The Trump Presidency
- Thread starter joepistole
- Start date
- Status
It's very important to make sure that Trump is seen as the normal Republican he is, from a policy and basic ideology perspective as well as his electoral base. The real problem here, the more serious danger, is the Republican Party.
Otherwise, blame for the effects of the nasty that the Republican Party has become will be offloaded unto Trump when he's kicked to the curb, he'll be a scapegoat. The only way to get rid of this Party is to staple the blame for its Ws and Trumps unto its forehead, so it can't talk its way out of responsibility.
I understand your strategy...and in "normal" circumstances agree with it... however Trump is sooo ...unprecedented that it is necessary for the Republican party ( in fact all parties) to see beyond the party and look deeper at the real threat to your system of democracy and values being posed by Trump. IMO
The worst is yet to come... and I got a horrible, sick feeling that the need to look beyond "politics" and focus on core American values instead will become essential.
Trump is not at all unprecedented. His only novel threat is the embarrassment of his vulgarity - which is not trivial, btw, in foreign policy matters, but not central to the Republican threat (may even in fact be some protection).
The W&Cheney administration held power for eight years, less than a decade ago. Within two years of its ascension to power it had a chain of black site "interrogation centers" set up around the entire planet. It's not ancient history, ok?
There is no such thing as the Republican Party "seeing beyond" itself - it's entire mode of operation, its political structure, is built on not doing that. You're asking the Republican Party to see itself, and commit suicide - disband as a Party, and renounce its political power. It's not going to do that until it's trapped in a bunker of incoming consequences with no way out.
Last edited:
The Republican leading the House investigation of Trump's Russian connections today stated that there was no there, there. That there was no evidence of any Russian contacts with the Trump campaign. Now how he can know that before he has seen any evidence or collected any evidence is a bit puzzling. 
Normally, you look for evidence before you proclaim there is no evidence. That's normally how investigations work. His committee hasn't even produced a scoping document at this point. How can you know the answer before you have looked into the matter?
Furthermore, he doesn't want to investigate Americans because he says he doesn't have evidence? If that standard were used in the American judicial system, no American would be investigated for anything. And he stated his committee will not subpoena Trump's tax records. Now how can you conduct an investigation of Trump's Russian connections without subpoenaing his tax records?
Unfortunately for Republicans and contrary to the chairman's assertion, there is ample evidence of Trump's Russian connections and you don't have to look far to find them. That's why both Republicans and Democrats have called for an investigation. That's why his committee is suppose to be investigating the issue. But if you never look and refuse to see, as this guy has done, you will never find.
I think it's time for an independent investigation.
Normally, you look for evidence before you proclaim there is no evidence. That's normally how investigations work. His committee hasn't even produced a scoping document at this point. How can you know the answer before you have looked into the matter?Furthermore, he doesn't want to investigate Americans because he says he doesn't have evidence? If that standard were used in the American judicial system, no American would be investigated for anything. And he stated his committee will not subpoena Trump's tax records. Now how can you conduct an investigation of Trump's Russian connections without subpoenaing his tax records?
Unfortunately for Republicans and contrary to the chairman's assertion, there is ample evidence of Trump's Russian connections and you don't have to look far to find them. That's why both Republicans and Democrats have called for an investigation. That's why his committee is suppose to be investigating the issue. But if you never look and refuse to see, as this guy has done, you will never find.
I think it's time for an independent investigation.
Last edited:
The Republican leading the House investigation of Trump's Russian connects today stated that there was no there, there. That there was no evidence of any Russian contacts with the Trump campaign. Now how he can know that before he has seen any evidence or collected any evidence is a bit puzzling.
I think it's time for an independent investigation.
The fact that people with compromising positions (such as Sessions) are not recusing themselves is, in my opinion, further evidence of wrongdoing... if Trump and co did nothing wrong, then let the damn investigation proceed and prove it! What are they hiding that they are adamantly trying to prevent an investigation...
http://deadline.com/2017/02/darrell-issa-real-time-bill-maher-special-prosecutor-1201988192/
Issa threatens Trump, via media.
The problem of curbing Trump's whims and enthusiasms, so that the Republicans can get their agenda through more easily, may have found its strategy. The main question here is Bannon's position.
Issa threatens Trump, via media.
