Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, September 05, 2018

OTP 2018 September 4: Candidate for governor pitches politics at Jacksonville baseball game

The Democratic candidate for governor spent his Labor Day in Jacksonville and attended a Jumbo Shrimp game at the baseball grounds.

Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum called for his Republican opponent, Ron DeSantis, to have a more civil campaign, but New4Jax political analyst Rick Mullaney doesn’t think the political attacks will slow down.

 

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:26 AM | 1496 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: off topic, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 3 of 15 pages  < 1 2 3 4 5 >  Last ›
   201. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 05, 2018 at 06:49 PM (#5739260)
maybe, but I lower my opinion of every Senator who votes against a clearly-qualified Supreme Court nominee. That was their role for many years - affirm if clearly-qualified - and it was a good one. we have already been headed in the wrong direction on that for a number of years, and of course last year's Merrick Garland debacle further lowered the esteem any of us should have for that body.

but 45-49 Democrats voting in unison against Kavanaugh, without even a fig leaf of "not qualified" suggested - I'd like to think that decades from now, that too would produce rolled eyes and scorn.


I think that decades from now, their eyes are going to be all rolled out at the idea that one of our leading political parties could ever nominate someone like Donald Trump, and could continue to defend him no matter what he said or did.

Oh, and do you have an equal drop in esteem reserved for the party that wouldn't even let its own Senators meet with Merrick Garland, let alone give him a hearing or a vote?

I'll say it: By conventional standards, Kavanaugh is indeed fully qualified. Unfortunately we're not in conventional times, or dealing with conventional contexts over court battles. Kavanaugh on the Court is going to help cement a hard right majority for at least the next 10 or 20 years. I realize that this is a small concern to you, but maybe it isn't to people who would likely be on the receiving ends of those opinions.
   202. Joe Bivens, Slack Rumped Rutabaga Head Posted: September 05, 2018 at 06:50 PM (#5739262)
#### Kavanaugh. If he can't answer "can Trump pardon himself?" because it's a hypothetical, he's a gutless piece of ####.
   203. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:03 PM (#5739271)
Cursing doesn’t make a dumb argument less dumb. That’s not how judging works. People on a website can opine about such issues all we want because there are no stakes. But judges don’t - contrary to what you guys think - just pick the answer they like. People present arguments and evidence to them and they weigh it. So, no, Kavanaugh nor any other judge will answer a question like that off the cuff.

And if he answered and said, “No, he can’t,” then that would be one of the few reasons he’d be forced to recuse himself if the issue came before him.
   204. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:03 PM (#5739272)
It’s the Trump era Howie.

"Trump made us do it" doesn't really work for the Brett Kavanaugh opponents. Any GOP President might have nominated Kavanaugh. Had Rubio, Cruz, Bush or Kasich won in 2016, they all might have appointed Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. Kavanaugh is a mainstream "judicial conservative", well-deserving of the ABA's highest rating (unanimously!). There's really not an intellectually honest justification for opposing GOP President's appointment of mainstream conservatives while allowing Democratic Presidents to appoint mainstream liberals unchecked - other than the enormous conceit that you're always right and election results don't matter.
   205. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:06 PM (#5739273)
So I mean. Pence wrote it, or someone wanted people to think Pence wrote it.

I think?
   206. zenbitz Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:06 PM (#5739274)
Can the President even fire the Vice-President? That doesn't fit the Op-ed description of "fears for his job"...
   207. SouthSideRyan Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:06 PM (#5739275)
Kavanaugh’s Sean Spicer impersonation at his announcement is enough to DQ him for me.
   208. Greg K Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:08 PM (#5739276)
Cursing doesn’t make a dumb argument less dumb. That’s not how judging works. People on a website can opine about such issues all we want because there are no stakes. But judges don’t - contrary to what you guys think - just pick the answer they like. People present arguments and evidence to them and they weigh it. So, no, Kavanaugh nor any other judge will answer a question like that off the cuff.

And if he answered and said, “No, he can’t,” then that would be one of the few reasons he’d be forced to recuse himself if the issue came before him.

One of the Charles I's favourite games was to summon the top judges in the kingdom and ask them, hypothetically, if X guy were to face Y charges in your court, would you convict?

At which point some of the judges would say "I'd have to hear the case to say", and the judges who wanted to keep their job would say "yes!"
   209. zenbitz Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:09 PM (#5739278)
but 45-49 Democrats voting in unison against Kavanaugh, without even a fig leaf of "not qualified" suggested - I'd like to think that decades from now, that too would produce rolled eyes and scorn.



Howie, I think if we were talking about President Cruz or Pence - yeah you would have a point. But Frankly, the Democrats have zero reason to play along with the nominations BY a lunatic.
   210. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:10 PM (#5739279)
Any GOP President might have nominated Kavanaugh. Had Rubio, Cruz, Bush or Kasich won in 2016, they all might have appointed Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court


Was I not clear?

Nothing is making the Scorn Top 100 during the Trump years that Trump won't bear responsibility for.

If you wanted a confirmation hearing and opposition to qualified judge to be THE scorn thing, you shouldn't have chosen an idiot, amoral, reckless, and unfit President -- as his own administration says he is.

But you wanted the clown.

So, you got the clown.

Footnotes have become a real thing with you dipshits, hasn't it?

   211. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:12 PM (#5739281)
"Trump made us do it" doesn't really work for the Brett Kavanaugh opponents.


The argument against Kavanaugh has little to do with Trump. The only relevant argument is "is he Merrick Garland?" If the answer is no, #### him.
   212. Joe Bivens, Slack Rumped Rutabaga Head Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:15 PM (#5739283)
But judges don’t - contrary to what you guys think - just pick the answer they like.


