Third Umpire: Pakistan Team Overhaul

Let it be said straight up, India outplayed Pakistan in every department of the game. More than batting, bowling or fielding, India had a game plan, rehearsed over the past five odd years down to a science; players groomed for the event well before rather than just slotted in a few weeks before. In an earlier blog I framed England and India as the two strongest teams, and Pakistan with a slim chance to make it to the last four depending on which side showed up for each match.

In honesty this clash with India was lost by Pakistan in the match before where they lost to Australia in a game they could have won. What Pakistan lost in the game against the Aussies was also the temperament to play the close hard games. If the Aussie game had been clinched, which it could have, then a more positive Pakistan would have turned up.
owl
We hear the pundits tell us that individually the players in green have the talent and the skill to play top class cricket, but collectively it somehow just does not gel! Three essentials lack in the Pakistan camp, leadership on the pitch, lack of a game plan, and a haphazard selection to the playing XI.

Lack of Leadership:

Captaincy is not merely barking out orders to the fielding side, its all about reading the moment, the situation and making the right tactical  choices to gain an advantage on the field of play. Lets take Hassan Ali as case in point. School team coaches will tell you that his is not approaching the task with any conviction other than to bowl fast and all over the place. On average in each over he barely managed to put the ball in the right place other than once, if that. The leadership was so absent at these moments when he was leaking runs that the captain never really told him t adjust his line and length. Leadership in terms of setting the right field and the right players in the positions they field at best was highlighted when in the Aussie game Asif Ali replaced Babar Azam (a specialist slip fielder) in the slips and presto he dropped a sitter of a catch!


Lack of Game Plan:

Okay admitted that reading the pitch wrong and electing to field first can happen to most captains. But Sarfaraz should know that chasing against India, apart from the emotional pressure is not one of our key points. Once having put India in to bat and only Amir had a thought process to his bowling. Hassan Ali, to some extent Wahab Riaz and Shadab had no plan to their attack. Shadab's first over was pedestrian to say the least and it became clear that if there was a plan only Amir read it. As for the others it was simply turn up, throw the ball where it lands and call it a day.

In the batting both against Australia and India, if there was a plan it was more a matter of individuals etching out short durations of such a plan. While selection of the team may be questionable, the ones playing on the day were touted for their experience. Surely knowing that having just lost two set players a three to four over consolidation phase would be in order?


Selection:

Since the tour to England started the whole approach of the selection committee has been a joke. We are into the fifth game of the World Cup and still there is not set playing XI with changes coming match after match. If people like Sohaib Malik were selected for their experience even though their performance in the past year or so have been terrible, where did that experience show in the matches thus far? If you want experience call Yunus Khan out of retirement, or perhaps Inzi himself can don some pads on?

Prior to the England tour the main playing XI should have been finalized and then during the tour final adjustments should have been made. In the batting side it is clear we do not have a finisher who can take the game to the end with power hitting, but backed by a technique so its not just slogging. Asif Ali was meant to play the role and in a sense given the on and off approach to each match, he has not had a place in the team. Our middle order is brittle and that is where Harris Sohail should have been retained in the main XI. These two should replace Hafeez and Sohaib who would come in only if there were injuries to others. Hassan Ali should either be given a final outing to see if he has the intelligence to bowl to the conditions or not. While I am not sure why an untested Husnain was taken only on the basis he has speed, given the team is what it is he cannot do worse than say Hassan Ali?

The truth is that the selectors have to bear the burden of this imbalanced side they have sent to the World Cup. They have to answer for the fact that why was the team selection put in place a year earlier and then groomed into playing as a team and not individuals. None of the mature teams who are  serious contenders for wining the World Cup cut and chop their team on a match by match basis.


For the remainder of the World Cup with very slim chances to make the last four, the Pakistan camp should be brave and bite the bullet and let there be changes they will stick to through the rest of the tournament. On the side lines we must see how England and India have planned their campaign and how a year before they were pretty certain of the 15 or 18 players they would take and who would be the core back bone of the team.  For Pakistan we should not pride on the label of being mercurial, to me its a polite way of saying 'lost' and 'living on hope'. The only hope I have is after this world cup a true rebuilding process starts and this trial and error approach needs to be buried with the hope we had of reaching the last four, which was always hanging by its finger nails.