The problem of curbing Trump's whims and enthusiasms, so that the Republicans can get their agenda through more easily, may have found its strategy. The main question here is Bannon's position.
This just gets stinkier and stinkier . . .
It's bad enough using taxpayer money for Trump to visit his hotel in Florida every weekend, but now there is this:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-muc...en-on-overseas-business-trips-cost-taxpayers/
Trump will drain the coffers dry by the time he is booted from office.
It's bad enough using taxpayer money for Trump to visit his hotel in Florida every weekend, but now there is this:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-muc...en-on-overseas-business-trips-cost-taxpayers/
Trump will drain the coffers dry by the time he is booted from office.
I'm fairly certain that's the Republican's plan... drain it dry, then they have an excuse to cut all social funding, including Medicare and Social Security, once and for all...
¡Christie Scores!
It's not quite "The Manservant Strikes Back", but two important points about metrics and optics:
No, really:
By any metric, them's some nasty optics.
And, you know, maybe it seems like minutiae, but let's face it, you're not going to read the long version↱, and, quite frankly, I don't blame you, as I didn't really enjoy putting it together. But it really has been a remarkable couple weeks for the GOP. For all the complaining we've heard in recent years about corruption and the Establishment and entrenched powers that be, it seems remarkable to think that any of those should remain in President Trump's camp. At the same time, that is the underlying joke about the idea of the #trumpswindle. But the only Trump voters who should be rallying to him are the supremacists and the lulzies. Well, you know, unless all that stuff about corruption and entrenchment and sinister cabals plotting against the nation was as much bullshit as we thought.
Notes:
Benen, Steve. "Priebus’ improper contacts with the FBI come into focus". msnbc. 27 February 2017. msnbc.com. 27 February 2017. http://on.msnbc.com/2mnoKpC
Cribb, Esme. "Chris Christie Says White House Contact With FBI Was Result Of 'Learning Curve'". Talking Points Memo. 26 February 2017. TalkingPointsMemo.com. 27 February 2017. http://bit.ly/2lhPnaE
It's not quite "The Manservant Strikes Back", but two important points about metrics and optics:
(1) Chris Christie thinks he has credibility enough to defend you.
(2) Chris Christie defends you by arguing that people just need to give you time to learn how to be competent.
(2) Chris Christie defends you by arguing that people just need to give you time to learn how to be competent.
No, really:
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R), a top Donald Trump ally, did his best yesterday to defend the White House urging FBI officials to downplay the Russia scandal. The Republican governor's defense isn't that the White House is innocent, but rather, that Team Trump doesn't know what it's doing↱.
Factually, Christie's point has merit—we have an amateur president who's surrounded himself with people who have no governing experience—but it's still not much of a defense. By his reasoning, it didn't occur to the president's chief of staff it might be problematic for the White House to intervene in a pending federal investigation. It's one of those things the person running the White House needs to know, not "learn."
(Benen↱)
"I can guarantee this, I don't think [White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus] will ever have that kind of conversation with the FBI, with FBI personnel, again," he said.
"Remember, these are all people who have never been in government before," Christie said. "And so they're going to need to learn these things."
"Remember, these are all people who have never been in government before," Christie said. "And so they're going to need to learn these things."
Factually, Christie's point has merit—we have an amateur president who's surrounded himself with people who have no governing experience—but it's still not much of a defense. By his reasoning, it didn't occur to the president's chief of staff it might be problematic for the White House to intervene in a pending federal investigation. It's one of those things the person running the White House needs to know, not "learn."
(Benen↱)
By any metric, them's some nasty optics.
And, you know, maybe it seems like minutiae, but let's face it, you're not going to read the long version↱, and, quite frankly, I don't blame you, as I didn't really enjoy putting it together. But it really has been a remarkable couple weeks for the GOP. For all the complaining we've heard in recent years about corruption and the Establishment and entrenched powers that be, it seems remarkable to think that any of those should remain in President Trump's camp. At the same time, that is the underlying joke about the idea of the #trumpswindle. But the only Trump voters who should be rallying to him are the supremacists and the lulzies. Well, you know, unless all that stuff about corruption and entrenchment and sinister cabals plotting against the nation was as much bullshit as we thought.
