Pop some popcorn and welcome to the debate; let's hope for more movie, less cartoon circus

Disney's Dumbo the Flying Elephant
with cartoon crows and mouse

Tonight's debate has something in common with not one, but two, very dissimilar movies, and with a circus.  Pop yourself some popcorn, and settle in.

The fantasy animation feature about a circus, "Dumbo the Elephant", was released by Disney Studios in 1941, and included a character with the unfortunate name of Jim Crow (voiced by Cliff Edwards, who earlier did the voice of Jiminy Cricket in the animated classic Pinnochio).

In 2015, the Academy Award winning movie Spotlight, about the Boston Globe's efforts to expose serial sexual predator pedophile priest  was released.

Tonight we can expect some of the circus style entertainment from substance challenged candidate Donald  Trump, who has prepared for this evening's debate, much as he prepared for the second debate, by attempting to distract with ugly spectacle, or what one might term a circus. 

Tonight's Trump circus will feature a mother who lost her son in the Benghazi attack, who wrongly blames Hillary Clinton.  While I feel great sympathy for this woman's loss, I feel far less sympathy that she is attempting to victimize someone else with a false attribution of blame.

The other feature of tonight's Trump Circus will be the half-brother of President Obama, a pathetic individual reminiscent of Billy Carter, President Carter's feckless brother, in his lack of intellect or success. For some inexplicable reason, Malik Obama holds dual Kenyan and US citizenship, and has been voting since 1980.  His reasoning for supporting Trump are pretty thin:

“This Trump guy is a really cool guy and I like him because he speaks from his heart and he is so down to earth,” said the older Obama then. The wire service reported he held dual citizenship in both the U.S. and Kenya and that he has voted in American elections since the 1980s.

Trump may soon have something in common with Malik Obama: HuffPost Pollster shows it’s likely the magnate will lose by significant margins come Election Day, much like when Malik Obama lost a bid for a Kenyan governorship in 2013, also by big margins.

From other reporting, in the UK, quoting Malik, who admits to 3 current wives.  One of the few things Malik has in common with Trump is a lack of monogamy, and alleged domestic violence.:

“There have been 12 wives since my first marriage in 1981, when Barack was my best man. I have done my best with all of them, along with the children.”

And: “I don’t beat my wives, as has been alleged. It’s all b******t. I categorically deny the allegations said to have come from my wife.”

Movie Promo photo
winner 2015 best movie Oscar

And while we are on the subject of bad causes supported by Malik Obama, he apparently knew and liked horrific dictator Moamar Kaddaffi, and lobbied Barack Obama to keep him in power.  What Trump has proposed while campaigning and his notion of how government works generally is fascist and authoritarian, which would appeal to someone who likes dictators.

Malik Obama is notoriously pro-Islamic terrorists; sadly part of the incompetence of Trump is his failure to vet his supporters.  This certainly argues he is incapable of effective so-called extreme vetting.  From Winning Democrats:

Now, there’s a reason President Obama doesn’t associate with his Kenyan half-brother, and Trump may not be aware of it — Malik Obama supports Hamas, and was photographed in 2012 wearing one of the terror group’s scarves with the slogans “Jerusalem is ours – we are coming” and “From the river to the sea,” a statement that asserts Israel doesn’t exist at all.

As a shorthand for this particular circus exhibit that is Malik Obama, I think of him as "Dumb-bro", dumb for supporting Trump, 'bro' for brother, and like a cartoon elephant for supporting this particular worthless Republican candidate.

The movie Spotlight pertains tonight because more people have come forward to support the stories of the victims of sexual assault by Donald Trump.  As with Malik Obama, who erroneously believes Donald Trump is innocent "because the women didn't come forward before", in point of fact as we see in the movie Spotlight, women DID come forward before the election, in some cases long before, as in the case of the law suit filed by Jill Harth, LONG before Trump considered running for office.

Six people have come forward to corroborate the assault reported by People magazine staff writer, Natashay Stoynoff.  The quote below is an excerpt from the New York Times regarding the accusation by Stoynoff.  It is worth noting that while superficial and shallow, less fact conversant people like Malik Obama focus inaccurately on the timing of events, the New York Times has followed a very similar pattern of seeking corroboration to that followed by the Boston Globe in pursuing their stories, as depicted in the movie "Spotlight".  Multi-sourcing, seeking multiple sources for a quote or an event, are standard practice for responsible, ethical, serious journalists.