If there is any legal reason that a president can pardon himself then that law has to be changed.

What is your opinion on the question?
   213. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:17 PM (#5739284)
Re "basket of deplorables":

No, it got so much play because it was one of the stupidest, if not the stupidest, remark in 20/21st century presidential election history.

And secondarily, because it was a nice window into a candidate's -- and a highly-influential political faction's -- true thought process and character.


(Tshipman)Again, look at what Trump said about black and brown people.

Why would calling white supremacists and Nazis deplorable hurt Hillary more than


She didn't call "white supremacists and Nazis" that; she called "half of Trump's supporters" that. She said (direct quote) "you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables." You're missing the entire problem with her comment. It was the putting of half of Trump's supporters into that basket, not the calling of white supremacists and Nazis deplorable.

63 million people voted for Trump. Half of that is 31 million -- but that severely understates the number of Trump supporters since tens of millions of them didn't vote at all. There were 230 million eligible voters in 2016, and about 130 million of them voted. Thus of the 100 million people who didn't vote, there were probably, what, 20-30 million Trump supporters among the bunch? Thus the number of Trump supporters -- defined as people who voted for Trump** plus supporters who didn't vote -- was probably 80-90 million. (**If you want to claim that not all people who voted for Trump were Trump supporters, be my guest.)

Half of that is 40-45 million. Do you think there are some 40-45 million white supremacists and Nazis among the ~250 million adults in the US? You must, because you're implicitly making that argument, and it's completely insane. 1 in 6 adults are white supremacists and Nazis? Have you people completely lost your minds?

(But really, while Hillary said half of Trump supporters were deplorable, it's clear that the left and the Davids of the world think that pretty much *all* of Trump supporters are deplorable. David and others explicitly stated that on this board. That means that you think 1 in 3 adults are white supremacists and Nazis. You're very far gone at this point.)

Once more, since folks are confused about how presidential elections work: a run of the mill Republican voter is simply not voting for Hillary Clinton, or really for any presidential candidate with a D next to his or her name. The election doesn't boil down to "Is Trump deplorable? Vote R if you think no and vote D if you think yes!" It's a fundamental misunderstanding of why votes in a presidential election are cast.

calling all Latinos rapists and murderers? Because white supremacists are still white.


Your Latinos comment is false on its face. Even by the terms of Trump's comment, taken at face value, Trump said that some he assumed were good people. But it's much more than that:

"When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Look at the first sentence. He says there ARE plenty of "best people" in Mexico. He was talking about who -- in his view -- were coming over *illegally*. He badly misfired as to that and his comments were racist in that they were layered with stereotyping and profiling but even at that he didn't say anything like "All Latinos" are criminals.

He also said "people (from) Mexico," not "Latinos."

You're simply making things up, on both sides of the equation here.
   214. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:18 PM (#5739285)
Was I not clear?

Yes, but your refusal to accept the results of the 2016 presidential election isn't controlling. Just as few followed your lead in fleeing to Canada (THE PARALLELS!!!), no one should oppose an objectively qualified, experienced, independent jurist simply because some hate the President who nominated him or her.
   215. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:21 PM (#5739286)
Once more, since folks are confused about how presidential elections work: a run of the mill Republican voter is simply not voting for Hillary Clinton, or really for any presidential candidate with a D next to his or her name. The election doesn't boil down to "Is Trump deplorable? Vote R if you think no and vote D if you think yes!" It's a fundamental misunderstanding of why votes in a presidential election are cast.


lol, thanks for explaining that.

no one should oppose an objectively qualified, experienced, independent jurist simply because they hate the President who nominated him or her.


IDGAF if J. H. Christ himself (with a JD from Harvard law to boot) is up for nomination, if the POTUS nominating them cheated to get elected it's invalid.
   216. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:22 PM (#5739287)
Yes, but


Good.

I'm glad to know you Trumpkins still understand that much at least.

Now give that op-ed by one of your Dear Leader's own people a try.

See if you can understand that.

   217. Joe Bivens, Slack Rumped Rutabaga Head Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:27 PM (#5739289)
Now give that op-ed by one of your Dear Leader's own people a try.

See if you can understand that.


The Omega Dancing Monkey will say that TDS has infected the WH.
   218. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:27 PM (#5739290)
God the headlines are SO GOOD THO:

Fox News reporter is Trump State Dept's top choice for anti-propaganda post: report


he State Department is reportedly considering Fox News reporter Lea Gabrielle to serve as special envoy and coordinator of the Global Engagement Center.

The job would put Gabrielle in charge of the agency focused on combating propaganda and disinformation spread by foreign adversaries.

Multiple State Department sources told CNN that Gabrielle, a general assignment reporter for the network’s “Shepard Smith Reporting,” is a leading candidate for the job.


Get up out of that grave Irony!
   219. Jack Keefe Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:28 PM (#5739292)
Kevin Awe is dreamy. He has a hot chick sit behind him flashing sines Al. Plus he has been to Harlem or Yail and that does not mean any thing to youse point head numpties but when you have like I only got as far as Redeemable Trickonometry at Ivy Tech Kokomo you have some respect and I bet Kevin Awe eats meat and does not have lunch with women outside of Wet Loch. These Dimocrats burn me up Al.
   220. zenbitz Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:35 PM (#5739294)
So was ignoring the whole Zina Bash / White power symbol stuff but it randomly flew by my facebook feed. I don't know WHAT she is trying to signal in that shot, but she is 100% talking to someone with her fingers. And that is not how you say "OK".

