walk free.
16
You nailed it, Maureen, i.e., "...Donald Trump, Ken Starr and Alan Dershowitz have joined together in a pervy, hypocritical cabal..." Let the emphasis be on the word "pervy," aka pervert. Their empty minds, soulless souls, and heartless hearts are indeed perverted. But to your point, yes, a woman can be president and should be president and NOW. We have two women left on the debate stage who can match their male counterparts in smarts, in experience, in ethics. Amy has been giving it all she's got. But Elizabeth who has been and will continue to be my first choice has not. She has got more to give. Blame it on communication skills or perhaps too much defensiveness, whatever. But to return to the one to emulate, of course it is Nancy Pelosi. Not Hillary, but instead our Speaker. For one moment, let us imagine if she were a presidential nominee. It would be a no-brainer. That being said I thank my God daily that Ms Pelosi is where she is at this ominous point in time. My final contribution: Drink more coffee, lady candidates. Show that pragmatism and aggression. And never worry about the men who would find fault in the Virgin Mary if she were running for president.
11
America we are bouncing around the bottom of the barrel.
We either dump Trump/GOP and crawl out or the ideal of
America dies.
VOTE 2020!
15
@Casey Jonesed VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO!
1
You didn’t mention your own role in Clinton’s loss.
15
"You can bet that Trump and his buddies will continue to turn out the women's vote."
Let's be clear Maureen. You mean the WHITE women's vote. That's the only category of women Trump won. Not brown women. Not African-American. White women, like you. Like your family.
Happily, that category of women voters is shrinking. Along with elderly white voters. When it shrinks sufficiently America will have a female president.
And hopefully we will not have you to tell us untruths about why there is no female president.
It's simple: white men, and white women. Like you.
5
So Americans voted for a despicable man , because Hillary Clinton wasn't joyful enough. What a disgusting thing to say. But you endorsed this 'godlike' jolly entertainer. Now we know why you endorsed him. To have a bit of fun. Congratulations.
7
@Anna I agree with you about Mo's Hillary hate, but she did not endorse Don as far as I know. However, she might as well have with all the hate.
Thank you
Not only did you reintroduce an intriguing word “Bloviating”, to your readers, but you illustrated how it is to be used, as well.
Slime and sleaze seem to be important character traits for anyone wanting to serve Trump. Honesty and integrity mark someone as being incompatible with the current White House MO.
8
In a democracy we get the leaders we deserve. It’s as simple as that.
We in the rest of the world are at a loss to understand why 5% of Americans would vote for this preposterous charlatan, let alone almost 50.
There is only one possible reason; a very large proportion of American voters are gullible dimwits.
The end.
All the rest is noise.
12
@Nils Wetterlind
Bravo, Nils! The most cogent and succinct explanation I have read in a long while. And I have lived in some of the Dimwit Nation territories and have seen it firsthand and repeatedly. (Happy ending - I escaped!).
1
"Even Trump was appalled. “Starr’s a freak,” the bloviating builder told me back in 1999. “I bet he’s got something in his closet.” In other interviews, he called Starr “a lunatic,” “a disaster” and “off his rocker,” and expressed sympathy for Hillary having to stand by her man when he was “being lambasted by this crazy Ken Starr, who is a total wacko.”
A most interesting quote. The projector-in-chief.
11
Starr was fired for concealing sexual assault at Baylor after winning an idiotic deanship at the Pepperdine law school for being paid by the Scaiff trust for prosecuting Bill Clinton for lying in a deposition about sperm on a blue dress. Nobody other than Bubba was ever prosecuted for lying in a deposition in the history of the nation, and supposedly Starr was encouraged by Brett Kavanaugh to indict Clinton. How Starr can defend the criminal behavior of Trump would only matter if he was anything other than a tool of the Trump criminal enterprise. He has always been a dark pasty figure for hire and has never served the nation honestly or well.