 

Third Umpire: Logos and playing conditions

India, given its enormous financial muscle in the world of cricket, has always felt it deserves a special ticket, not necessarily available to others. The fact that on the pretext that their IPL just finished a couple of weeks before the current World Cup, they were allowed to commence their current campaign much later than other teams. South Africa has already played two matches when they met indicates the extent to which that India muscle (off the pitch) can and has been used. One forgets that a number of players from other countries also played in the recently concluded IPL and perhaps those teams should also have been given a reprieve in the time table of the current tournament.

While the cricketing world put aside the scheduling issues and just wanted to get on with the game, the controversy over the logo on M S Dhoni's gloves emerged. Sporting a logo of one of the Indian Army regiments, of which he is an honorary Lt Colonel, caught the eye of ICC and he was told to remove the logo. The uproar in the Indian media and in general is unbelievable as they argue that its a sign of patriotism and not a political or religious message.

Well the ICC rules are very straight forward on this, both in terms of generally having such a logo displayed and also that the rules expressly state that wicket keeping gloves can only sport the brand logo of the manufacturer. The Indian camp should show some maturity and simply accept that rules are rules and they cannot stretch exceptions each time. One must not forget that recently Indian players in a match against Australia in Ranchi work military caps in support of the army and they were sanctioned by the ICC on that. So there is a recent precedent of the rules and clearly Dhoni and co should know that.

On a broader front other players from different teams have been asked to remove logos and even wrist bands with messages that violate the rules of the ICC. An exception to India will turn international cricket into an advertising board with each player professing a tribute to some cause or the other. At the end of the day the patriotism is well expressed, and allowed, by having the countries logo on various gear that is used.


On another note it would seem that ODI cricket has almost deliberately been shifted to favor batsmen. Yes the host nation always have the prerogative of preparing pitches to suit their own teams but with scores over 300 almost the norm one has to ask the ICC to rethink the game to bring back some balance between bat and ball. For instance in ODI cricket, where the white ball is used, there are two balls used, one from each end, on the pretext that the ball does not get too discolored. This has really resulted in fast bowlers losing the ability to have some effective bowling in the latter part of the game, largely because they are deprived of reverse swing.

If the sole reason for a two ball rule is to prevent discoloration, then when a ball is discolored it can be replaced just as a ball is replaced if it is hit far out of the ground. Why should the same not apply to a ball that is discolored?

I believe to make the game more entertaining and give some balance to the game it is important that a such rules should be changed. Seeing the recent West Indies match against Australia, one has to wonder if there is a third umpire there and he does look at the no ball on his monitor when a wicket falls, why cannot he point out if the umpire has missed a no ball. (as it happened when West Indies was batting). After all run outs, catches, boundary decisions (which are 50-50) are all referred to the third umpire, why then cannot he also look at the no balls?


I am all for the use of technology but it must be applied fairly to all playing conditions on the field, not just a selective process of referral. The game is getting more competitive and it needs all the necessary tools to administer the conditions of play on the field.

Third Umpire: My view of the World Cup Cricket 2019.

Cricket evokes passions comparable to any other sport, especially when it comes to the sub continent, from where four of the countries play in this years World Cup Cricket. As the first few matches of the current World Cup have got underway, with easy wins for some of the more predictable sides, we are reminded that the setting of a World Cup is always going to be one where there will be surprises. Interestingly, unlike a few decades ago, the style and technique of the one day game has evolved to the point where one cannot really consider and of the countries competing as minnows. On their day Afghanistan, as an example, can surprise one of the big power houses.

That said what does the outlook emerge for this World Cup.

England:

Clearly dubbed as the favorites based on their current form and the home ground advantage. But delving deeper into the side one cannot over look the fact that not only is the English team brimming with talent, its perhaps one of the best balanced sides. In all three departments of the game, batting, bowling and fielding, they have excelled in recent months. While one may argue that they peeked too soon with their comprehensive drubbing of Pakistan just before the World Cup started, I do believe they have more than enough in their tank to carry them into the last four.

Jos Butler and Joe Root anchor the batting well enough to be sure that till number 7 they have the strength to set high totals when batting first and yet deep enough in their batting to chase down totals. Their bowling attack is suited for the conditions and does not depend solely on the performance of one or two stars, giving them the variety to pin down most oppositions.