She has some 'splainin to do.

This explanation from her husband is grade-A horsepuckey:

John Bash wrote. “We weren’t even familiar with the hateful symbol being attributed to her for the random way she rested her hand during a long hearing.”


That is NOT a relaxed position. That is a TENSE position. Look at her face, she is grimly determined.
   221. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:35 PM (#5739295)
Why would calling white supremacists and Nazis deplorable hurt Hillary more than calling all Latinos rapists and murderers?

Trump never did the latter, and Hillary said far more people than white supremacists and Nazis were "deplorables."

You can't even write a simple sentence without completely misstating and exaggerating reality. It forfeits your credibility entirely. Why do you do that? It's like you have some fear that if you don't wildly exaggerate a point, no one will grasp it. (Or even worse, that you actually believe what you write. That seems inconceivable.)


It's amazing. What Trump said was bad enough. But still people feel the need to lie about what he said, thereby diluting the valid criticisms of his words.

It's really remarkable.

--

In the alternative, TShipman et al really believe what they're saying -- that 1 in 3 or 1 in 6 people around them are Nazis -- which is pretty much a perfect example of living in a mass hysteria bubble. Which is what leads one to hallucinate that a former Kavanaugh law clerk was flashing a white power symbol behind him at his hearing.
   222. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:36 PM (#5739296)
Gonfalon:

Fox News:

’Cosby Show' actor Geoffrey Owens spotted bagging groceries at NJ Trader Joe's

Mark Harris:

Aside from the obvious right-on-the-surface ugliness of this, note the hypocrisy: Fox News, which purports to represent the concerns of ordinary working "real Americans," can't hide its revulsion when it spots one.

What this is really about is reinforcing Fox News's target viewership in a belief they cling to for dear life, one that starts with, "See? Even when you give them every opportunity, they still end up..." It is that bone-deep and that vicious.


Ummmm... Elvin was bizarre-doxxed by pretty much every major media outlet. It wasn't exclusive to FOX News.

And the doxxing was odd. As if working at Trader Joe's is supposed to be an embarrassment or something. (But working as a porn star is totally not, when it's Rudy Giuliani's ox being gored.)
   223. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:40 PM (#5739300)
That is NOT a relaxed position. That is a TENSE position. Look at her face, she is grimly determined.


has anybody in the HISTORY of meetings ever "rested" their hand in the "OK" position? Come on. It's not a ####### position of repose.
   224. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:41 PM (#5739304)
Donald J. Trump

Verified account

@realDonaldTrump
1m1 minute ago
More
Does the so-called “Senior Administration Official” really exist, or is it just the Failing New York Times with another phony source? If the GUTLESS anonymous person does indeed exist, the Times must, for National Security purposes, turn him/her over to government at once!

137 replies 309 retweets 731 likes
Reply 137 Retweet 309 Like 731
   225. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:42 PM (#5739305)
Anyone who supports Trump is deplorable by definition.
   226. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:44 PM (#5739306)
And the ##### was clearly flashing the 3% sign.
   227. Jack Keefe Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:46 PM (#5739308)
Rickies you have hurt my Feelings and I am going off to half a good Bawl. Mam never told me that ODP would be so gruel Al.
   228. Random Transaction Generator Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:56 PM (#5739315)
the Times must, for National Security purposes, turn him/her over to government at once!


I look forward to the Trump-positive media attempt to spin that as a good thing.
   229. Laser Man Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:58 PM (#5739317)
Do you think there are some 40-45 million white supremacists and Nazis among the ~250 million adults in the US?
Speaking of people lying about what was said...The "Basket of Deplorables" line was not just about white supremacist and Nazis. From Clinton's own speech, she specifically calls out those who are "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, and Islamaphobic." Those groups could easily get to 40-45 million.
   230. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 05, 2018 at 07:58 PM (#5739318)
More bad news for the James T. Hodgkinson faction - Guilty Plea For Death Threats Made To Family Of FCC Chairman:
A California man has pleaded guilty to threatening to kill the family of Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai for his role in repealing net neutrality rules. Markara Man of Norwalk, California, pleaded guilty Friday in federal court in Alexandria to sending multiple threatening emails to Pai.

The FBI traced the emails to the 33-year-old Man, who admitted he sent them because he was upset about the repeal of net neutrality and wanted to scare Pai. Man faces up to 10 years in prison when he is sentenced Dec. 7.

California Man may give Florida Man a run for his money. This guy seems likely to do some time.
   231. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:08 PM (#5739326)

It’s not just scripted speeches, it’s in off-the-cuff interviews too. Going back YEARS, prior to his VP run.
Another reason it's not Pence is that the author is described as a "Senior Administration Official." The real journalists here can back me up (or tell me that I'm crazy), but in political coverage, the descriptors chosen for anonymous speakers (like SAO, or White House Official, or whatever) actually have meaning; they aren't just arbitrarily chosen for variety. And I don't think that the veep would fall in the category of senior administration official.


Moreover, you need to take into account this: White House Leaker Covers Tracks by Impersonating Co-workers:
“To cover my tracks, I usually pay attention to other staffers’ idioms and use that in my background quotes. That throws the scent off me,” the current White House official added.
   232. Howie Menckel Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:10 PM (#5739327)
I think that decades from now, their eyes are going to be all rolled out at the idea that one of our leading political parties could ever nominate someone like Donald Trump, and could continue to defend him no matter what he said or did.

Oh, and do you have an equal drop in esteem reserved for the party that wouldn't even let its own Senators meet with Merrick Garland, let alone give him a hearing or a vote?