19
Im tempted to note that the 200 plus attack pieces you made on Hilary Clinton helped to get this criminal in the White House but I would like to point something else out. We hear of the lowlife killers of women that Dershowitz has defended and yes it is shameful to search out these lethal millionaires for your client base. But he will say with a halo on his head "even a guilty millionaire deserves representation in our system"...what I would like to point out is that ever since a movie was made about the Von Bulow case I have heard that Dershowitz is some great legal scholar. Well I am no scholar but I did graduate from a top ten law school and taught philosophy of the law at a major east coast university and I have never seen one journal article or text by Dershowitz that is of any quality whatsoever. He writes many books on the middle east that I have not read, i go to experts for that subject. His area I see nothing. Sort of like Phyllis Diller he is famous for being famous. I hope both Starr and Dershowitz are criticized for the absurd positions they have taken throughout their pathetic excuses for a career.
24
You want to know how to beat Trump? Don't write about him for a week. Don't even mention his name. Do you know how crazy that will drive him and his cult-mates?
Prove that you don't need him. Because for the past three years, I've read about little else in this paper but Trump. A thousand small fires burn and keep his flame alive.
Prove that there's something there besides "anti"!
Prove that you really don't care about the 50% increase in NYT revenue since the President Twinkie hit the scene. Prove that this really is a two party system. Prove that the Democrats are more than Repub-lite.
Prove that what really matters is new ideas, new ways of living. Prove that you can do better than this charade we've been living with for 40 years. Prove that America still exists, and not just as a reaction to the threat of Trumpageddon, which is closer than we dare admit.
A week is not possible? OK, try one just day. Because, though you hate to admit it, Donald Trump has been running the show, and I mean the show you're reading right now, from the beginning. And all the columnists, and editorials, and snark is just putting him back in the oval office for four more years. Prove that wrong.
4
@Sera I totally agree. Trump is like some science fiction monster that the more energy you give it, the stronger it becomes. Trump would shrivel up like a vampire without fresh blood and disappear if there were no news about him anywhere for a month.
1
In the immortal words of Charlie Brown...." It staggers the imagination ".....
3
Years ago, a very smart criminology professor told me that rich people often sought to hire the biggest "name" they could find when they needed a lawyer. His example decades ago was the attorney F. Lee Bailey. But the smarter option, the professor said, was to hire the best local lawyer you could find, whether in DC or the small town where you would stand trial. The same applies to surgeons: You don't want the chairman emeritus of the medical school's surgery department. You want the mid-career doctor who performs your kind of operation day in and day out. To the extent that President Ignoramus probably won't be well-served, I won't lose any sleep.
11
...meanwhile the Russians team up with Facebook and subvert our elections....
11
Maureen criticize Dershowitz all you want. But you cross the line when you suggest that a lawyer who defends high profile criminal defendants is somehow endorsing or approving of their bad behavior.That is clearly your intent in in your comments about D. That is flat out wrong.
Of course Trump picked Dershowitz and Starr.
Two very sick human beings.
Both proudly claim the extreme dishonor of having defended Trump’s good buddy, Jeffrey Epstein.
12
Dershowitz is an 81 year old has been. Ever listen to this guy? First he cites how smart he is (not a stable genius), then he tells you how many books he's written, talk about a man with a frail ego.
7
Hillary was definitely "all about the voters." Pelosi surely cringed when HC smirked about "the deplorables."
1
Initially, I had doubts about Nancy becoming Speaker again after the 2018 election. Now, I pray that the republican senate members will snap out of their cult-trance, impeach all executive branch criminals complicit in jeopardizing our democracy; thereby anointing President Nancy.
9
The GAO report on withholding funds from Ukraine proves 'Individual-1' violated the Take Care Clause, mandating that a POTUS "take care that the laws be faithfully executed."
Yet another example why Impeached 45* is unfit for office, besides his 15,000+ documented lies in just 3 years.
13
It's only fitting that an OJ defense counsel participate in a faux trial that Senate repubs promise will make the OJ jury look analytical. Whether Starr or Dershowitz is better at dragging this country further into the slime pit will probably draw even odds in Vegas. Either way, we lose.
4
Ken Starr was outraged and dedicated all of his energies to investigating Bill Clinton's extramarital consensual sex in the 1990's and related fibbing.
A few years later, in 2007, Starr joined the legal team defending Palm Beach billionaire sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein, criminally accused of the statutory rape of numerous underage high school students.
Starr was “in the room” when then-US attorney Alex Acosta made the sweetheart country club legal deal that yielded Epstein's plea bargain and he later described Acosta as “a person of complete integrity,” adding that “everyone was satisfied” with the agreement.