People published her claims on the same day that The New York Times published an article in which two women described what they said were their own encounters with a sexually aggressive Mr. Trump.

The six people quoted in the latest article include two editors from People, Mary Green and Liz McNeil; a professor of journalism, Paul McLaughlin; a co-worker; and two personal friends of Ms. Stoynoff. All of them said Ms. Stoynoff told them about the episode around the time it occurred.

“She wasn’t sure what she should do,” Mr. McLaughlin told the magazine. “I advised her not to say anything, because I believed Trump would deny it and try to destroy her.”

The investigation by the Spotlight feature writers at the Boston Globe led to many  more accusations, and to many successful law suits against the insurance companies and the Boston diocese for their part in the cover up.  Many of those who came forward did so after a long period of being intimidated into silence, as appears to be the case with the Trump accusers.  The significance of the New York Times, much like the Boston Globe, in seeking corroboration from people who knew of the assaults and other abuse AT THE TIME THEY OCCURRED, could have significant legal ramifications for the notoriously litigious Donald Trump in the same way the Boston Globe investigation resulted in successful law suits.  Trump has already been embarrassingly unsuccessful in attempting to suppress the New York Times, much as the Catholic archdiocese was unsuccessful in stopping the Boston Globe a decade and more earlier.  That reporting is potent stuff.

From Wikipedia, citing the Boston Globe as their source:

Settlements in the Boston, Massachusetts suits were estimated to be up to $100 million. In some cases insurance companies have balked at meeting the cost of large settlements, claiming the actions were deliberate and not covered by insurance. This was additional financial damage to the Archdiocese, which already faced the need to consolidate and close parishes due to changing attendance and giving patterns. In June 2004, much of the land around the Archdiocese of Boston headquarters was sold to Boston College, in part to raise money for legal costs associated with scandal in Boston. 

Given the success of such corroborated law suits in Boston, it would perhaps be wiser for Donald Trump to start banking his money instead of looking for what he will do next, after losing his bid for the presidency to Hillary Clinton. The information being accumulated was helpful to law suits in Boston and could very well be very helpful in law suits against Trump. I would argue he might not be able to afford his own cable network, given his real estate businesses are doing poorly, particularly his latest venture down the street from the White House, which has an exceptionally high vacancy rate.  It's not like he can return to the Apprentice after being replaced by a very successful and far less abusive host, Arnold Schwarzenegger.  Trump is pretty much failing on all fronts other than the racist revolutionary bigot militia crowd.  As Sarah Palin found to her loss, popularity among the right wing extremists does not translate well into cable tv success.

It would not surprise me to see Trump sued, by multiple accusers, for damages from his misconduct.  If that were to be the case, we could expect to see some of that unreleased MGM owned Apprentice footage where crew and guest stars report Trump speaking at length in exactly the same manner he spoke on the Billy Bush bus.  At least one of his accusers is from the Apprentice, and others have come forward from that show to corroborate Trump's offensive language and behavior.

It would also not surprise me this evening to see Hillary Clinton speak to the new accusers and the substance of their accusations, as well as the credible reporting done by the Times, People Magazine, and by attorneys like Gloria Allred.  Back in 2012, this happened, relating to Allred, who was acting on behalf of a transgender woman competing in one of Trump's terrible pageants. 

From the Daily Beast:

Trump, forever incapable of turning away from obvious bait, hit back in a nasty call with TMZ.

Before even being asked a question, Trump said: “I think Gloria would be very very impressed with me, I really do,” referring to his penis with the subtlety of a train crashing through a building.

“I think she’d have a whole brand new image of Donald Trump,” he continued through the laughter of the TMZ staff. He went on to say that Talackova could compete if she chose to do so but joked that he might have changed his mind if he knew that Allred was involved.

Hillary Clinton will be her usual substantive, dignified, poised presidential self tonight.  We can comfortably expect that no one invited by Donald Trump will throw her off stride.  And we can expect a circus pandering to the gullible, tasteless and stupid to be the response from Donald Trump, as he has already indicated by his guest list.  For anyone in doubt, Trump is what conservative losing looks like, and it is ugly, not entertaining.

Please feel free to boo Trump from the comfort of where you choose to watch the debates, but you might want to resist throwing you popcorn at the television or computer screen.