(Think about all that both sides bullshit, too, and the idea that liberals and conservatives can't be friends or simply get along and break bread together anymore, and how does all that look if it turns out one side of the equivocation was never sincere to begin with? Yeah, we kind of knew the whole time, but some people insisted, so the only proper thing to do, apparently, was play along, and look at what it gets us. And if it's that much harder to break bread with my conservative neighbors, I would like to think the reasons are at the very least worth something. Yet, weirdly, such an outcome would still prove the point: If it really was all for naught, what does that say? No, really, think it through. And does it hurt your feelings? Well, okay, ask yourself this question: Are you really one of those conservatives? Or are you just throwing in so you can pitch a fit at liberals? And every time you go through that, you're just proving the point. It seems to me the better outcome is that if we really have come to such loggerheads there ought to be a better reason than we're sick of you lying to us and you're sick of us calling you liars because it's absolutely a violation of your rights to ever expect good faith. No, really, we ought to have a better reason. And if this really is all we get from you―a bunch of insincere, infantile fitting and spitting―then at least we get to know there isn't a better reason. Fuck, y'all remember when "sincerely held beliefs" was all the rage among conservatives? Eighty-five percent support among Republicans; this president isn't a RINO. Right now the only sincere anything about the Republican Party is the sincere danger it and its people present to pretty much everyone else on the planet.)
____________________Notes:
Benen, Steve. "Priebus’ improper contacts with the FBI come into focus". msnbc. 27 February 2017. msnbc.com. 27 February 2017. http://on.msnbc.com/2mnoKpC
Cribb, Esme. "Chris Christie Says White House Contact With FBI Was Result Of 'Learning Curve'". Talking Points Memo. 26 February 2017. TalkingPointsMemo.com. 27 February 2017. http://bit.ly/2lhPnaE
Trump has been saying for weeks now that he has assembled the smartest group ever. So it's kind of funny to see them play the ignorance and stupidity cards.¡Christie Scores!
It's not quite "The Manservant Strikes Back", but two important points about metrics and optics:
(1) Chris Christie thinks he has credibility enough to defend you.
(2) Chris Christie defends you by arguing that people just need to give you time to learn how to be competent.
No, really:
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R), a top Donald Trump ally, did his best yesterday to defend the White House urging FBI officials to downplay the Russia scandal. The Republican governor's defense isn't that the White House is innocent, but rather, that Team Trump doesn't know what it's doing↱.By any metric, them's some nasty optics.
"I can guarantee this, I don't think [White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus] will ever have that kind of conversation with the FBI, with FBI personnel, again," he said.Factually, Christie's point has merit—we have an amateur president who's surrounded himself with people who have no governing experience—but it's still not much of a defense. By his reasoning, it didn't occur to the president's chief of staff it might be problematic for the White House to intervene in a pending federal investigation. It's one of those things the person running the White House needs to know, not "learn."
"Remember, these are all people who have never been in government before," Christie said. "And so they're going to need to learn these things."
(Benen↱)
And, you know, maybe it seems like minutiae, but let's face it, you're not going to read the long version↱, and, quite frankly, I don't blame you, as I didn't really enjoy putting it together. But it really has been a remarkable couple weeks for the GOP. For all the complaining we've heard in recent years about corruption and the Establishment and entrenched powers that be, it seems remarkable to think that any of those should remain in President Trump's camp. At the same time, that is the underlying joke about the idea of the #trumpswindle. But the only Trump voters who should be rallying to him are the supremacists and the lulzies. Well, you know, unless all that stuff about corruption and entrenchment and sinister cabals plotting against the nation was as much bullshit as we thought.