In 2013, Starr was among many high-profile figures to express support for Christopher Kloman, a 74-year-old retired teacher at the Potomac School who pleaded guilty to molesting five female students from 1966 to 1985.
Starr signed a letter written by his wife Alice to the Virginia judge presiding over the case.
The letter asked for leniency for Kloman, a friend of the Starr family.
Kloman was convicted in 2013 and sentenced to 43 years in prison.
And as Baylor University President, it was open season for rape on campus under Ken Starr.
Ken Starr has called Bill Clinton’s actions 'clear felonies' and now he happily defends a proud liar and predator in Trump whose efforts to pressure Ukraine to provide 2020 campaign assistance, which he calls “woefully inadequate” justification for removal from office.
"only the worst possible hypocrites"
Trump-Starr 2020
23
Trump really beat NYC and California. Big Media in both states were vying to control the countries politics through their large populations. Big media basically promised a Hillary win. Trump beat them under our current rules against what Maureen called a joyless, entitled, basically loser, of a candidate who was outworked and outsmarted by a man that the elites in NY and California hate. The media, including Maureen have to admit they underestimated a man who made them into front page liars. Sorry about your egos and reputations but please don't try to destroy our country trying to "get Back"! Your time would be better used preparing for your next loss. 11/2020!
More white women voted for Trump than Clinton.
1
"And then there’s Dershowitz, whose past clients have included such sterling fellows as Epstein, Claus von Bülow, O.J. Simpson and Harvey Weinstein."
You forgot to add to this sordid list The Queen of Mean: Leona Helmsley.
One of the top 10 mean-spirited women in the 20th century.
8
Trump, Starr and Dershowitz, sounds like Satans’ crack Legal Team.
Seriously.
8
Too bad the Democrats couldn't hire a Starr. He wouldn't even need a blue dress to entrap Trump into lying about his affairs.
2
Maureen, Trump's lawyers are Mitch McConnell and all other republican senators. The rest of the marionettes are disgusting, but marionettes they are.
9
"Hillary Clinton did not lose because she was a woman. She faced sexism, of course, just as Barack Obama faced racism. She lost because she ran an entitled, joyless, nose-in-the air campaign and because she didn’t emulate her husband’s ethos of campaign ’til the last dog dies and the last bowling alley closes, and always make it about the voters. She lost because she and her campaign manager, Robby Mook, didn’t listen to Bill Clinton, the world’s leading expert on the white, male, rural vote, when he warned them that there was trouble and offered to help out."
Surely it's worth remembering the role of Bill Clinton's behavior in Hillary's defeat. Pete Buttigieg, a veteran continually reminds voters of "bonespurs." This was off limits to Hillary because of Bill's history. And the Access Hollywood tape is the end of Trump without the precedent of Bill's "foreplay."
1
How come Guiliani hasn’t joined the defense team? The forces of darkness in the Senate Chamber would then be dense enough to become a black hole. Bye bye. Take Trump with you.
5
Truths about Trump: The “billionaire” who hides his tax returns. The “genius” who hides his college grades. The “businessman” who bankrupted 3 casinos and lost over $1B in 10 years. The “playboy” who pays for sex. The “Christian” who doesn’t go to church. The “philanthropist” who defrauds charity. The “patriot” who dodged the draft. The “innocent man” who refuses to testify.
Senator Alexander and Senator Burr will lead when the trial begins because there is no need to upset the Criminal Con Man in Chief earlier than necessary.
Republican Senators it is definitely time to bail. Trump has zero chance of winning in the election. Lame duck Donald is not funny but darn scary. We can't have a mad dog holding the nuclear codes. The Criminal Con Man in Chief will drag the R party right off the cliff and D's will take the Senate.
The R's best chance in to dump him now before he does more damage to the party and they certainly don't want a lame duck lunatic in charge between Nov and Jan. Can you imagine the damage and corruption he will cause after his "landslide defeat" while awaiting criminal proceedings? Senators must worry about horrible vengeance Trump will expend on our nation from Nov landslide defeat) thru Jan 2021 swearing in of Biden.
67 votes Poof Trump(insanity) is gone.
9
Best byline of the year, no matter what else is generated by this so-called Presidency in 2020.
Trump's relatively recent thoughts about Starr are priceless. I now have something to pass along to my Fox-induced father.