India:

Perhaps the only side which can claim the pedigree to take on England and be capable staking a claim to not only the final four but also perhaps winning the title this time. As much as the Virat Kohli is the talisman for the teams fortunes they do have a formidable batting that can cover for the team should Kohli have a bad day. Their bowling has been touted as one of the best, however, under pressure it can become brittle and it would be interesting to see how they tackle players like Jos Butler (England) or Chris Gayle (West Indies).

Yes the format of the tournament allows them a hiccup or so on the way to the final four. India knows too well that after the final four stage form and statistics are put aside as each team lifts their performance to another level (as they learned in the Champions Trophy final against Pakistan two years back). If India can hold their own on the big moments of this tournament then they would be worthy winners.


Australia:

While David Warner and Steve Smith return to the squad and bring in valuable experience, the Aussie batting does not seem to impress one as much as it would have four years ago. Their bowling is decent with Starc being the key 'go to bowler', and one would be curious to see how Nathan Lyon handles the conditions and the pressure. Yes there is Aaron Finch and Usman Khawaja to add to the batting but somehow I do not feel they are deep enough in their batting to make make a huge impact if Warner or Smith were to get out early.

Indeed, the experience of their bowling attack is good enough to handle the fifty-fifty matches, but facing the likes of England, India or West Indies top order batting onslaught the verdict is still out on how their attack would manage. If Australia have some lucky breaks they could make the top four but might be through the skin of their teeth.

South Africa:

On their day South Africa can be impressive in all departments of the game. The question is will they have enough of those good days. England's drubbing of them in the first match showed some serious chinks in their armor. Indeed it was perhaps the toughest match for them and its out of the way, but a batting that revolves around three main players, Amla, du Plessis, and de Kock, and a smattering of middle order sloggers cannot, in my opinion assure them of a strong showing in this tournament.

That said, with Rabada in their bowling line up, and the guile of Imran Tahir, and the experience of Steyn, South Africa provides interesting options to turn matches on their head through their penetrative bowling attack. On his day Rabada can simply change a game single handedly.

New Zealand:

I have always believed that balanced sides have the best chance to win the World Cup because of the format of the tournament is extended and individual performances from one or two stars can just carry you so far. The Kiwis have perhaps the most balanced side in the tournament after England. Their batting is strong and can set an early pace to an innings that assures them very respectable and challenging scores. Kane Williamson, Guptill, Nicholls, Munro can set the score board ablaze allowing the likes of Ross Taylor and other middle order players to pile on the pressure. The one failing of the side is that a failure at the top tends to trickle down the ranks.

The Kiwi bowling is a very balanced and attacking line up. While I do not consider their spin bowlers to be a serious threat, they could help in checking the run rate and tie the opposition down backed by one of the best fielding sides. I do feel if their batting performs at crucial moments they could make the last four.

Pakistan:

Its all a question of which Pakistan team will turn up not only for the tournament but for each of the matches. Mercurial and temperamental the team has both the bowling and batting talent to win this. But talent alone is not a guarantee for success as it needs planning an execution to get the job done. Babar Azam, Fakhar Zamman, Imam ul Haq can all be star players, the problem is can they all star on the same day, and match after match? In fairness in the past Pakistan's achilles heel was the failures of their batting which seems to have been fixed with very respectable scores in the recent English series. What let them down was their bowling much to the surprise of everyone considering their strong suite was always their bowling.

In my opinion the problem with the team has been a lack of direction and leadership. In the recent series against England the fast bowlers; known of their toe crunching yorkers, only managed 3% of their deliveries as yorkers! In addition the absence of an attack plan for each game showing up in operation suggests the bowlers were left to their own when in the middle of the track.

I personally doubt Pakistan will make the top four on their current form. However, should they have the right team turn up on each of the days ahead, then having made the last four, they could up their game to cause problems to any of the sides in this tournament.


Sri Lanka.

I would tend to think that the Sri Lanka team is in a rebuilding phase and while their bowling would be well above par, their mercurial batting line up will remain a chronic problem in this tournament where none of the bowling sides will give room for mistakes.

I doubt the team will make the last four though in this tournament do not rule out one or two upsets caused by the Lanka Lions.


Bangladesh.

