By Bob Gaydos

Cut!

It reads like the script from a bad Hollywood B movie. With the future of humanity at stake.

   The president of the United States, for generations regarded as the leader of the free world, announces a deal with Russia — for even more generations regarded as a predatory wannabe bigger power and traditional enemy of the United States — to buy what sounds like a lot of diesel fuel. It actually amounts to only about two weeks’ worth for busy American truckers, who are struggling with the hugely inflated price of diesel.

   Russia, whose economy is also struggling, is involved in a brutal and unpopular war it started by invading its neighbor, Ukraine, an ally of the U.S., who has supported it in that war. So this relatively minor oil deal amounts to treachery at the highest level. When that American president also criticizes the Ukrainian president for not, in effect, surrendering to Russia, which in many ways is losing the war, and says that Ukrainians should choose a new president who will submit to Russian demands, the treachery is multiplied. Whose side is the U.S. on?

     The plot thickens and the question becomes more pointed when it is discovered that Russia, whose leader is coincidentally a former head of the Russian KGB spy agency, has been providing intelligence help to Iran, a country with which the U.S. is at war. So, the American president is helping Russia, a traditional enemy, to conquer Ukraine, an American ally, even though Russia is helping America’s opponent, Iran, to attack and kill Americans and their allies in the Middle East. 

    That war with Iran was started by the American president for bogus reasons, in violation of the country’s Constitution and in a deviation from his stated campaign promise not to start another “forever war” in the Middle East. It is also the reason for the inflated price of diesel fuel and the need of the American president to make that deal with Russia to look like he’s doing something to ease the economic pain from the war he has no apparent strategy to end.

    Or, plot twist, is the diesel deal really more of an effort to help the Russian president, whom the American president publicly admires and whose economy is suffering and whose war has cost hundreds of thousands of Russian lives? True treachery. Treason.

    Americans, like Russians, are weary of senseless wars. They’ve seen this plot before. Loved ones are dying and they can’t afford basic stuff. They also vote and, unlike in Russia, votes in the U.S. are still being counted legitimately. Mostly.

     Also, not coincidentally, the American president had promised in his campaign for office to end the war in Ukraine on “day one.” That was almost two years ago. People were noticing the contradictions and deaths.

      So the American president, a self-proclaimed deal-maker, made a deal. He switched sides in the war. Treachery. Then he had his on-and-off friend, who happened to be the richest man in the world, pull the plug on a high-tech defense system the Ukrainians depended on to alert them to Russian missile attacks. The richest man in the world, a white supremacist, just happened to own the defense system, yet another significant plot twist. The very rich man claims the American president ordered the system cutoff. The president, a notorious liar whose mental capacity was clearly declining, blames his sometimes friend.

      Whom to believe?

      Ukrainians and Americans didn’t care who did it. Many of them don’t trust either man at this point. Pressure is building. They want it all to stop before the American president, who had often boasted about obliterating Iran in that war he started and can’t finish, decided to use nuclear weapons at his disposal to make good on that threat. Once and for all.

      That significant plot twist would certainly test the loyalty of (1) Russia, also a nuclear power, and (2) China, the growing world power in the East, and (3) North Korea, who also possessed nuclear weapons, all of whom were aligned with Iran against America in that god-forsaken war the American president had started with the assistance of a cliche drunken Defense Secretary.

      It’s a scriptwriter’s nightmare. Written into a corner. Will it be nuclear holocaust and end of the world as known, or, surprise, a heroic effort by someone or someones in the American Congress summoning the courage and ending the nightmare by removing the president from office for the survival of the planet, never mind Ukraine, Iran and the American Dream?

     The trouble is, Hollywood likes both endings.

By Bob Gaydos

Melania Trump

    OK, I was writing something else when a headline caught my eye this morning. It seems Trump had negotiated a temporary ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine. 

    Wow. Well, it’s not the same as ending the war on day one of his term, as promised, but it’s something, I thought. Then I read the story. It turns out the temporary ceasefire applies to only one city in Ukraine, Oleshky, which is described as “war ravaged.“ The Russian-occupied city was the scene of the first Russian attack on Ukraine. It is without water, electricity, heat, food, medicine or anything else basically needed for human survival. Unlivable. The temporary ceasefire is described as “humanitarian,“ to bring desperately needed aid to residents of the area and allow those who wish to leave the opportunity to do so safely.

   OK, still a positive. Then I read further. The White House said that the Trump who negotiated the ceasefire was Melania.

   They really do think we’re that stupid. 

   The absentee First Lady brokered a deal with Russia and Ukraine, presumably because her Russian is much better than her English. Oh, and she heard some terrible stories about children suffering in the region at a recent meeting at the United Nations.