I'll say it: By conventional standards, Kavanaugh is indeed fully qualified. Unfortunately we're not in conventional times, or dealing with conventional contexts over court battles. Kavanaugh on the Court is going to help cement a hard right majority for at least the next 10 or 20 years. I realize that this is a small concern to you, but maybe it isn't to people who would likely be on the receiving ends of those opinions.


1. yes
2. yes
3. I understand that

..........

re "senior administration official"

ideally that would have a real definition, but I suspect that inside-the-beltway reporters have gotten a bit sloppy about that over the years. and if it was Pence, i can see them twisting enough to keep the playing field wide.

..........

the Cosby show actor was spotted by a Jersey girl who likes gossip. she thought it was interesting, so she e-mailed the photos to a number of such sites. one was one of the British tabloids. they ran with it, and I think that's when Fox News picked up on it.

the Jersey girl says she regrets everything. but the actor is getting a ton of publicity out of it, per NY Post:

"The phone has been ringing off the hook for actor Geoffrey Owens since he was publicly shamed for working at Trader Joe’s.

“It’s been nonstop contact, emails, and phone calls and texts and interviews,” Owens, 57, explained on Wednesday in a follow-up interview with “Good Morning America.” “It’s actually bizarre. A lot of fun, though.”

On Tuesday, he appeared on the morning program and confessed that he’d been working for the grocery chain for 15 months to make ends meet.

After hearing the story, Tyler Perry offered him a job on OWN’s “The Haves and the Have Nots.”

[he took it]
   233. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:12 PM (#5739329)
Speaking of people lying about what was said...The "Basket of Deplorables" line was not just about white supremacist and Nazis.


In TShipman's telling it was. He said "Why would calling white supremacists and Nazis deplorable hurt Hillary..."
   234. stig-tossled, hornswoggled gef the typing mongoose Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:14 PM (#5739331)
From Clinton's own speech, she specifically calls out those who are "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, and Islamaphobic." Those groups could easily get to 40-45 million.


Looks like the thing in the White House got 62,979,879 votes. So 40-45 million is quite low.
   235. Joe Bivens, Slack Rumped Rutabaga Head Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:14 PM (#5739332)
The other CA man (the one who threatened to shoot up the Boston Globe newsroom) is likely to see some prison time, too.

JUANABOUT THAT?
   236. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:15 PM (#5739333)
Another reason it's not Pence is that the author is described as a "Senior Administration Official." The real journalists here can back me up (or tell me that I'm crazy), but in political coverage, the descriptors chosen for anonymous speakers (like SAO, or White House Official, or whatever) actually have meaning; they aren't just arbitrarily chosen for variety. And I don't think that the veep would fall in the category of senior administration official.


Yea it's not pence, it's not pence's style, for starters. pence is a wet blanket waiting for god to make him POTUS. He's not gonna rock the boat. whoever wrote it included the "lodestar" crap to throw people off. I'm leaning towards mattis, but who ####### knows.
   237. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:16 PM (#5739334)
Another reason it's not Pence is that the author is described as a "Senior Administration Official." The real journalists here can back me up (or tell me that I'm crazy), but in political coverage, the descriptors chosen for anonymous speakers (like SAO, or White House Official, or whatever) actually have meaning; they aren't just arbitrarily chosen for variety. And I don't think that the veep would fall in the category of senior administration official.


Turns out that each publisher has their own definitions - and the NYT is refusing to speak to its specific criteria.

That said - it should also be noted that another thing we know from reporting on various "leakers" is that they also very much do try to mimic language of other people in order to throw Trump cultists off the trail.

I'm betting lodestar was just that.

My money is on McGahn. He's quitting (or has been fired, tweets vary:-)) in a few weeks anyway. This reads like what I think a Koch lackey would write.

I think I'd be willing to take McGahn against the field at this point... If I can get McGahn AND Coats against the field, I'd give odds.

EDIT: Do cokes still apply to late edits? Conditional coke to David...
   238. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:21 PM (#5739338)
It's not McGahn imo. Senior Counsel doesn't really have much to do with the daily operations of the executive branch. It's gotta be either a senior aide to Kelly or someone like Mattis that has been through a lot of rodeos and sees this thing for what it is. Nobody else in the cabinet (Pompeo perhaps) fits that bill imo.
   239. GregD Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:24 PM (#5739341)
I lower my opinion of every Senator who votes against a clearly-qualified Supreme Court nominee. That was their role for many years - affirm if clearly-qualified - and it was a good one


It may be bad practice but it is old practice. Justice nominee often got negative votes in the 19th century. Of course Washington had one go down to defeat as did James Madison. Significant votes against several of Jackson's nominees, defeat of one of Tyler's and one of Polk's, squeaker for one of Buchanan's and defeat of the other, refusal to take up Johnson's, defeat of one of Grant's, close call for Garfield, defeat of two of Cleveland's and one of Hoover's (with solid bunches of no votes in between), etc.

Who counts as clearly qualified is in the eye of the beholder but it's clear that Senators have been voting against justices they disagree for centuries.
   240. Traderdave Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:29 PM (#5739342)
McGahn is a reasonable guess, as are Nikki Haley and Mnuchin. Recently departed SAO's are probably even more likely. I don't think it's Mattis or Kelly, though. Disloyalty, no matter how patriotic & appropriate, just isn't in a Marine's DNA. Especially not a career Marine with a star.
   241. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:31 PM (#5739346)
it's not Mnuchin, are you kidding me? That dude don't DGAF about anything other than photo ops with his trophy wife. Come on. I guess Yglesias agrees with you tho.
   242. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:31 PM (#5739347)
Funniest thing about Trump's rant in reaction to the anonymous op-ed: In the middle of his rant, he said his "poll numbers are through the roof".

