Thank you for your column. I too wondered who paid for this trip, why she was there in the first place, will she use a vacation day to make up for her absence from her job. She is a sorry excuse for an AG, quite a difference from her quietly effective predecessor.
Thanks for writing about this ridiculous trip that Brenna Bird took to”support” Mr Trump. Clearly it was politically motivated. She is another crony in the Kim Reynolds Crony Department. She does not represent Iowa!
Well said. Her appearance there was wrong on so many levels. As a private citizen she can support anyone she cares to support, but she crossed a big fat line, speaking as Iowa AG.
Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird was not in New York City on our state’s business. If so, in her public comments, she should have said what it was. And Dave’s questions are spot on about who paid for her trip if not taxpayers.
I have always disliked celebrity news—stories of famous people discussing topics about which they are not expert. And their opinions are no more newsworthy that my garage mechanic, barber or grocery story checkout person. But fame gives them media access non-celebrities don’t have.
Yes, Bird is a lawyer and presumably has some expertise about trials. But her comments about Donald Trump have no relationship to Iowa . However, as a state employee, Iowans have the right to know about her trip. But her comments about the former president can be ignored.
Reading this is almost like attending group therapy! Once again, thank you for so eloquently putting into words how so many of us feel. We continue to be lucky to have your voice of reason in a sea of crazy!
Excellent column, Dave. No matter how you slice it, Bird has no business injecting herself into the Trump fiasco. She's clearly angling for her next job.
It wouldn't surprise me to find our Governor financed this politically motivated excursion. When she tied our State Auditors hands to only reviewing State expenditures she personally approved, that was a huge red flag. Bird has a law degree, but remember, even Doctors who graduated at the bottom of their class are still called 'Doctor'.
Yes, she is in her interview process, should her rapist, insurrectionist, lying, fraud, etc. would be boss, Trump, prevail--she has her eye on the Attorney General job (probably promised with her endorsement). Aren't we just so proud of our chief law enforcement officer? The new "Iowa nice?"
She certainly does NOT represent this Iowan, and many others like me. She is auditioning for a role in D.C., should trump prevail. That is all, plain and simple. Reminds me of her.
Thanks Dave for putting into words all of my concerns about this situation. All except two, will she reveal receipts for payments for her appearance so we can ascertain that "we" did not pay for it? And, is Rob Sand unable to audit her for this since they took away most of his power this session?
Many have realized that this trial is a platform for our 45th president to hold daily press conferences --- and an opportunity for anyone to get national attention while showing fealty to the 2024 GOP nominee in waiting simply by their presence. This is the biggest microphone in the country right now. While one can debate whether the trial's a sham, it's definitely a show. I don't buy for a minute that the 45th president is hamstrung from campaigning. He's doing it every day of the trial - directly, and indirectly three or four times a day on every infotainment show where pundits hash and rehash his statements to kingdom come. All Trump all the time, along with ambulance chasers on the pundit panels throwing in thoughts on trial strategy like retired jocks calling a ball game as "color analysts." I'm not sure if cameras in the courtroom would have defused the present situation, but it also gives attention and extra face time to infotainment pundits of all stripes who sit in the courtroom and tell you what THEY saw through their tinted lenses rather than letting you decide for yourself. As Al Pacino said as Michael Corleone to corrupt Senator Leahy in The Godfather, Part II, "We're both part of the same hypocrisy." And our 45th president is the new Teflon Don and remains a master showman. If we had actual video of him falling asleep in court or otherwise dottering, that might be another matter and level the playing field between him and President Biden on the presumed age issue.
Having served as an Assistant Attorney General and as an attorney in or around Iowa's state government for a number of years, I join others in expressing deep regret regarding Ms. Bird's decision to insert herself into Trump's criminal trial. She has done so without a shred of necessity for doing so as Iowa's Attorney General. It is one thing to publicly embarrass oneself but quite another to publicly embarrass the State of Iowa in the eyes of an entire nation. Brice Oakley
Thank you, Brice. You speak from a place of experience and authority that few can match. As I commented above, she really erred when she said she was there representing “our state”. Judging by the letters just published in the Register app, there are a lot of Iowans who resent her doing that.
Thank you for your column. I too wondered who paid for this trip, why she was there in the first place, will she use a vacation day to make up for her absence from her job. She is a sorry excuse for an AG, quite a difference from her quietly effective predecessor.
Thanks for writing about this ridiculous trip that Brenna Bird took to”support” Mr Trump. Clearly it was politically motivated. She is another crony in the Kim Reynolds Crony Department. She does not represent Iowa!