   And that bridge in Brooklyn is still for sale if you’re interested.

   What do I think? In a nutshell, Trump and the Republicans are in deep trouble with the midterm elections approaching and are desperate to find anything that sounds like a positive story coming out of the White House. The situation in Oleshky sounds like a perfect scenario for war crimes accusations against Putin and Russia. He could use a little good ink back home for all the suffering the war has caused in Russia. Trump, the one who is president, also desperately needs good ink to stave off a Democratic takeover of Congress. But Putin, who controls Trump, likely came up with the idea with some of Trump‘s close advisors. They are well aware that the number of Americans who believe Trump could actually come up with such a proposal is rapidly dwindling. He’s not bright enough. He doesn’t care enough. People have heard him speak in public. But he knows it will play well in certain places, maybe convince some voters, and so he is willing to take whatever goodwill comes out of it by attaching Melania‘s name to the deal. Makes it seem more believable. At least that’s the operating theory.

   The ceasefire is scheduled to begin at 4 A.M. Tuesday, Moscow time. A Russian spokesperson declined to say how long the cease-fire/evacuation will last or whether  those who choose to leave will be evacuated to Russian- or Ukrainian-held territory. Seems important.

   This, of course, is wonderful news for the suffering residents of the region. It might also be a reflection of Putin and Trump being aware of how unpopular the war has become with Americans and Russians and how that might affect their ability to continue to lead their countries. I seriously doubt it’s because of any sincere concern for the residents of Oleshky.

     As for what’s in it for Melania, the new peacemaker and old friend of Jeffrey Epstein, that’s probably spelled out in her non-disclosure agreement.

By Bob Gaydos

Katie Zacharia … legally fired

     Lawyer, schmoyer, taxidermist? Who cares? The point is, in this administration you can never have too many blondes.

      Unfortunately, this particular blonde apparently had no idea and no training on how to do her actual job. Which was not to provide legal advice, but rather, to spew Trump propaganda.

      Katie Zacharia was, briefly, the new White House press secretary. Young, attractive and blonde, like her predecessors, Karoline Leavitt, Kellyann Conway and Kayleigh McEnany. Zacharia was fired, literally as I started to write this column about there being no such thing as a quota on how many attractive blonde females can be hired to represent Donald Trump, legally or attorneyily, if there is such a word.

       Zacharia’s five days on the job were spent mostly explaining how she was a lawyer, really, but not really. That is, she graduated from Pepperdine with a degree in law, but never passed a bar exam anywhere (including China), but she said someone had told her that she could still call herself a lawyer, but not an attorney, even though she couldn’t legally do any lawyer stuff, like draw up wills or represent someone in court. Which attorneys do. Lawyers, too.

      Apparently, no one thought that this lawyer thing would be a handicap to her representing Trump to the news media every day. After all, she could still lie legally. Probably everyone in the White House thought she was a lawyer, because she said so. If only she hadn’t said so to the press. They still actually check up on stuff people say. 

     But, after manhandling a mere three questions at her first press conference, she quickly ended it. Zacharia’s remaining tenure, to stretch the meaning of the word, was consumed by debating whether or not she was really a lawyer. As if it really mattered in her new (now former) job, which was to present propaganda. Blondly and blandly.

     My suspicion is that someone in the White House had a hunch, looking at the long run Karoline Leavitt, attractive, young, blonde, KoolAid drinking follower of Trump, had as press secretary before getting pregnant and leaving to tend to her baby, how she had followed two other attractive blonde, etc. whose first names by some weird coincidence also start with a “K,” and how attached at the hip Trump is to his executive aide, Natalie Harp, attractive, young, blonde, KoolAid drinking follower, etc., that another young, blonde, etc. wouldn’t be a bad idea. And Trump had already had an attractive, blonde, not quite as young, actual lawyer/attorney supplicant representing him in Pam Bondi, the now fired attorney general.

    So there probably wouldn’t have been any problem with Zacharia for Trump. She checked all the important blonde boxes. If only the whole silly lawyer/attorney thing hadn’t come up and if only the media hadn’t focused on that for some reason rather than about her being obviously in over her head as press secretary, blonde, lovely and loyal notwithstanding.

    And honestly, Zacharia might still have her job if much of the lawyer-no lawyer obsessed media also hadn’t sidestepped the real news of that day: That Trump had just switched sides for the U.S. in the war between Russia and Ukraine by announcing a deal to buy diesel fuel from Russia, thereby helping its struggling economy and war effort and by saying that Ukrainians should get a new president because Zelensky keeps attacking Russian data centers, which send out all those phony comments on social media sites supporting Trump. 

    I’d have liked to hear Zacharia try to explain that diplomatic (impeachable?) stab in the back positively to the press. Maybe Trump did her a favor by suggesting she rethink taking the job. 