(Think about all that both sides bullshit, too, and the idea that liberals and conservatives can't be friends or simply get along and break bread together anymore, and how does all that look if it turns out one side of the equivocation was never sincere to begin with? Yeah, we kind of knew the whole time, but some people insisted, so the only proper thing to do, apparently, was play along, and look at what it gets us. And if it's that much harder to break bread with my conservative neighbors, I would like to think the reasons are at the very least worth something. Yet, weirdly, such an outcome would still prove the point: If it really was all for naught, what does that say? No, really, think it through. And does it hurt your feelings? Well, okay, ask yourself this question: Are you really one of those conservatives? Or are you just throwing in so you can pitch a fit at liberals? And every time you go through that, you're just proving the point. It seems to me the better outcome is that if we really have come to such loggerheads there ought to be a better reason than we're sick of you lying to us and you're sick of us calling you liars because it's absolutely a violation of your rights to ever expect good faith. No, really, we ought to have a better reason. And if this really is all we get from you―a bunch of insincere, infantile fitting and spitting―then at least we get to know there isn't a better reason. Fuck, y'all remember when "sincerely held beliefs" was all the rage among conservatives? Eighty-five percent support among Republicans; this president isn't a RINO. Right now the only sincere anything about the Republican Party is the sincere danger it and its people present to pretty much everyone else on the planet.)____________________
Notes:
Benen, Steve. "Priebus’ improper contacts with the FBI come into focus". msnbc. 27 February 2017. msnbc.com. 27 February 2017. http://on.msnbc.com/2mnoKpC
Cribb, Esme. "Chris Christie Says White House Contact With FBI Was Result Of 'Learning Curve'". Talking Points Memo. 26 February 2017. TalkingPointsMemo.com. 27 February 2017. http://bit.ly/2lhPnaE
Our local fish and chip shop owner has more business nous than Trump. Golden rule.. if you don't know ...ask someone who does. No excuse for bad decisions...
Trump has been saying for weeks now that he has assembled the smartest group ever. So it's kind of funny to see them play the ignorance and stupidity cards.
Wait... you are telling me #45 is incompetent and inept, completely clueless what it takes to be a President, and has surrounded himself with even more inept and incompetent folks...? I'd have never guessed it!
*shakes head* How did enough people fall for this fool... is American education really THAT bad...? Yes, yes it is... if I had naught but what I was taught in high school, I wouldn't have the necessary faculties to see through his bluster and bullshit, do my own research, and realize he was a fraud.
Cest la vie...
#corruption | #WhatTheyVotedFor
In American politics we often have a certain back and forth about scandal, and this is an example of why.
As a report from a Fox affiliate in Oklahoma makes clear, Pruitt’s use of private email for official business is not illegal, but that’s not the core problem here. Rather, the new controversy stems from the fact that Pruitt specifically told senators during his confirmation process that he never used a private email account to conduct official business.
In fact, the Republican assured senators – in writing and in sworn committee testimony – that he used his official government email account exclusively when conducting public affairs.
It’s a curious thing to lie about. Remind me, does the political world take an interest in public officials facing email controversies? ....
.... We learned last week, for example, that Pruitt illegally hid correspondence that documented his cooperation with the oil and gas industries – the industries he’ll ostensibly help regulate as the head of the EPA. Evidence also emerged last week pointing to Pruitt’s role in a botched execution in Oklahoma.
Now we’re learning that Pruitt twice gave false information to the senators responsible for scrutinizing his record ahead of his confirmation. It usually takes a cabinet official more time to rack up this many controversies.
(Benen↱)
In fact, the Republican assured senators – in writing and in sworn committee testimony – that he used his official government email account exclusively when conducting public affairs.
It’s a curious thing to lie about. Remind me, does the political world take an interest in public officials facing email controversies? ....
.... We learned last week, for example, that Pruitt illegally hid correspondence that documented his cooperation with the oil and gas industries – the industries he’ll ostensibly help regulate as the head of the EPA. Evidence also emerged last week pointing to Pruitt’s role in a botched execution in Oklahoma.
Now we’re learning that Pruitt twice gave false information to the senators responsible for scrutinizing his record ahead of his confirmation. It usually takes a cabinet official more time to rack up this many controversies.
(Benen↱)
Nobody is ever especially thrilled with the argument that my politician is less corrupt than your politician; well, okay, maybe Republicans, but that's kind of the point. Every Republican in on denouncing Hillary Clinton in the email scandal they never cared about when it was Colin Powell or the boys over at the RNC, for instance, should be similarly denouncing Mr. Trump's administration.
That there are any Republicans left defending this administration reminds that Republicans ought not be trusted from the outset.
Honestly, conservative neighbors, it would be a lot easier to waste my time trying to accommodate or, at the very least, answer your concerns if anything you ever said was actually sincere. As it is, there really isn't any useful purpose in addressing what you say since it is so frequently meaningless.