Except that’s how she represented herself - on behalf of “our state.” She should not have done that.
Agree. Ugh!
Well said. Her appearance there was wrong on so many levels. As a private citizen she can support anyone she cares to support, but she crossed a big fat line, speaking as Iowa AG.
Exactly.
Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird was not in New York City on our state’s business. If so, in her public comments, she should have said what it was. And Dave’s questions are spot on about who paid for her trip if not taxpayers.
I have always disliked celebrity news—stories of famous people discussing topics about which they are not expert. And their opinions are no more newsworthy that my garage mechanic, barber or grocery story checkout person. But fame gives them media access non-celebrities don’t have.
Yes, Bird is a lawyer and presumably has some expertise about trials. But her comments about Donald Trump have no relationship to Iowa . However, as a state employee, Iowans have the right to know about her trip. But her comments about the former president can be ignored.
Maybe Rob Sand can audit her!
Reading this is almost like attending group therapy! Once again, thank you for so eloquently putting into words how so many of us feel. We continue to be lucky to have your voice of reason in a sea of crazy!
Thanks, Terri. I try to stick to media issues but this just seemed so obviously wrong.
Excellent column, Dave. No matter how you slice it, Bird has no business injecting herself into the Trump fiasco. She's clearly angling for her next job.
It wouldn't surprise me to find our Governor financed this politically motivated excursion. When she tied our State Auditors hands to only reviewing State expenditures she personally approved, that was a huge red flag. Bird has a law degree, but remember, even Doctors who graduated at the bottom of their class are still called 'Doctor'.
Yes, she is in her interview process, should her rapist, insurrectionist, lying, fraud, etc. would be boss, Trump, prevail--she has her eye on the Attorney General job (probably promised with her endorsement). Aren't we just so proud of our chief law enforcement officer? The new "Iowa nice?"
She certainly does NOT represent this Iowan, and many others like me. She is auditioning for a role in D.C., should trump prevail. That is all, plain and simple. Reminds me of her.
Well said!
Pathetic is the word that came to mind seeing her with Vance and Tubberville.
I thought the same thing. Tubberville, of all people. The guy who held up all military promotions for months on end.
Thanks Dave for putting into words all of my concerns about this situation. All except two, will she reveal receipts for payments for her appearance so we can ascertain that "we" did not pay for it? And, is Rob Sand unable to audit her for this since they took away most of his power this session?
Good questions. I’m sure journalists and perhaps the auditor will want to see invoices.
Many have realized that this trial is a platform for our 45th president to hold daily press conferences --- and an opportunity for anyone to get national attention while showing fealty to the 2024 GOP nominee in waiting simply by their presence. This is the biggest microphone in the country right now. While one can debate whether the trial's a sham, it's definitely a show. I don't buy for a minute that the 45th president is hamstrung from campaigning. He's doing it every day of the trial - directly, and indirectly three or four times a day on every infotainment show where pundits hash and rehash his statements to kingdom come. All Trump all the time, along with ambulance chasers on the pundit panels throwing in thoughts on trial strategy like retired jocks calling a ball game as "color analysts." I'm not sure if cameras in the courtroom would have defused the present situation, but it also gives attention and extra face time to infotainment pundits of all stripes who sit in the courtroom and tell you what THEY saw through their tinted lenses rather than letting you decide for yourself. As Al Pacino said as Michael Corleone to corrupt Senator Leahy in The Godfather, Part II, "We're both part of the same hypocrisy." And our 45th president is the new Teflon Don and remains a master showman. If we had actual video of him falling asleep in court or otherwise dottering, that might be another matter and level the playing field between him and President Biden on the presumed age issue.
It’s turning into a loyalty parade. Mike Johnson and Doug Burgum there today.
Having served as an Assistant Attorney General and as an attorney in or around Iowa's state government for a number of years, I join others in expressing deep regret regarding Ms. Bird's decision to insert herself into Trump's criminal trial. She has done so without a shred of necessity for doing so as Iowa's Attorney General. It is one thing to publicly embarrass oneself but quite another to publicly embarrass the State of Iowa in the eyes of an entire nation. Brice Oakley
Thank you, Brice. You speak from a place of experience and authority that few can match. As I commented above, she really erred when she said she was there representing “our state”. Judging by the letters just published in the Register app, there are a lot of Iowans who resent her doing that.
Brenna is going for Kim's job; best be looking over your shoulder Ms. Reynolds -- LOL!
It clearly proves the trial isn’t going well for Trump. It’s a sham and Iowa needs to vote her out of office.