Scariest thing about that rant: He was loudly applauded by his audience after the rant was over, an audience which consisted of uniformed law enforcement officials.
   243. Howie Menckel Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:32 PM (#5739349)
I like the sleuthing on the author. lots of good points made. and thanks GregD for the history.

if a Senator honestly doesn't think a judge is qualified, that's fine. but as I noted, these guys aren't even wearing fig leaves anymore. 'qualified' is not in play anymore.
   244. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:35 PM (#5739352)
I don't give a rat's ass who wrote that anonymous op-ed. It got the job done, even if it wasn't the job that its author intended. And the longer he or she remains anonymous, the better, even if it's only for a few days.
   245. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:37 PM (#5739353)
Is he Merrick Garland? Then he’s not qualified.
   246. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:37 PM (#5739354)
If there is any legal reason that a president can pardon himself then that law has to be changed.

What is your opinion on the question?
It's not a law; it's the constitution. As a normative matter, of course I think that a self-pardon should be a nullity. As a structural matter, it doesn't make sense for the president to have the power to self-pardon. But what the historical record says -- if anything -- is something I'm not an expert on.
   247. BDC Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:40 PM (#5739356)
Perhaps, as GregD’s timeline suggests, consensus confirmation of “qualified” justices was a only a norm during a slice of the 20th century when gentlemen’s-club decorum prevailed in DC.
   248. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:43 PM (#5739357)
The “Trump supporters” in Hillary’s comments are the hooting hordes who waddled their way to his rallies with their red hats and “Build the Wall” chants.

It was basically the only correct thing she said in her campaign: we can’t “reach out” to these psychos, they’re not gonna be convinced by our superior “logic and reason” to suddenly become leftists. Just write them off and focus on increasing turnout among those who otherwise don’t vote—that’s all. It’s what Republicans have spent the last 20+ years doing (none of them give a #### about “compromising” with Democrats, it’s 100% fear-mongered GOTV campaigning.
   249. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:44 PM (#5739358)
if a Senator honestly doesn't think a judge is qualified, that's fine. but as I noted, these guys aren't even wearing fig leaves anymore. 'qualified' is not in play anymore.

"Qualified" can mean different things to different people. Judge nominees with stellar paper credentials are a dime a dozen.

The unspoken assumption of Kavanaugh's supporters is that Kavanaugh is just a normal judge being nominated within a normal confirmation context. Nothing could be further from the truth, and there's no need to fill in the details that have been spelled out ad nauseum.

Bottom line is that barring last minute developments, McConnell's got the votes. There are no principles here regarding Kavanaugh, other than one party wanting to freeze the court's right wing majority for the next 10 to 20 years, and the other party wanting to prevent that. All the rest is just spin.
   250. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:48 PM (#5739360)
Also: Pence wrote it, duh, these guys aren’t that smart.
   251. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:50 PM (#5739361)

It's not McGahn imo. Senior Counsel doesn't really have much to do with the daily operations of the executive branch. It's gotta be either a senior aide to Kelly or someone like Mattis that has been through a lot of rodeos and sees this thing for what it is. Nobody else in the cabinet (Pompeo perhaps) fits that bill imo.
The focus of the author does not seem to be on foreign/military/homeland security matters -- though, yes, he mentions them -- so I don't think Mattis or Kelly or Pompeo are the best guesses. I don't think any of them would be inclined to say,
Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people. At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright.

In addition to his mass-marketing of the notion that the press is the “enemy of the people,” President Trump’s impulses are generally anti-trade and anti-democratic.
That sounds more like a conservative ideologue (I mean that in its best sense) than someone who focuses on national defense or foreign policy.
   252. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:53 PM (#5739362)
I don't give a rat's ass who wrote that anonymous op-ed. It got the job done, even if it wasn't the job that its author intended. And the longer he or she remains anonymous, the better, even if it's only for a few days.


I'm not seeing the big deal about the op-ed, other than it fuels the right's deluded Deep State theories, to the extent I understand them. Quoting from the op-ed:

"The dilemma — which he does not fully grasp — is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.

...

That is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump’s more misguided impulses until he is out of office."


Note that it's not one senior official that is the issue either; if this senior official is to be believed it's "many" of them.

Stepping back, however, the administration serves the presidency not the president. They serve the country not the man. No government official serves the man. The AG, for example (slightly different context), would resign rather than carry out an order to fire the special counsel. A military commander would not nuke Canada just because Trump ordered him to.

The only things noteworthy about the opinions expressed by the senior official here are (1) that they're published, and (2) the senior official disagrees with more of the agenda than the typical senior official would. No senior official agrees 100% with any president, including the senior officials who worked for Obama. We wouldn't WANT complete agreement. That's for a James Bond villain, not a president. If you as a senior official disagree with the president, you voice your disagreement and go along until such point as you cannot in good conscience go along, and then you work to achieve a different result or you resign. In this case the senior official says he does agree with much of the agenda and wants the administration to succeed; clearly he disagrees with more of the agenda than the typical senior administration official would. But, so what? There's always going to be a line.

Folks are just completely ridiculous, in their views about every new item in a news cycle. This is a complete snore.