    Of course, there’s always Fox News. You can apparently never have too many blondes there as well.

By Bob Gaydos

Trump and Putin in Helsinki.

   Forgive me if I sound a bit testy, but I get frustrated, after 10 years of dealing with Donald Trump, when people, especially people who are supposed to be educated in such matters, express surprise when the dotard says or does something that benefits Vladimir Putin.

   Like announcing a deal to buy 300,000 metric tons of diesel fuel from Russia. Let’s set aside the legality, duplicity and utter stupidity of the deal for a moment. To those not familiar with the details of diesel fuel usage in America — most of us, I suspect — that may sound like a lot of diesel. It is. But it is roughly half the amount of diesel that America uses every day.

    Half a day’s worth of diesel. To help out a financially struggling Russian economy on which the U.S. has placed economic sanctions, including on diesel, and a Russian leader engaged in a costly and unpopular war (half a million dead soldiers, a million wounded) he started with Ukraine, whom the U.S. is supposed to be supporting.

    Which is only half the war story. In the war that Trump started, Russia is on the side of Iran, sharing intelligence. So Trump wants to send money to Russia to help it fight against our ally, Ukraine, even though Russia is helping Iran to kill Americans. Do you get that MAGA? Republicans?

    But, American truckers and farmers are angry that they can’t afford diesel fuel for their trucks because Trump’s war against Iran has resulted in Iran and its allies shutting down the main route for shipment of oil from the Middle East, resulting in a steep increase in the price of diesel available in the U.S. And diesel fuels the trucks that move all those now also more expensive groceries, etc. that Americans are complaining about.

   And the polls show Republicans likely losing control of the House of Representatives in next month’s election, meaning Trump won’t be able to ignore the law, as he is with the diesel deal, and is likely to spend two years, at least, of intense investigation. 

     So (and we’re not through with all the dots here) Trump looked for a quick fix to save his butt with voters and turned to his “friend,” Putin.

      This looks like a good spot to go back to why I’m so cranky about this Trump/Putin thing. It goes back to July 16, 2018. Trump and Putin had a summit meeting in Helsinki. Their third meeting. It began with a private, two-hour meeting between Trump and Putin and their interpreters. That’s it. No one to this day knows what was said behind closed doors for two hours. But the world saw a smiling Putin emerge along with a slumped over Trump looking like he had just been taken to the woodshed. That aura of smiling confidence Trump likes to put on was gone. He was thoroughly whipped. Very unpresidential.

       When asked by reporters what Putin had to say about  charges by Special Counsel Robert Mueller that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election to help him, Trump meekly said that Putin had denied it and that he believed him. Case closed.

       It was there for the world to see. Putin had Trump. Or more accurately, something on him. Has had it ever since. It has been reported often and too often forgotten when Trump does something that seems stupid because it helps Putin, who has never been this nation’s friend. Sex tapes, videos, photos of Trump in embarrassing and illegal situations. Believing they don’t exist is to ignore the life histories of the two men. A narcissistic, legally adjudicated sexual predator whose attorney general and FBI are hiding the Epstein files from the public and the former head of the Russian KGB, which is known to have used women to lure men with influence into “compromising” situations.

       Connect the dots. Trump is Putin’s puppet. In spy lingo, he’s a Russian asset. It makes him our liability. 

       Trump doesn’t care who is hurt if he can protect himself. Say that Ukraine should get a new president because Zelinsky refuses to surrender to Putin? Sure. Suggest at a political rally that Iran (with a large, international network of terrorist allies and intelligence help from Russia, remember?) might want to take out San Diego and Los Angeles? Why not? “Small price to pay,” said Trump. People laughed.

      He is solely driven by self-protection. 

      The “deal” with Russia is illegal, ignoring economic sanctions that were in place. In total, it amounts to about two weeks’ worth of diesel in the U.S. and can be gotten cheaper from Canada, our ally until Trump. It will do little to help either Russia or the U.S. economically. It’s political window dressing for two struggling authoritarians. The fact that Russia is helping Iran to fight us, killing Americans, makes the deal incredibly stupid and … maybe treasonous?

      You get the idea. We know all this. Republicans know and refuse to stop it. The media mostly treat it as business as usual. But there’s nothing “usual” about this. That’s why I’m testy.