A young side, passionate about their game suffer from a brittle batting and a bowling attack prone to leak runs. On the plus side their fielding is energetic and perhaps one of the best in the tournament. The format starts for them playing three of the strong sides England, South Africa and New Zealand, and losses against them could set the tone for their recovery.


Afghanistan:

Perhaps counted as the weakest side of the tournament, I would consider them worthy of one big surprise in the tournament. Their batting is moody but if they get a decent total on the board they have an excellent bowling attack to make the game interesting. One of the biggest things going for the Afghan team is their lack of fear against any of the teams and a team that is hard to rattle.

To sum up I feel the final four could be England, New Zealand, India, South Africa. Australia and Pakistan may just slip into the final four at the expense of New Zealand and/or South Africa. While its hard to predict from then on what would happen but my hunch is that England would be the final day winners.

Imran Khan & PTI: A need to reset the agenda.

Over twenty years back Imran Khan, two of his friends and myself were engrossed in a discussion on the future of Pakistan in my hotel room in Dubai. Imran was dropping hints that in a couple of days he would announce entering the political arena. I recall telling him then that would it not be better than become the 'Ralph Nader' of Pakistan, like a non political force bringing the government of the time to task of its performance or the lack of it. Late that night he took the flight to Pakistan and within days announced his entry into politics.

I have always said that if one attribute that stood out with Imran it has been his honesty, knowing full well that he accounted for every penny raised for his cancer hospital. I also felt that he was good at inspiring people in his team and yet the challenge would be running a country is radically different from running a country. The past two decades have evolved Imran Khan, from the start up political party to now a party in power in Pakistan. His policies and stance on some issues have warmed my heart, and on others I have had to stop and think about the sagacity of his words.

Today he is heading the government of a very difficult country, which does have enormous potential, and in my first blog after his election I imparted some advice to him (https://aqsher.blogspot.com/2018/07/letter-to-imran-khan.html) highlighting that tackling the economy and setting the foreign policy course are the two most important tasks before him. His successes so have on both fronts have been marginal. While his recent handling of the face off with India has been very good, his faux pas on Afghanistan, the recent press conference in Tehran, and his governments lack of economic direction are disturbing to say the least.

While one can go into specifics here, the fundamental problem lies in the way the PTI governance is being carried out. Though social media may well not be the only way to gauge the mind set of the governing party and its supporters, there is no doubt that Imran's cavalier style effects the proper framing of policy. On foreign policy alone you see the Foreign Office, the Prime Ministers office and the Prime Minister himself issuing statements that clearly indicate a lack of coordination and internal discussion between them.

A large part of me had hoped that Imran Khan would be a cohesive force after becoming Prime Minister. In this sense he has failed as the narrative from the PTI camp seems to suggest an intolerance to criticism. I, even though a well wisher of Imran, run the risk of being attacked on social media for criticizing him here. Imran and the PTI would argue that being inclusive towards political figures of the past who, in their eyes, robbed the nation of its wealth is next to impossible. My simple retort would be by all means accountability should be there and any one who has stolen money or misused public office should be brought to justice. However, this should be through the due process of the law. The national accountability machinery should be used to investigate and then the courts of law should be the ones to determine the fate of such people. Much like predecessor governments NAB seems to be a weapon against those who happen to be opponents and may well have ill gotten wealth.

The atmosphere is becoming toxic in a sense. Exit control lists, assuming all investments are from ill gotten wealth and in a sense short circuiting the due process of law in the aim to bring people to justice who allegedly stole money does have its ramifications on the business environment. Yes Imran Khan wants to clean up things, and that is a laudable task, but there are courts to do that and the effort should not look like its just a witch hunt for certain people. Legitimate investors will obviously be worried if arbitrary actions will come to haunt them for making investments into the country.

Indeed with an external debt of $99 billion and economic numbers across the board looking dismal, there will be a tendency to lean towards the blame game. Economic management in Pakistan has over decades been unhinged. While even the current debt level is around the same level as a percentage of GDP over the past two decades (ranges from 24% to 31% debt to GDP) there is no doubt that there has been a propensity to borrow even when GDP growth has been good. Part of the reason is the tax revenue has been abysmally low. In a country with a workforce of 58 million people the official tax payers who filed returns in 2018 was only 1.4 million!