Thank you for this piece.
4
I think, and feel sure, that both men, Dershowitz and Starr are doubling down, and going deeper "inside" because they have the very real fear that they are next. The Epstein situation blew the roof off. So, in a way, being insiders, they are information gathering for their own protection, safety, and perhaps defense. They are not there to defend the Constitution, or Donald Trump. Suggested reading the New Yorker article about Dershowitz' life and career in The New Yorker archive; it has the stench of fear all over it.
12
I don’t always agree with you Maureen.
But this is one of your best pieces .
You are seething with rage ... and rightly so .
47
“... pervy, hypocritical cabal”
Thank you, thank you, thank you Ms. Dowd. I’m still laughing.
As for “Trump and his buddies turning out the women’s vote,” the only time they pay any attention to the women’s vote is when it comes from Susan Collins or Lisa Murkowski.
35
Isn’t that ripe? The Puritan inquisitor now defending the self-professed sex predator.
38
Oscar Wilde described fox hunting as “the unspeakable in full pursuit of the uneatable.”
Well to my mind, Starr and Dershowitz are “the unspeakable in full pursuit of the ‘undefendable.’”
34
Brilliant connection!
1
@Susan what a fabulous quote!!!
1
Ibid.? Not e.g.?
5
So please, Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar, stop whingeing about sexism and just show how you could wield power like a boss.
what is it about dowd and strong women. i haven't heard warren or Klobuchar whine about sexism. i guess she didn't see the colbert show after the jan debate and his comment about warren and the men on the stage.
8
These two disgraceful excuses for human beings absolutely nauseate me.
May the Dems score a takedown of unprecedented magnitude in the days and weeks to come.
11/3/20. VOTE.
22
@Guitar M
VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO!
8
Ted Bundy?
Maybe in the next life.
6
Yes, the id, the primitive and instinctual part of the mind that
contains sexual and aggressive drives and hidden memories.
Donald Trump, Ken Starr and Alan Dershowitz were good buddies with Jeffrey Epstein, like Sigmund said everything can be linked back to sex. Someone should really psychoanalylize all of this.
14
"The Starr chamber was a shameful period of American history, with the prissy Puritan independent counsel hounding and virtually jailing Monica Lewinsky and producing hundreds of pages of panting, bodice-ripping prose that read more like bad erotica than a federal report, rife with lurid passages about breasts, stains and genitalia."
I haven't laughed this hard in a while. Is there a better description for Kenny Starr than this? He is a disgrace to this country. How fitting that he should skip into the Oval Office to help the perverted Trump.
37
Apparently the Starr/Dershowitz argument is to side step evidence and denounce any critique of executive privilege. That could be the argument for Trump’s ‘locker room talk’ or even paying off a porn star: male privilege. Boys will be boys; the prez gets to play with his power.
Of course. There is now so much evidence that Bolton, Pompeo, Mulvaney. Pence, Perry and Barr under oath would be simply corroborative.
It this would reveal such a broad corruption of power that Trump’s whole administration would be exposed as a rogue operation. A true Senate trial would have casualties. Too big to jail?
16
Better to smirch than besmirch, sayeth I.
1
I don't watch cable news, but Dershowitz is just being a lawyer. [How are lawyers like flies? They both...] Defending rich creeps pays the pro bono bills. Of course, he's beyond retirement age, so that's probably over. But I don't believe Virginia Giuffre for one second.
Maureen, you’re a smart lady. Do you really believe that trump asking the president of Ukraine to investigate the Bidens activity in that country qualifies as “high crimes and misdemeanors”? Come on.
1
@Tom of course, extorting a foreign leader to dig up dirt on a political rival is a high crime.
11
@Tom do you really believe that withholding congressionally mandated military aid to an ally under attack by our enemy unless they assist the president in the 2020 election is just some minor transgression?
14
@Tom
Trump deliberately and affirmatively withheld Congressionally allocated funds from Ukraine until and unless they announced investigation of the Bidens.
Here in the US, we call that 'extortion'.
And, yes: that's a 'high crime'.
NOT my president
1
How much of these dramas are being driven by men who can’t deal with their own growing irrelevance and are doing anything they can do to cling to power? Trump, Rudy, Barr, Starr and now the Dersh. All beyond shame and trying to repair past taints by climbing back on the horse, regardless of where it is headed.