Prologue

I wrote the column below on Oct. 20, 2016. It appeared on zestoforange. It’s still here. It was obviously written out of frustration and anger and I’m reposting it here out of frustration and anger that, nearly 10 years later, there are people in this country who still think the Republican Party has any moral standing as a legitimate political party. Even after that craven display of cowardly behavior at the State of the Union. Despite the continued Epstein coverup. Trump is Trump. He’s always been the same. Republicans picked him. He has been the death of them. Millions of Americans voted for him simply because he represented one of our two major political parties. Others believed his lies. Many, sorry to say, agreed with his brand of bigotry. Then they did it again. Even after four years of chaos. Yet people still give Republicans a pass for making this vile, now demented, man their leader. He in turn remade them in his image. Finally, one of those shouting TV commentators actually said the other day that Republicans are letting Trump destroy our country. It started 10 years ago, people, when Trump destroyed them.

By Bob Gaydos

People walk past a mural on a restaurant wall depicting Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin greeting each other with a passionate kiss in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius. PETRAS MALUKAS / AFP – Getty Images

That’s all. I’ve had it. I am through with writing about what a sick, repugnant human being Donald Trump is and then watching him reach a new low. Those who know about recovery from addiction, a subject on which I write regularly, say that every bottom has a trapdoor. Trump is living proof of that. Yet, with each new bottom, every poll seems to find 40 percent of those surveyed favoring him for president.

A few days ago, I thought maybe it would be a good idea to give people a reason to vote for Hillary Clinton, rather than against Trump. I stopped writing in mid-column because it seemed to be a waste of time. Who was I going to convince?

Here’s as far as I got …

There I was, having breakfast and rummaging around in my mind to find an angle for this presidential campaign other than don’t vote for Donald Trump because he’s an ignorant, racist, bigoted, misogynistic, cruel, vindictive, vile, narcissistic, xenophobic, quick-tempered, undisciplined, untrustworthy, uninformed, unspeakably crude sexual pervert and birther, who lies as naturally as he breathes.

Somehow, writing that message week after week (me and plenty of others) still hadn’t convinced a lot of people that the only vote that makes sense on Nov. 8 is one for Hillary Clinton. You don’t have to like her, folks, just know that that the future of this nation may well depend on voting for her.

Deaf ears. “Yeah, Trump may be all those things,” comes the unconvincing shrug, “but I can’t vote for her.” I have given up asking for reasons why. You know, reasons based on actual facts that would outweigh the choice at hand.

I set aside a newspaper article about how Trump had managed to actually make insulting comments about Clinton’s body as part of his defense against multiple charges that he is a sexual predator. Instead, I tried to focus on my egg white omelette (Swiss cheese and tomatoes). Then, as fate (or my excellent hearing) would have it, the angle was delivered to me from a nearby table. A reason to vote for Hillary … not that it was presented that way.

“DId you hear that Putin said if Clinton is elected, be prepared for war?”

The point the gentleman was making to his friend was that voting for Clinton would be dangerous because it could mean getting into a war with Russia. This was delivered in all seriousness because Vladimir Putin had said so and, as we know, he always speaks the truth and never has any nefarious plot in mind because that’s the way former heads of the KGB comport themselves when they get elected president of Russia.

The further point would be that voting for Trump would be smart because Putin says nice things about him. And Trump says he’d like to work with Putin.

So there you have it, America, the Republican candidate for president of the United States is now being touted as the better choice because the president of Russia doesn’t like the other candidate. Does this seem backwards to anyone else? When did being pals with Putin all of a sudden become more important than standing up to the Kremlin? When Trump launched his campaign based on lies and fear, that’s when.

Trump, of course, has said that he has met Putin. He has also said that he has not met Putin. You can be sure that Clinton and Putin know each other well. And he apparently does hate her guts. (I’m liking this reason for voting for her even more now.) That’s because, as secretary of state, she publicly called him out on stealing his election, something which Trump has accused Clinton of trying to do. She stood up to Putin. Meanwhile, Trump wants to do business with the man who grabbed Crimea from Ukraine and whose political opponents have a way of ending up dead.

It used to be that Republicans automatically voted for the candidate who was tough on Russia. They wanted someone the Kremlin would have to talk to and would do so with respect. Someone experienced in  diplomacy whose word could be counted on by friend and foe alike. That would be Hillary, not Donald. Donald, who doesn’t know Crimea from Korea, wants to sell out NATO and maybe get a hotel deal in the bargain. Putin has played him — and his followers — perfectly, from the hacked Clinton e-mails to the threat of war. Trump’s entire campaign is based on fear. That’s no way for America to negotiate with Putin, or any other world leader. …

***

I stopped there, wondering whether to go on. Then Trump said in the last debate that he wouldn’t necessarily accept the results of the election if he lost. That’s when I threw in the towel. For a man who has promoted violence at his rallies and some of whose supporters have openly espoused rebelling against any defeat, this is as unacceptable, unpatriotic, indefensible, possibly treasonous a statement as a candidate for president can make.