Clearly what I would have expected Imran Khan to do is to work with the two other major parties on forming a consensus on economic policy and to legislatively overhaul the economic structure. In an environment where PTI feels anyone who is not supporting them is a traitor to the country there will not be any hope of a unified approach to economic reforms. It is time for the rhetorical slandering to be scaled down and for the PTI and its leadership to understand that just as the country united to face the recent threat from India, the same cooperation and mentality is needed to deal with the economic crisis the country faces.

Yes there are differences between the main leadership of the PMLN and PPP with PTI but there is still a possibility for a broad consensus with the rank and file members of both parties to consider a multi-partisan approach to handling issues of national importance. To me resetting the economic agenda is a priority and its great that Imran sees what is good about other countries and wants to learn from China and Iran and others, he must also realize the solutions are well within the intellectual capital available within the country.

Indian Elections: Divisions being put to test.

India is undoubtedly the worlds largest democracy with over 900 million going to the polls this election. So gigantic is the task that voting spans seven phases and a six week period, all in the backdrop of electioneering that continues till the last vote is dropped in the ballot box. This election, however, pitches not only the traditional rivals; Modi's BJP against Rahul Gandhi's Congress, but also, almost in keeping with elections the world over since Mr Trumps election, pitting divergences like never before. Modi's rallying point has been a heightened appeal towards a 'New India' based on a nationalist appeal, and playing the terrorism card to the extent that promising an end to the special status if Indian Kashmir. Gandhi's party appeals to the broader base of Indian secular integration and reform that having been its hallmarks.

In a country so large and diverse polling would be either ridiculously flawed or totally biased to rely upon to make any predictions. Modi's use of and support from a smattering of Indian TV channels and personalities is reminiscent of a nation almost ready to go to war. The recent confrontation with Pakistan where India lost one jet fighter and claiming to have shot down an Pakistani F 16 seems to initially have been the jingoism that Modi needed. This seems to have backfired badly as Imran Khan, the Pakistani PM, quickly returned the down pilot and then waited for the Indian media spin to continue till evidence came from none other that the US itself that Pakistan did not lose a F 16.

Indeed Modi's pitch has been that if you hate Modi then you hate India! A message that may have an appeal within the hard core of the BJP ranks but in a diverse country like India where many of the states and people from different segments feel disfranchised by the Modi camp it might be a slogan that would not hold voter attention. Additionally almost 80 million new, and mostly young, voters have been added to the list. These voters may well hold the card to some main polling battles.

Living in UAE one has a large number of Indian friends and their feedback, while not indicative of 900 million people who vote, does give an insight into the issues. A well placed Muslim engineer from Hyderabad in India made an interesting comment that the Muslim voters along with the voters in the Southern States could well tilt the balance away from Modi. Then he added yet to the Muslims it will make little difference because they will continue to me marginal and treated accordingly. A couple of workers from Kerala who I often bump into were adamant that Modi was himself causing these 'terror' attacks and is more corrupt than all of the others put together.

Modi does have one thing going for him. A robust social media presence, (which matters with young voters) and the ability to deflect controversy with ease. To him the spin matters, and rest is just noise. Rahul Gandhi and the Congress will certainly be tested and for the progressive Indians the Congress has always been a better bet. Yet they have to climb the proverbial mountain since in 2014 they won only 44 seats, down from 206 in the 2009 election. While alliances will help the Congress this perhaps will be its biggest test to turn around its fortunes.

The fact in the recent regional elections the BJP lost some key states, which in fact had been instrumental in helping BJP win the 2014 election, will be a matter of concern to Modi and co. In states like Tamil Nadu Modi has struggled, especially with the younger voters. Modi has been playing the patriotism card over the recent spate with Pakistan, and even though it is evident that the Indian Air Force did not fair well, his spin doctors continue to deny that and hail Modi as patriot who you favor and if you don't then you are anti Indian.

None of this implies that Modi and the BJP would not have a decent showing in the elections, but it might well be so that they will not have a simple majority on their own to form a government. If Congress and its potential allies can have a good enough showing then forming a coalition government is open to either camp.

Beyond electioneering what I find disturbing is this nationalist born again fervor which can be a dangerous card to play. Anyone who talks of moderation and peace in regional affairs is dubbed a 'peacenik' and 'anti Indian'. Modi and co are playing out a message of scare mongering which may well help them in the short term but in a country where emotions run high and a reconciliation towards a strong central government in New Delhi is not something that the population of Tamil Nadu and other southern states have quite yet embraced. Certainly they want a united India and perhaps a strong India, but they want their voice to be a part of that message not on the fringes of Indian politics.