23
Oh and then there is you- who spent the entire Obama years mocking him , spent the 2016 election year propping Trump- Remember you said "Trump is a dove and Hilary a hawk"
14
This makes the OJ dream team look ethical. This bunch deserves each other. Should be fun to watch.
5
As I recollect, Dowd consistently aimed her snark at Clinton during the last election. Add her columns to the list of reasons Clinton lost.
21
Maureen Dowd won a Pulitzer by writing about the hypocrisy undergirding Ken Starr and the Republicans’ push to impeach Bill Clinton. Her comments here about Starr’s role in that shameful episode are spot on. But if she’s going to re-visit Starr’s appalling treatment of Monica Lewinsky—and I’m glad she did—she should acknowledge her own. On February 8, 1998, Ms. Dowd described the twenty-four-year-old Monica Lewinsky as “a ditsy, predatory White House intern who might have lied under oath for a job at Revlon.”
More than 20 years later, that language would never get past an editor. Everyone makes mistakes. Maybe it’s time for Maureen Dowd to own up to hers.
16
Ms. Dowd, Please stop using the word Pharisaic to mean hypocritical. You have done it before (in the NYT of July 18, 2009), and you should know by now that it is incorrect and insulting to any Jew. The Pharisees created Judaism as we know it today. Pharisaic Judaism is the norm; every Jew is a Pharisee. I suggest you read The Pharisees, written a century ago by a Unitarian minister, R. Travers Herford. It is as valid today as it ever was.
7
In America anything is possible. You start out with a land deal in Arkansas and end up with a blue dress...USA USA
2
The defence team is emblematic of everything wrong with the defendent. Ms. Dowd has done a fantastic job of explaining just how disgusting these slimeballs really are. Thank you for putting it clearly. Identity politics or political correctness have a place in a normal world. Trump has created "bizarro world". All bets are off.
8
And of course his other personal attorney is Rudy...I can't even type I'm laughing so hard...the gang of goofs....
7
"How did he miss Ted Bundy?" Best line Maureen, Thanks.
7
Guess Trump was stuck with Starr and Dershowitz because Michael Cohen's in prison.
10
"How did he miss Ted Bundy?"
Thank you Maureen Dowd, you made my day!
4
It's ironic isn't it that Ken Starr who went after Bill Clinton for his bimbo eruptions (since try as he might , Whitewater didn't pan out , nor the so called assassination of Vince Foster , nor the so called plot of Secretary Brown's plane crash ) ;it took an affair with a 22 year old aide with a big crush to get him impeached . Meanwhile Starr , with the aid of the Republicans and the FBI terrorized the poor girl , ruined her life forever , now is defending a man who crudely talked about what he did to women and was actually taped saying so . Dershowitz has his own history too . Two men who in Trump's world would actually be called losers and pervs if they weren't allied with him . Our world indeed has been turned with their alternate facts and in your face dissembling . Not surprising at all , since Trump is assembling his team of Roy Cohns that are mentally and morally challenged when it comes to the truth .
16
@sm
Whitewater didn't pan out? Several people went to jail for that scheme.
Once the case was closed and the Whitewater billing records were discovered by a WH maid, Starr's pursuit of Hillary (and her refusal to voluntarily testify and hand them over) was proven correct.
Thank you, Maureen. As usual, you operate with the precision of a brain surgeon. It is interesting that Trump has decided to use the services of the voyeur Starr and of the sick mind of Dershowitz. He has a twisted sense of humor.
5
Don’t stop Maureen! You nailed them to the slime bar and the stench is all over the land.
3
Maureen, thank you. Your best. Ever.
2
The 'Dream Team' who will leave no rock unturned, no lie untold, no reputation unruined in their quest to exonerate the most loathsome lawbreaker ever to hold the office of President. Was 'Judge' Pirro too busy?
9
I almost gave up on Ms Dowd after last weekend's column, having been a fan for years. I'm happy I hung in there for this weekend's column, though. It is difficult for me to even read Mr Starr's name, much less witness him being thrust back into another Impeachment trial. A more despicable, morally compromised man cannot be found in the country. Then add Dershowitz into the sordid mix and we have, oh yes, Trump to thank, yet another poisoned pill who is intent on debasing and degrading our country to the point where it will take a generation of hot showers to wash off the stink and lies forced upon America by jowly white men who cannot fathom giving up power, cannot imagine not being in the news, their mugshots about to be displayed, once again, on the bedraggled American soul as the trial begins, the trials they cannot end.