But that’s Trump — a new bottom every day. His fans cheered. I do not blame him for being who he is; I simply detest him. In truth, I’m sick of him. I do, however, blame the Republican Party for infecting American society (not just politics) with this utterly degrading election campaign. I mean every elected Republican official, from Speaker Paul Ryan to every governor, senator, congressperson, state legislator, county executive, county legislator, mayor, supervisor, councilman who has stood silently by and let Trump make a mockery of our democratic system and lay waste to any sense of decency or decorum in selection of the most powerful political leader on the planet.

A lot of these people went to Cleveland to vote for Trump. Then they stayed mute for months as he … okay, I said I’m not doing that anymore. The world knows what he has done. If you know all that and can still support him, words actually fail me. The same goes for those who say Hillary is just as bad. Not even close. You people need to get serious.

Republicans, Trump is not one of you. He is Trump. Period. You created him. Your hypocrisy and cowardice have emboldened him and his ilk. He has sullied us all. And he has destroyed you.

By Bob Gaydos

Donald Trump and Nicolas Maduro (kidnapped)

   Be careful what you wish for.

   After a few days of reminiscing about Christmases past and pondering the year to come, of musing about the choices and chances of survival of once seemingly stalwart Trumpers Elise Stefanik and Susie Wiles, I woke up on your regular Saturday, January 3, 2026, wondering what the man himself, the beneficiary of the first ever FIFA Peace Prize, would give me to write about.

     War.

      I should have known.

      This won’t take long. What you’re going to read here is likely to be pretty much what you read elsewhere because there’s only one way for rational, law-abiding citizens of our system of government with its separation of powers spelled out in a Constitution to look at it: Invading Venezuela and kidnapping its president and his wife/adviser with no legitimate provocation and without consulting Congress is an illegitimate act of war.

     The nonsense about Venezuela being a primary source of Fentanyl coming into this country is just that, nonsense. This is all about oil. Always has been. Gaining control of Venezuela’s vast oil reserves. Wait to see which of Trump’s wealthy backers benefit.

      That Nicolas Maduro was a much-hated dictator does not justify attacking Venezuela and looking to change the government with no request for intervention and the claim that he was in fact a major drug dealer himself for allowing the drug trade to continue is sheer nonsense when one considers the actual major drug dealers Trump has pardoned.

     Trump says we’re going to “run” Venezuela for a while. Why? They have a new president — the former Vice President. Trump says Maduro is going to be charged with drug charges in New York. There are international courts.

      Then there’s the fact that China and Russia both get a lot of oil from Venezuela and our seizing the country to make up for losing control of its oil fields when they were nationalized seems to give China an argument for taking back Taiwan and its wealth and Russia invading Ukraine for its. Same authoritarian playbook.

    Illegal. Dangerous. Foolhardy. Unwanted and unwarranted. If you believe what we tell the world, unAmerican.

   Americans don’t want this. Congress must step in. Republicans must finally find the courage to do their job. He is out of control.

    The Epstein files are still out there. Trump’s name is all over them. War is a powerful distraction. Frightened and unchecked, he will only get worse. It’s only January 3rd.

Footnote: The plane carrying Maduro and his wife apparently landed at Stewart Airport in Orange County, my neighborhood and a short ride to New York City. When the hostages from Iran landed there, it was a much more joyous event,

The following is an update of a column I wrote 12 years ago. I am re-posting it today on the 62nd anniversary of the assassination of president John F. Kennedy because of its significance in my life and because of the times we live in. Would things have been different if Kennedy had lived to continue serving? I have no way of knowing. I’d like to think the answer is yes. Joe Biden was the oldest elected president this country has ever had. Kennedy was the youngest. They shared the same dedication to protecting our democracy. I continue to celebrate Kennedy on the birth date I share with him and I also honor his memory on the anniversary of the day he was taken from us. A day history was altered forever.

By Bob Gaydos

John F. Kennedy

 The first editorial I wrote for the Times Herald-Record in Middletown, N.Y., appeared on the 20th anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy. I wrote the headline, too: “The measure of the man.” 
      Trying to “measure” the meaning of the life of a man who was literally loved and idolized by millions of people is no easy task, especially for a rookie editorial writer’s debut effort. But that’s what newspapers do and, in truth, I took it as a good omen that remembering JFK was my first assignment. He was a hero to me as to many young men my age when he was elected president. It was a combination of things: his youth, his wit, his easy-going style, his intelligence, his words, his sense of justice. Plus, we shared the same birthdate: May 29.
     As fate would have it, JFK would come to be remembered, not on his birthday, but on the anniversary of his death. And not so much for what Americans received for having him as president for 1,000 days, but rather for what we lost by not having him much longer.
     That first editorial said, in essence, that it would take more than 20 years to measure the meaning of the man. It acknowledged the things we had learned about JFK in the years since the shooting in Dallas — the flaws that made him human — as well as what I felt were his positive contributions. Thirty years later, no longer a rookie editorial writer — indeed, retired after 23 years of writing editorials — with Nov. 22 approaching, I realized I had to write about JFK 50 years after his death (because that’s what old newspaper guys do). Before I started, I asked one of my reliable sounding boards, my son, Zack, what he knew about JFK. Zack was 19 at the time and better informed than a lot of young people his age, so I figured his answer would provide me with a fair sense of what our education system had been telling kids about Kennedy.