In terms of India's neighbors I doubt it will make any difference whether the Congress or the BJP are in power. Certainly the BJP may wish to continue its niggling with Pakistan but they may well have learned that in the recent round of exchanges Imran Khan of Pakistan seems to have outwitted the accomplished and seasoned Narendra Modi. It would be interesting if Modi went ahead and changed the status of Indian Kashmir the backlash may well be something he then cannot blame Pakistan off. Either way these elections, barring Modi's attempt to play the 'war with Pakistan' card, regional and international issues have been totally absent from the political speeches.

In sense rising unemployment, and managing an economy that has become enormous with its own challenges, and finally a need to define India's economic partnerships in a broader context are imperatives that who ever is elected will need to address.

Can Trump be impeached?

The past week clearly was pivotal in showing the extent to which Mr Donald J Trump can lie and mislead people. His former attorney, Micheal Cohen, who once said he would take a bullet for his client, realized the bullet headed his way was really a cannon ball and ducked to become a snitch that could spell trouble for President Trump. To say he was the quarter back directing the play for the Trump empire across not only business deals but hush money and campaign funding would be an understand. While Trump will dismiss him as unimportant person in the Trump organization, the fact remains Cohen may well have spewed out more than what Robert Mueller was looking for.

While Democrats and the anti Trump camp may be rejoicing that they might just have enough to impeach the President, there is a clear matter of legal issues to consider. If President Trump lied under oath to the FBI or the Mueller investigation, then indeed impeachment is a possibility. However, it would then be important to consider what did he lie about? Knowing of the hush money payments and saying he did not while a lie, would not constitute enough of a crime to be impeached upon. However, if it is proved that he knew that some of the money that funded his campaign was illegal and undisclosed then the matter might take a more serious tone.


In a broader sense, the distinctions of lying as an impeachable offense and lying in general, raise more disturbing traits to the persona of  Mr Trump. Yes politicians lie and bend the truth all the time, every one has done it, but Trump has taken lying to not only an art form but has blatantly bended the truth to the point that perhaps he and some of his supporters, have a totally different vision of reality. Coupled with the art of deflection Trumpians tend to still not accept the man is a pathological liar of the highest order. Kelly Anne Conway, his most ardent supporter, on the Chris Cuomo interview kept on repeating that 'Trump did not direct Cohen to break the law." Fair enough he perhaps did not, but that is not the question, the question is was he present in one of the meetings where payments as hush money were discussed?

Presidents cannot be impeached for lying to the public, perhaps because politicians are expected to lie to the electorate! This is ironic in the sense that he lied his whole way through the primaries and into the White House and continues to invent facts as he sees them, and the only retribution he can face is at the ballot box. There is no mechanism to hold him accountable other than the election or within the media. What all this means is that unless the Mueller probe comes up with a smoking gun that is directly linked to President Trump himself most likely President Trump will run out his term.


However, if Mueller does not get the link directly to Trump, and this is not the focus of his investigation, but indicts Trump Jr, or others close to him then the tightly spun web of deceit into the Trump camp will begin to unravel. It is also possible Trump may be infuriated by any indictment of a family member and will simply start a serious of questionable executive orders, pardons and firings which will perhaps save his family but leave the Trump Presidency open to impeachment. An unhinged Trump is not going to be a pleasant sight for anyone. The core of the Republican party is perhaps also fed up with the way things have turned out and might not have the will to continue to support a President who has become an embarrassment to many of them.

The base of Trumps support amongst the public, however, will not have any of this. To them Trump is making America great again and that slogan itself evokes a sense of patriotism, as false as it may be, that Trump relies on the most. His survival instincts are honed into playing to mainly that segment of the American public, a segment that has become his die hard base, to whom the man's lying, questionable ethics of business and his total lack of respect for others is seen as a man who is doing the right thing in their eyes. This is the division that Trump has brought to American politics, a division that he flaunts with gusto because it is where he feels he is right and everything he and his cohorts spin off feed into the mainstream of this base.