9
Unfortunately he didn’t reach into the barrel. He just shoved a few out.
4
Had the Democrats chosen to investigate Trump’s payoffs to porn stars and models, they might have produced a document vaguely resembling the Starr report. I doubt, however, that it would hold a candle to the original, for want of good material. Stormy Daniels’ account of her liaison with Trump indicates that he has the erotic imagination of a teaspoon.
5
The "perv-party" Donny-Boy believes invincible is built on the same farces he's been able to get away with. OK, watch the team Nancy adeptly built to deliver the House's case @ Donny's Impeachment trial. Notice beyond Schiff & Nadler there are REAL women who know both law & how to present evidence. Whether he gets away it here or not, it shall not be without voices of integrity broadcasting, demonstrating & carving his self serving violations of "our constitution" in stone. Regardless of this outcome, all voters with women of integrity can send this bum home forever this November. Vote like your life & rights depend on it because they do!
3
Might be good if you would repeat for your readers why Clinton was impeached: President Bill Clinton was impeached for committing two acts of perjury, one act of obstruction of justice and one act of abuse of power to commit perjury.
Instead, we get a column that is full of snark.
So
Hillary hate to no purpose.
Check.
The think about it for .5 seconds and to know it isn’t so claim that white working class makes elected Trump.
Check.
There aren’t near enough to have elected him. White women went Trump. But troll on.
Time for another column from Dowd’s brother. One of the right wing Roman Catholics that elected Trump and are still snotty about it. They elected Trump. Their ongoing inexcusable support of his evil keeps him going Along with the hypocrit evangelicals who together with the cult right wing Roman Catholic federalists are the guard of crazies around Trump.
Leave white working class men out of it.
5
Starr should throw hmself in a river and leave us at peace!
As the old saying goes, "Ya can’t make this stuff up!" Thanks, Maureen.
1
“BIRDS OF A FEATHER......”
1
Perv barrel ? We’re gonna need a bigger barrel. And at the very, very bottom, resides Donald. He of the luminescent orange maquillage, the cantilevered hair-product coiffure, the bespoke clothing tailored by Omar the tent Maker. He’s the Grabber-in-Chief, the inspiration of nightmares, the bad example Grandmothers warn children about.
“ The Great Gatsby “ meets “ Deliverance “.
Had Enough ??? Vote them ALL out. November.
14
Bill Maher has a segment on Real Time called “There’s no proof but you just know it’s true”
All roads lead back to Jeffrey Epstein, who I am sure procured teenage girls for these ugly rich guys. And you can be sure Epstein had every room wired and had the tapes.
I have no doubt whatsoever that Epstein was murdered by the same rich, powerful people that considered Epstein their own personal pimp. He knew too much.
The “Deep State” the Republicans always whine about isn’t the Democrats or the FBI or the media. It is Trump himself and the thugs, swamp dweller, criminals and con artists in his orbit.
Trump knows Dershowitz and Starr have no scruples and won’t ever tell what they know.
Trump, Dershowitz and Starr all partied with Jeffrey Epstein. As a team they are expert at keeping their behavior secret so only other ugly rich guys they partied with know the truth. Anyone talks is MUD. Mutually Assured Destruction.
We can’t get Johnnie Cochran back since he died young but maybe Barry Scheck or Robert Shapiro is available?
I have no doubt Epstein was murdered. Likewise Trump is the most dangerous man in America if not the world. Trump has bought his way out of every bad situation in which he has found himself.
But he cannot buy his way out of this. Any Republican that votes again witnesses and the truth should be finished politically.
6
She won by 3 million votes. Why do you keep ignoring that fat?
6
Great "hit" piece by Democratic Party operative. Great fodder for the Times' liberal readers which means more clicks which is good for advertising revenue. Donald Trump has saved the business of printed newspapers by aggravating coastal elites. The trouble is I am not sure which newspaper or columnist I should read for an unbiased take on issues--certainly not Ms. Dowd's almost daily hatred.