--

Also:

There is an argument that serving under Trump -- if we accept all the bad things the left and David have to say about him -- is doing the country a great service. The left and the elites on both sides have been fools on this point. They have discouraged working under Trump by making it toxic and reputation-destroying to do so. I can't begin to explain how foolish that is. If you dissuade quality people from working under Trump you create a disaster because then mainly people who are NOT quality are working under him. We WANT people such as this senior administration official in the mix, working under Trump.

Thus in effect you prevent Trump from actually _having_ many Best People. Then you mock him for not having Best People. I just find the commentating class to be so ridiculous.
   253. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:54 PM (#5739364)
I haven't read Slate since college, is this really what they are putting out these days?

Only clicked on it because their clickbait headline was on twitter. I was kinda hopping Bannon called her a "feckless ####\".
   254. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:57 PM (#5739366)
Folks are just completely ridiculous, in their views about every new item in a news cycle. This is a complete snore.


right ray we have a long history here in america of senior admin officials publishing anon op eds about how the POTUS is "amoral" and how his staff actively works to squash his worst instincts. JFC, at lunch break do you start rambling about catcher's throwing lanes and your senior partner just tells you to STFU? Just STFU, you don't know jack #### about American Politics you're a ####### patent lawyer that got interested when your horse won the race.

   255. tshipman Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:57 PM (#5739367)
Given the instability many witnessed, there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president. But no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis. So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until — one way or another — it’s over.



This is 100% misguided and self-justifying. If you think that the President is unfit to serve, the moral action is to resign and say so, with specific examples.

This is an administrative coup d'etat, but it's not being led by the "Deep State" but by Republican flunkies who lack the courage to say so with their own names attached.

I actually agree with Trump that this is treasonous (but not actually treason, because that word is defined in the constitution).
   256. BDC Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:58 PM (#5739368)
But Ray, the op-ed author claims to favor many Trump-admin policies, presumably conservative ones. If anything he’s a deep-stater of the right.
   257. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 05, 2018 at 08:58 PM (#5739371)
Who counts as clearly qualified is in the eye of the beholder but it's clear that Senators have been voting against justices they disagree for centuries.

That's only sporadically true, at best. Most Supreme Court Justices have been confirmed by large majorities, including recent appointees such as Sandra Day O'Connor (99-0), Antonin Scalia (98-0), Anthony Kennedy (97-0), David Souter (90-9), Ruth Bader Ginsburg (96-3), and Stephen Breyer (87-9). There were occasional controversial nominations, but, in general, well-qualified, experienced appellate judges were confirmed without more than a handful of dissenting votes. That changed with John Roberts nomination, and even more so with Samuel Alito, when Democrats attempted to filibuster his nomination and ended up voting overwhelmingly against him. Republican Senators who voted for Ginsburg & Breyer in overwhelming numbers were well aware of their liberal backgrounds but voted for them based on qualifications. However, the confirmation process can't be a gauntlet for nominees of GOP Presidents and a walk in the park for those nominated by Democratic Presidents, so as would be expected, Republican Senators mostly followed the lead of their Democratic colleagues when it came time to consider Sotomayor & Kagan.
   258. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:00 PM (#5739374)
FFS.... at what point can just one of you dumb #### Trumpkins quit pretending like he’s an inamimate object?

Presidential elections are more than a matter of the nation picking the proper damn hood ornament for four years and replacing it ONLY if it’s rear ends another car.

We get it - you dumb ##### love that the nation picked a really weird hood ornaments that is just an upturned middle finger which also whistles la cucaracha while moves.
   259. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:00 PM (#5739375)
The sheer amusement level of today's events can scarcely be exaggerated. How can anyone not guffaw at the scene this latest article describes?

‘The sleeper cells have awoken’: Trump and aides shaken by ‘resistance’ op-ed
President Trump and his aides reacted with indignation Wednesday to an unsigned opinion column from a senior official blasting the president’s “amorality” and launched a frantic hunt for the author, who claims to be part of a secret “resistance” inside the government protecting the nation from its commander in chief. ...

Trump reacted to the column with “volcanic” anger and was “absolutely livid” over what he considered a treasonous act of disloyalty, and told confidants he suspects the official works on national security issues or in the Justice Department, according to two people familiar with his private discussions. ...

The column, which published midafternoon Wednesday, sent tremors through the West Wing and launched a frantic guessing game. Startled aides canceled meetings and huddled behind closed doors to strategize a response. Aides were analyzing language patterns to try to discern author’s identity, or at a minimum the part of the administration where the author works.

“The problem for the president is it could be so many people,” said one administration official, who like many others interviewed for this story spoke on the condition of anonymity to be candid. “You can’t rule it down to one person. Everyone is trying, but it’s impossible.” ...

“It’s like the horror movies when everyone realizes the call is coming from inside the house,” said one former White House official in close contact with former co-workers. ...

The president went on to brag about his popularity, although nearly all public polls show that more Americans disapprove of his job performance than approve of it. “Our poll numbers are great, and guess what? Nobody’s going to come even close to beating me in 2020,” Trump said, as the sheriffs assembled behind him burst into applause.

The president later tweeted a single word alleging a possible crime: “TREASON?” ...

[Historian Douglas] Brinkley said the most analogous example of disloyalty and advisers disregarding the president’s wishes was in Richard Nixon’s final year as president. He explained that Nixon would “bark crazy orders” to aides that they intentionally disregarded.

“You’d have to go back to Hans Christian Andersen, ‘The Emperor Has No Clothes,’ to see this syndrome where the president’s reality happens to be so different from his own senior advisers,” Brinkley said.