   “He was the first Catholic president,” Zack said. Correct. “He had an affair with Marilyn Monroe.” Uh, correct. ‘There’s still some theories that there was more than one shooter.” Right. “Do you think the Kevin Costner movie (“JFK,” directed by Oliver Stone) was true?” Well, the people portrayed were real. “The Bay of Pigs didn’t go too well.” No, it didn’t. I took the opportunity to point out that Cuba was the site, not only of Kennedy’s biggest failure in global affairs, but also his biggest success.

     I was 22 years  old when the world stood at the brink of a nuclear war over the presence of Soviet missile-launching sites in Cuba, aimed at the United States. I was a senior in college and knew full well, as did all my classmates, than no 2-S deferment was going to exempt me from what might happen if the Soviets did not — as Kennedy demanded — remove their missiles. Kennedy ordered the U.S. Navy to blockade Cuba to prevent the shipment of Soviet missiles and equipment. Nikita Khrushchev, Soviet president, who had initially denied the existence of the missile sites, sent a naval fleet to Cuba, loaded with supplies and armed for battle. As the world watched and waited and prayed, Kennedy and Khrushchev exchanged messages. Kennedy prevailed. The Soviet fleet stopped short of Cuba and turned around. I lived to write this remembrance. Kennedy was dead not long after.

     So here I am 62 years later, still looking to take the measure of the man and still wondering how that is possible. Kennedy had the gift of engagement. He appeared to be comfortable with whomever he was speaking. He had tremendous appeal to young people, being so different from the older, stodgier presidents who preceded him. He created the Peace Corps — a legacy that continues to this day with not enough fanfare. He made many Americans — and this is not a small thing — truly proud to be Americans. Not in an arrogant, flag-waving, we-know-better-than-you way. Just proud. And he cheated on his wife and kept his serious health problems a secret from us and sometimes needed to be prodded by his brother, Bobby (another tragic loss) to take the proper (courageous) stand on issues.

      So the question I still ask myself is, what might JFK have done, what might he have meant to America and the world, if he had lived longer? What did we lose at Dealey Plaza? Certainly, whatever innocence we still possessed. The wind was sucked from our sails as a nation and our domestic politics have slowly and steadily deteriorated into such partisanship that it is virtually impossible for any president to speak to the minds and hearts of a majority of Americans the way Kennedy did. Maybe it would have happened even if Kennedy had lived a longer life and gone on to be an ambassador to the world of what America stands for. Or maybe not.

     It dawns on me in writing this that it is an ultimately frustrating task to try to take the measure of another man or woman. I know what JFK meant to me personally. I know a lot of others feel similarly and others do not. I know what history has recorded (he was also the youngest man to be elected president) and what the tabloids have told us. I have a sense of what I would like to think Kennedy would ultimately have meant had he not died so young. But it’s only speculation.

     The only man I can truly take the measure of is myself. It is 62 years since that morning when I was waiting at home to go to Fort Dix, N.J., to begin six months of active duty training. How do I measure up today? That’s a question I still work on every day. It wasn’t always thus, but the years have a way of insisting on perspective. Maybe the answer will appear in some other writing. I have neither the space nor the inclination to do so here. I will say that, on balance, I’ll probably give myself a passing grade, but there’s still some stuff I’m learning. That’s a lesson in itself. For now, I’m through trying to take the measure of JFK, as man or president. Let the historians have at it. I’m going to try to take his advice and ask not what life can do for me, but what I can continue to contribute to life. And I’m also going to continue to celebrate him not on the date he died, but on the date we both were born. 

By Bob Gaydos

Putin and Trump after their meeting in Alaska. Which one is smiling?

Well, at least he didn’t get a deal on selling Alaska back to Russsia.

That’s the most positive spin I can put on Trump’s ego-driven “summit” with Vladimir Putin last Friday. Everything else was a win for Putin, from the red carpet, hand-clapping, smiling welcome on the tarmac to the private limo ride bringing the two men to the meeting. Not bad for someone declared a war criminal for his invasion of Ukraine.

Oh right, Ukraine wasn’t invited to this Alaskan summit to decide its future. Just Trump and his Russian handler and their aides. Trump’s retinue, interestingly, included officials not typically involved in diplomacy, but rather, finance. Money. Did the two pals cook up a deal in the limo?