In the real political world if Trump is faced with impeachment his base may rally with protests and noise, but in the legal sense none of it can be consequential to a possible impeachment. The merits of whether he can be impeached all go back to the Mueller probe and this is why he and his base continue to call for its shut down. The Mueller probe is not about Trump, its about simply one fact whether the Russians interfered with the US election and how? It so happens that in investigating that many aspects of the conduct of people close to Trump, (Manafort, Flynn, Cohen et al) have come up which have created different smaller, but more significant, investigations into Trump Jr meeting the Russians, campaign finances, election rule violations, and even money laundering. These are the things which could lead to a more focused finger pointing to Mr Trump himself. While in fairness nothing has been revealed thus far other than his lying about certain matters related to hush money payments, the fat lady, or the tall man in this case, (Mueller) still has not sung.

Trump, Mueller and the approaching meltdown.

Donald J Trump has two very distinct traits which coexist, diametrically opposed to each other, within his persona. We know on the one hand he has a very thin skin, and yet on the other hand looking by the comments on his post he has a panache to ignore the noise he does not like. While this sounds like a complicated contradiction in a confused man, he functions in a manner that allows him not to switch on and off from each trait, but simply to let them coexist as strange bedfellows.

He has handled the Mueller probe into Russian meddling in US elections pretty much ignoring his once close buddies fall one by one and his ability to simply be indifferent to their plight On the other hand any direct comment to his own possible involvement or that of his family has provoked sharp reactions. Some time back at the start of his election campaign he seemed to draw two red lines; do not attack my family and do not probe into my finances.

By bringing the family not only into the campaign but also into the White House he essentially he positioned them into an arena where their actions are fair game to comment on. His intransigence over disclosing his true financial position along with the tax returns has a great deal to do with the supposed shady past of his fund raising for his businesses.

However, with the Mueller investigation a collision course is inevitable between Mr Trump and Bob Mueller. While it would be far fetched to conclude that Trump himself directed and participated in interference by the Russians, his knowledge of certain events, which he denies, may be exposed. While this would honor him with the Noble Prize for deception and lying it may well not carry the weight of enough wrong doing to be impeached.

However, there is an achilles heel to Trump and that is his son Donald Trump jr, who it is established did encourage and even participate in contact with the Russians to dig up dirt on Hilary Clinton. Is that an offense? We wait to see what concludes on that legal aspects. But it would seem that Mueller might indict Trump jr. for multiple counts of lying and misleading the FBI and the special counsel probe. Even if he does not disclose who those two phone calls were to on or around the time of the meeting with the Russians in the Trump Tower, there may well be enough for Mueller to at least make some charges stick on the junior Trump.

Now were this to happen, which seems highly likely, Donald Trump, the President, will completely lose his marbles. His rage will not be via a Twitter storm, but more likely by wielding his Presidential powers. This could be a general pardon for his son, Paul Manafort and a whole host of people who would be under the Mueller probe. Firing Mueller is difficult and perhaps too late as some suggest the indictments are already made and under seal. It is also possible that Trump will in his rage fire the Assistant Attorney General, go after his own party leaders for not supporting him on stopping 'this witch hunt' as he calls the probe.

Trump would feel emboldened by his now near fanatical base, even though in the scheme of the nation its small, but noisy, and take measures that would be tantamount to a dictator in a third world country ensuring he and his cohorts are above the law. Legally there is no denying that he has the legal power to pardon any one he chooses to and does not have to assign a reason for doing so. While some may argue a pardon would have political fall out Trump cannot afford. That may be true in so far as we talk of Manafort and others, but when it comes to his son, Trump would not care of fall out. His base would say 'well what do you expect a good father to do other than protect his son?' and Trump has disclaimed the investigation enough times to simply say his pardons protect peoples lives being wrecked by the Mueller probe.

If we have seen Trump mad we have noticed that all pretense of being Presidential goes out of the window. In the event Trump Jr is indicted his worst rages thus far will look quiet and calm as the pianist at the lobby of one his hotels. What we will see is blood seeking rage and the man will tear up the Constitution, the White House and even the whole country till he feels he has got his own way. This is the reality of Donald J Trump and soon we will see a day of reckoning when he will have to choice to accept the circumstances of the indictment and let the court deal with the matter, or he will take matters in his own hands (small ones) and rip every one around him to shreds.