   260. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:05 PM (#5739382)
We get it - you dumb ##### love that the nation picked a really weird hood ornaments that is just an upturned middle finger which also whistles la cucaracha while moves.


a common refrain tonight on shithead twitter is that "entertainers and athletes need to keep the #### out of politics". Hopefully nobody reminded them of Gerald Ford and Ronnie.
   261. Random Transaction Generator Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:05 PM (#5739383)
Folks are just completely ridiculous, in their views about every new item in a news cycle. This is a complete snore.


Sure, Ray.

An anonymous op-ed from a senior official in the government paints the existing President of the United States as someone who has to be handled, misled, and tricked in order to protect the country from his foolishness.

Yeah, that's perfectly normal.

Or you are saying that because you are the definition of an internet troll. That's probably the stronger case to be made at this point.
   262. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:08 PM (#5739386)
There is an argument that serving under Trump -- if we accept all the bad things the left and David have to say about him -- is doing the country a great service. The left and the elites on both sides have been fools on this point. They have discouraged working under Trump by making it toxic and reputation-destroying to do so. I can't begin to explain how foolish that is. If you dissuade quality people from working under Trump you create a disaster because then mainly people who are NOT quality are working under him. We WANT people such as this senior administration official in the mix, working under Trump.

There have been plenty of fine and well-qualified people who were glad to work for every previous president. Almost by definition, anyone who would choose to work for Donald Trump and further his policy goals would fall into neither of those categories. Just go down the roll call of his cabinet and you've got the proof of that right there in front of you.

The only thing at this point that could redeem Trump's appointees as a group would be mass resignations and speaking out. But failing that, sabotage is the least worst option.
   263. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:11 PM (#5739388)
An anonymous op-ed from a senior official in the government paints the existing President of the United States as someone who has to be handled, misled, and tricked in order to protect the country from his foolishness.

Yeah, that's perfectly normal.


Describes pretty much every CEO at a major corporation. The people under them always think they're some combination of stupid or ill-informed, make bad decisions, need to have things hidden from them.

   264. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:13 PM (#5739391)
Take your head out your ass Ray. It’s not a good look.

   265. Hot Wheeling American, MS-13 Enthusiast Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:14 PM (#5739394)
Folks are just completely ridiculous, in their views about every new item in a news cycle. This is a complete snore.

Are you talking at your beloved BBTF colleagues or...Alpha POTUS?
The Failing New York Times!

TREASON?

Does the so-called “Senior Administration Official” really exist, or is it just the Failing New York Times with another phony source? If the GUTLESS anonymous person does indeed exist, the Times must, for National Security purposes, turn him/her over to government at once!
   266. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:16 PM (#5739397)
To add a bit beyond just the roll call votes, by my count from the link in #257, 67 Supreme Court Justices were confirmed on a voice vote, a practice that only ended after Abe Fortas in 1965.
   267. tshipman Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:17 PM (#5739398)
David Frum in the Atlantic:

Impeachment is a constitutional mechanism. The Twenty-Fifth Amendment is a constitutional mechanism. Mass resignations followed by voluntary testimony to congressional committees are a constitutional mechanism. Overt defiance of presidential authority by the president’s own appointees—now that’s a constitutional crisis.

If the president’s closest advisers believe that he is morally and intellectually unfit for his high office, they have a duty to do their utmost to remove him from it, by the lawful means at hand. That duty may be risky to their careers in government or afterward. But on their first day at work, they swore an oath to defend the Constitution—and there were no “riskiness” exemptions in the text of that oath.



Agree 100%.
   268. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:23 PM (#5739403)
Impeachment is a constitutional mechanism. The Twenty-Fifth Amendment is a constitutional mechanism. Mass resignations followed by voluntary testimony to congressional committees are a constitutional mechanism. Overt defiance of presidential authority by the president’s own appointees—now that’s a constitutional crisis.

If the president’s closest advisers believe that he is morally and intellectually unfit for his high office, they have a duty to do their utmost to remove him from it, by the lawful means at hand. That duty may be risky to their careers in government or afterward. But on their first day at work, they swore an oath to defend the Constitution—and there were no “riskiness” exemptions in the text of that oath.

Agree 100%.

I agree that mass resignations followed by voluntary testimony to congressional committees** would be the best course, and certainly a more honorable one than writing anonymous op-eds, but jeez, let them have a bit of sadistic fun first.

** Of course that's based on the dubious assumption that any Republican committee chairman would even consider inviting them.
   269. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:26 PM (#5739404)
252 Ray CTL

I'm not seeing the big deal about the op-ed. (...)Folks are just completely ridiculous, in their views about every new item in a news cycle. This is a complete snore.

Agree 100%. It reminds me of the time that Al Gore wrote an anonymous op/ed in the Post about how Bill Clinton was a danger to America, that he was an amoral and narcissistic menace who'd be raping a different intern every day if it weren't for the many brave White House staffers who were pulling him off teenage girls every other day.

To demonstrate how much of a snore this is: OTPers, raise your hand if you even remember that article?

Yeah. Thought so. This NYT nothingburger will be forgotten by the weekend.
   270. tshipman Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:29 PM (#5739408)
I agree that mass resignations followed by voluntary testimony to congressional committees** would be the best course, and certainly a more honorable one than writing anonymous op-eds, but jeez, let them have a bit of sadistic fun first.


I don't give a #### about random Republican flunky's future career prospects. Random Republican Flunky swore an oath to the constitution, and if this President is as dangerous as they say, they have an obligation to take actions that remedy that situation constitutionally.

Again, we are literally talking about suborning the will of the people and substituting your own judgment for the law you swore to uphold. And writing this op-ed is making it worse. You're now putting a dangerous and reckless man in a corner and forcing him to prove that he's really calling the shots.