In his Quixotic quest for a Nobel Peace Prize, Trump, who did not manage, as pledged, to end the Ukraine War on Day One of his presidency, did manage to change his position on Ukraine after the “summit,” from ceasefire to full peace deal, which is, coincidentally, Putin’s position.

Surprise!

It’s obvious that Trump is totally lost in diplomatic relations and has been a Putin puppet for years. I’m constantly amazed that the major media treat him as if he has a clue beyond doing whatever benefits him. Make America an afterthought!

If you doubt Trump is Putin’s tool, just look at the photos of the two men after meeting in Finland in 2018 and last Friday. Putin owns him.

Ukrainian President Volodamyr Zelensky is scheduled to meet Trump Monday at the White House. Last time, he was insulted by Trump and JD Vance. I don’t expect anything different this time.

It’s all about Trump playing at being president. A national embarrassment that needs to be reported as such.

By Bob Gaydos

The check William Seward wrote in 1867 to purchase Alaska from Russia. It was no folly.

While I sit and read about the ongoing demands of Americans of all stripes — Democrats, Republicans, MAGAs, What Nots— for the Trump administration to release the Epstein files because no rational person believes that it is does not include mentions of Trump’s name and numerous girls between the ages of 13 and 17 with whom he may have engaged in sexual acts, which is officially known as rape, I also marvel at the lengths to which this soulless excuse for a human being is willing to go to divert attention from the Epstein files and his efforts to avoid their public release.

The latest entries in this traffic wreck of a presidency involve Trump taking over the policing of Washington, D.C., and negotiating a peace treaty between Russia and Ukraine without including Ukraine. What could possibly go wrong? In truth, with Trump’s record, almost anything.

Taking over the D.C. National Guard and mobilizing 800 troops to “police“ the nation’s capital along with the help of several hundred FBI agents, while claiming a major crime problem even though recent statistics show crime significantly down in the city, is fascism 101. Add the fact that Trump says he’s going to clean up the city by rounding up homeless people and taking them somewhere else. Anywhere else apparently because he hasn’t said where. That doesn’t bode well for the homeless ever since Trump’s Supreme Court last year ruled homelessness could be treated as a crime.

The mentally ill will also inevitably be included in any such round up. Apparently, Trump wants to return to the out-of-sight out-of-mind philosophy for dealing with these issues.

The fact that the National Guard, citizen soldiers, many of whom have day jobs (accountants, mechanics, sales people, politicians) are not trained for this kind of work apparently doesn’t matter to the geniuses in the White House. Send them out there, armed to the teeth so the citizenry feel safe. I doubt most of the guardsmen are thrilled with the mission.

And apparently the FBI agents are going to be patrolling some swanky D.C. neighborhoods. What a great use of trained investigators who should be dealing with actual crime committed by some of Trump’s wealthier supporters.

None of which, of course, is going to convince anybody to forget about the Epstein files. I suspect the show of force will be mostly a show simply to show that Trump, racist to the core, can do it seeing as he’s threatened to do it in other cities run by black mayors.

What could possibly go wrong? Look up Kent State in the history books if they haven’t been removed from the library.

As for the Putin meeting, it has disaster written all over it. Just recall the meeting with Putin in Finland and watch the Russian president emerge with a big grin on his face and Trump look like an 11-year-old boy who just had the riot act read to him. Just the two of them in the room. Manchurian Candidate material.

Trump is talking about giving up some land somehow to settle this deal even though Ukraine didn’t take any land and Russia is the one who invaded despite Trump’s insistence otherwise and Ukrainian President Volodamyr Zelinsky isn’t even invited to this “peace talk.“

What could go wrong? Well, for starters, Trump thought he was going to meet Putin in Russia and had to be reminded that the meeting was in Alaska, which is American territory which should be off-limits to Putin, who was declared a war criminal by the United Nations. Putin might be willing to forget about claiming a chunk of Ukraine if Trump lets him go home with Alaska back in his pocket. After all, it’s worth a lot more than the $7.2 million Secretary of State William Seward wrote a check for in 1867 to purchase the territory from Russia. Who knows what Trump’s price might be to sell it back, with hotel rights?

Far-fetched? Will there be any other American adults in the room who know what they’re doing? And will they realize that even giving Alaska back to Russia will not make Americans forget about those Epstein files?

By Bob Gaydos

Donald Trump talks to the press from the roof of the White House. Really.

  In a Trumpian world in which a week (at least it seems like a week) starts with the woman in charge of providing the monthly labor statistics being fired because Trump didn’t like the numbers and ends with Trump wandering around the roof of the White House shouting answers to questions from reporters down on the ground, it’s good to have Jimmy Breslin’s approach to the news available.