Think of it this way: One of these days, the Trump presidency will be over, but we still won't be able to trust you. Not your word. Not your businesses. Not the children you raise.
And this is why.
Yeah. Scott Pruitt is a corrupt politician. So, what? But look at the record, here. There is no excuse for the Trump presidency if one is a voter who howls about corruption and expected he should somehow drain the swamp. Don't get me wrong, there really isn't any excuse for the Trump presidency at all, but the problem is that this time it's so apparent conservatives must give deliberate effort to pretending otherwise. And as we've seen a gripe of Goldmans, a trollop° of Russians, and a Gordian knot of toadies, it just seems as if all the right-wing panic in recent years about Goldman Sachs and institutional finance, foreign influence, and the corruption of political Establishments as exemplified in questions about email practices ....
Seriouisly, part of the problem is that we just can't rub it in enough. True, rubbing it in is probably counterproductive, but the point also makes the point: We get that you don't give a damn.
And we will honor that. Really, the next time conservatives sputter and whine that we're not giving them a chance, that we're not hearing them out, the retort is pretty straightforward: As you're just lying to us, anyway, we're skipping that part of the ritual.
____________________
Notes:
° "Trump dollop" = tr'ollop = trollop
Benen, Steve. "Trump’s EPA chief already at the center of multiple controversies". msnbc. 28 FEbruary 2017. msnbc.com. 28 February 2017. http://on.msnbc.com/2mANzLG
Tried? Succeeded.
It's similar to what cost her the Presidency, apparently, with at least one apparent difference:
She appears to have been using her private server email accounts to do her job honestly and well (and they also seem to have proved more secure than her alternatives), whereas Pruitt appears to have been using his to cut deals under the table with oil and gas companies he officially oversaw, in return for money.
Things are about to become more challenging for Trump. The Donald is about to come fact to face with reality and is fellow Republicans. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. It look like his budget proposal will meet some very stiff resistance among Republicans in Congress. And his healthcare plan is probably dead on arrival. Republican hardliners aren't on board with Trump's healthcare reforms. So it will be very interesting to watch the next few months.
Except that to qualify as a mental illness it would have to cause Mr. Trump significant social and personal impairment, which it doesn't. Also you would have to be a mental health professional, in which case you wouldn't be allowed to make any diagnosis public without permission.
----------------
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/...ychiatrist-demurs-on-trumps-mental-state.html
To the Editor:
Fevered media speculation about Donald Trump’s psychological motivations and psychiatric diagnosis has recently encouraged mental health professionals to disregard the usual ethical constraints against diagnosing public figures at a distance. They have sponsored several petitions and a Feb. 14 letter to The New York Times suggesting that Mr. Trump is incapable, on psychiatric grounds, of serving as president.
Most amateur diagnosticians have mislabeled President Trump with the diagnosis of narcissistic personality disorder. I wrote the criteria that define this disorder, and Mr. Trump doesn’t meet them. He may be a world-class narcissist, but this doesn’t make him mentally ill, because he does not suffer from the distress and impairment required to diagnose mental disorder.
Mr. Trump causes severe distress rather than experiencing it and has been richly rewarded, rather than punished, for his grandiosity, self-absorption and lack of empathy. It is a stigmatizing insult to the mentally ill (who are mostly well behaved and well meaning) to be lumped with Mr. Trump (who is neither).
Bad behavior is rarely a sign of mental illness, and the mentally ill behave badly only rarely. Psychiatric name-calling is a misguided way of countering Mr. Trump’s attack on democracy. He can, and should, be appropriately denounced for his ignorance, incompetence, impulsivity and pursuit of dictatorial powers.
His psychological motivations are too obvious to be interesting, and analyzing them will not halt his headlong power grab. The antidote to a dystopic Trumpean dark age is political, not psychological.
ALLEN FRANCES
Coronado, Calif.
The writer, professor emeritus of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Duke University Medical College, was chairman of the task force that wrote the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV (D.S.M.-IV).
Oh, hogwash!. If you had been paying attention to the discussion you would know there are a host of mental illnesses with effects ranging from mild to severe impairment. It's very clear to any observer that Trump suffers from narcissistic personality disorder. Once again for your edification:
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-...ality-disorder/basics/definition/con-20025568
In the old days we would just call someone like that an asshole.
- Status