1
It’s sad how desperate Alan Dershowitz is to stay relevant. Pack it in already.
1
Hillary blew it and Maureen has hit the nail right on the head. The Donald was as surprised as anyone that he actually won! My problem with both was that this is the best my generation could come up with! I'm one of those that could vote for neither.
I am a white male in his 70s who would love to see a competent woman in the white house. I don't particularly like Pelosi's politics but agree that she has what it takes. There are many who have what it takes. Unfortunately, those running either have Hillary syndrome or want to do their best to turn the U.S. into socialist state. We have an imperfect system here, but it works. This proves itself by the millions who would, like our ancestors, risk everything to get here knowing only that here is better that where they came from.
I would call on any woman with creds and charisma to get elected as president to put herself out there to an electorate ready, willing, and able to elect a woman as President of this great country.
2
@traveler999
If you “voted for neither”, then you in fact inadvertently voted for him. When are you all gonna’ figure this out? That’s why we keep getting these “lesser of two evils” candidates.
1
"Once a woman electrifies Democrats the way J.F.K., Bill Clinton and Obama did — and the way Trump does his base — she will win."
This is the point I've been making for awhile now. Sexism is there but what you really need is a charismatic female orator. Someone who can soar to rhetorical heights while still making people feel comfortable at the local diner. We haven't had that candidate yet. Not in female form anyway.
Admittedly, the generational lag in female professionalism puts forward a far smaller crowd of potential candidates than men. The applicant pool is simply shallow. Fewer women have the political experience to become president because fewer women are allowed to participate in politics. You therefore have fewer chances to find an inspiring candidate. It'll take for the imbalance to even partially correct itself.
The current candidates, Warren and Klobuchar, are both fine. However, few people would describe them as "electric." It appears we're still waiting for Godot. However, in this election, the candidate's gender is hardly the primary factor. Whoever gets enough voters to the polls is good enough. A coconut shell with a smiley face drawn on it would be an improvement.
13
Clinton's loss was not a loss by "rejection", but by abstention. In Wayne County, 75,000 people did not vote. One seventh of them would have turned the vote around. The challenge for this year is to incite, excite, cajole, push, invite, beg, organize people to vote.
24
@Frank Casa
"Provisonal" ballots were tossed.
2
Great article, capturing the reactivation of Trump’s lawyers well past their peak and peak-a-boo careers in the equivalent of Branson-like activities. Obscurity is the only thing they fear though they may long for it in the very near future. Trump is the product of herd and “the unheard” mentality, not knowing their solution is worse then their real problems.
Everyone should read Michael Lewis’ TRAIL FEVER to appreciate today’s political landscape. There are plenty of familiar names, an approaching impeachment, Lewis calls the political mercenaries “the rented strangers”, folks like today’s Kellyanne Conway, hermit crabs who wonder the halls of Congress absent any unpaid loyalty or real value system.
It’s both nice to know the machinations of the upcoming election aren’t a rarity but they are far more dangerous. Comparing the sexual transgressions of Clinton to Trump’s myriad of domestic and international misuses of the White House is laughable.
16
Maureen, you're spot on wrt Starr & Dershowitz, but you seem to willfully, um, selective about some of determining factors for Hilary's "loss" (she won by 3 million votes and received more votes than any white male candidate in history).
Yes, she could have run a better campaign. Totally agree on that. But why no mention of Russian interference? Of voter suppression? Of voter apathy (i.e., the 4 million Obama voters in 2012 didn't vote in 2016)? Of the Bernie primary voters who voted for Trump in Pennsylvania (16%), Michigan (8%), and Wisconsin (9%)... numbers that were FAR more than Trump's margin of victory in those states? Just wondering...
31
I saw Dershowitz on Ari Melber's show last week as he tried to thread the needle whether or not he was on Trump's defense team. He said he was there basically as a lofty Constitutional scholar to argue that there was no proper crime included in the articles of impeachment to support the trial but was not part of the team. Melber pointed out that there are no extras other than the "jury" and lawyers (defense and prosecutors)--no observers so he must be on the team, which he obliquely admitted.
Dowd is right. This may go down as a men's club outcome that Trump is not convicted but women all over America will be taking note of the composition of the Trump team and will take that picture with them into the voting booth. Yes, women will vote in droves to end such infamy.
24