   So …

— Maybe it’s just me, but: Really? He fired Erika McEntarfer, commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, just because the July jobs report was disastrous and he’s been lying to us constantly that everything was rosy? I mean, how did he keep any employees at all his businesses with this approach? The casino, the Plaza, the airline, the college … oh, right, they all went bankrupt and he fired everybody. Guess he likes to say, “You’re fired!” And blaming others for his failures. This one is especially unhinged and, considering his hiring philosophy and penchant for lying, it will be anyone’s guess as to whether to believe the next monthly report.

— Maybe it’s just me, but: The Smithsonian Institution quietly removing any mention of the two impeachments on Trump’s record was particularly disappointing. Erasing history is a hallmark of fascist societies. The secret removal left Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton as the only presidents to be impeached, if one believed the Smithsonianian. People didn’t. They complained. Publicly. The Smithsonian, to its credit, was properly embarrassed. It reinstalled the Russia meddling and the Ukraine meddling impeachment stories, making history accurate again. It’s history. Trump was impeached twice. It still pays to speak out.

— Maybe it’s just me, but: It’s hard for me to get too worked up when Trump reacts to a former Russian president trolling him on social media by noisily ordering “two nuclear submarines” (his words) into waters somewhere around Russia. “I have ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions,” Trump announced, scarily (at least to major media). First of all, all U.S. submarines are nuclear-powered. Second of all, submarines that have nuclear missiles are already in waters around the globe and capable of striking Russia. Third of all, Trump’s old buddy Putin wouldn’t let Dimitri Medvedev, a former political ally, get him into another war, which he pretty much said after Trump rattled his subs.

— Maybe it’s just me, but: Bulldozing Jackie Kennedy‘s Rose Garden and announcing plans for a grand, gauche, golden ballroom that will dwarf the White House is Donald Trump to a “T.” Tacky. No class. Also, I think, illegal, since the White House is an official government building. He might need to get a permit, which would probably mean a bribe. He has lawyers apparently willing to do that. Stay tuned.

— Maybe it’s just me, but: Announcing plans to put a nuclear reactor on the moon in five years, as the acting head of NASA did recently, seems to be at the very least, highly optimistic. For starters, the reactor is intended to support a small colony of humans on the moon, but there are as yet no plans to put such a colony on the moon. Cart before the horse? Then there are the 700° daily changes in temperature on the moon, which has no water or air. The timeline, the-out-of-the-blue announcement, the supposed assurance of senior NASA officials serving in a Trump administration that this is not “science fiction,” might lead a skeptic to conclude that this is basically “news” that doesn’t involve Jeffrey Epstein.

— Maybe it’s just me, but: Putting a Fox News drunk in charge of the Pentagon seemed at first to be just the typical Trumpian spiteful, narcissistic need to have sycophants around him. Apparently it’s just policy. If Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is looking for a female drinking buddy, he now has one – former Fox News loose cannon and Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro was confirmed by the Republican majority U.S. Senate to head the federal prosecutor’s office in Washington, D.C. Pirro, a sycophant’s sycophant where Trump is concerned, is a conspiracy theorist whose  constant lies about the 2020 election being stolen from Trump contributed to Fox News having to pay $800 million plus in damages to settle a lawsuit. So, nothing new here.

— Maybe it’s just me, but: That same skeptic mentioned above might conclude that moving Ghislaine Maxwell from a maximum-security prison in Florida to a minimum security prison/spa in Texas was an attempt by Trump and his disciples to erase Maxwell’s memory of Donald’s relationships with teenage girls in Epstein‘s Lair. Whatever she says, it won’t work. She’s a known liar facing a 20-year prison sentence. Interview the victims. The story is not going away.

— Maybe it’s just me, but: The roof thing. What the hell was that? Surrounded by Secret Service, Trump appeared on the roof of the White House one morning apparently to survey the changes he has made and plans to make. Like the ballroom he says he and his supporters are going to pay for. Reporters spotting him up top shouted questions. Trump was asked what he was going to build. He said, “Nuclear missiles.” Chuckles. Well at least he didn’t have to stand at a real press conference and try to come up with real answers to real questions. Just another “normal” day at the Trump White House and no one mentioned Jeffrey Epstein.

— Maybe it’s just me, but: If I’m going to keep doing this, I think I’m going to have to come up with a rating system on the absurdity (an all-inclusive, non-profane word for all the negatives imaginable) of news stories emanating from the White House. On a scale of one to five, five would be the most absurd. I’ve got the labor statistics commish and Jeanine Pirro at five. Everything else is at least a two. Feel free to put your ratings in the comments below. Whew.