The actions of random Republican flunky are disgraceful.
   271. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:30 PM (#5739409)
Agree 100%. It reminds me of the time that Al Gore wrote an anonymous op/ed in the Post


Gore was not a "senior administration official." He was the VP, which is of a different class. (The op-ed even refers to "many" senior administration officials. There's only one VP.) If it were Pence that would be news, but instead it's just some run of the mill senior official, who by his own account is one of "many."
   272. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:46 PM (#5739420)
Lol this ####### guy.
   273. This is going to be state of the art wall Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:50 PM (#5739425)
   274. tshipman Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:51 PM (#5739427)
Matthew Yglesias

Verified account

@mattyglesias
4h4 hours ago
More
Working for the occupying authority while telling yourself that your presence does more good than harm because you curb its worst excesses is not resistance it’s collaboration.
   275. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:52 PM (#5739428)
If the president’s closest advisers believe that he is morally and intellectually unfit for his high office, they have a duty to do their utmost to remove him from it,


Frum fundamentally misunderstands the 25th Amendment. While there's an argument that it applies to mental incapacity, that doesn't cover "morally and intellectually unfit."

That's even setting aside that the mechanism of application of the 25th amendment is almost certain to fail as far as removing Trump goes.

It also would set a horrible precedent, allowing partisans to remove a president for, well, pretty much any reason. "Morally and intellectually unfit" goes a long way.
   276. Howie Menckel Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:58 PM (#5739438)
“It’s like the horror movies when everyone realizes the call is coming from inside the house,” said one former White House official in close contact with former co-workers. ...

that's well played
   277. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: September 05, 2018 at 09:58 PM (#5739439)
You cannot replace the hood ornament just because it’s ugly and you bought while high on pcp!!!!
   278. Hot Wheeling American, MS-13 Enthusiast Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:01 PM (#5739441)
allowing partisans to remove a president

You're a lawyer who does thinking real good?
   279. Srul Itza Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:02 PM (#5739442)
What is "CREDO mobile"?



The Vatican Bank in Godfather III?

No?
   280. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:06 PM (#5739447)
Hilarious, and typically hypocritical, that Ray insists on a strictly literal interpretation of "half", when nothing Trump says is to be taken literally or seriously.

Clearly, by Ray's logic, if HRC had said "some" rather than "half" he would have fully agreed with her remarks.
   281. Srul Itza Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:10 PM (#5739451)
what led the GOP to Trump


Nothing much. Trump is the id of the GOP. He says out loud the things they all are thinking. This clicked with large numbers of people who found a bull horn more arousing than a dog whistle.

Now, there is no coming back for the Trumpiblican Party. They are forever tied to the Trump Base of the Basest in the Land.
   282. Howie Menckel Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:15 PM (#5739454)
(no, this is not legal in the US - yet. UK and Ireland likely have action going already, though. they love to bet on American politics/everything)

Gentlemen, place your bets
Vice President Mike Pence – and “the field” – lead offshore bookmaking picks as the White House mole behind the anonymous bombshell New York Times op-ed blasting President Trump.

Pence was listed at 2-to-3 odds on the site MyBookie as the fifth column official who claims to be working behind the scenes to stop some of Trump’s policies that they find wrongheaded.

The biggest favorite, at 1-3 odds, is “the field,” someone not listed among the 18 administration officials listed by the Costa Rica-based operation.

The other 17 named potential moles, listed by MyBookie, are: Education Secretary Betsy Devos (2-to-1), Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (4-to-1), Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin (4-to-1), chief of staff John F. Kelly (4-to-1), Defense Secretary Jim Mattis (5-to-1), Attorney General Jeff Sessions (5-to-1), Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke (6-to-1), Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue (6-to-1), Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross (7-to-1) Labor Secretary Alex Acosta (7-to-1), HHS Secretary Alex Azar (8-to-1), HUD Secretary Ben Carson (8-to-1), VA Secretary Robert Wilkie (8-to-1), Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen (10-to-1), Ivanka Trump (12-to-1) and Jared Kushner (12-to-1)."

.............

[am surprised that Javanka are not an "entry," as they used to call it in horse racing. if you bet either, you also get the other.]
   283. Greg K Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:16 PM (#5739456)
In this case the senior official says he does agree with much of the agenda and wants the administration to succeed; clearly he disagrees with more of the agenda than the typical senior administration official would. But, so what? There's always going to be a line.

To me this is the remarkable thing. The Op-Ed doesn't seem like it's expressing a disagreement on policy so much as opposition to Donald Trump.

Keith Bogue (CBC's Washington correspondent) just commented that this type of thing (a unelected official openly undermining the elected head of state in the name of protecting democracy) is right out of the playbook for laying the groundwork for a coup. Which isn't to say that is what's coming, but I think it's a crisis for US politics that something like this would happen.

That an administration official would publicly admit that there is an active effort to undermine the President. That seems like a big deal.

EDIT: Just to be clear, that such an effort is underway is bad enough, but that someone involved feels the need to broadcast that it's happening seems like a bad sign.
   284. BrianBrianson Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:24 PM (#5739457)
Working for the occupying authority while telling yourself that your presence does more good than harm because you curb its worst excesses is not resistance it’s collaboration.


Yeah, I remember everyone walking out of Schlinder's List saying "God, I'm glad that movie exposed what a Nazi #### that guy was".
   285. Tom T Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:26 PM (#5739458)
Ivy Tech Kokomo


Yeah, you guys all have fun trying to sleuth who wrote that Op-Ed. I'm more interested in figuring out which of you even knows there exists an Ivy Tech campus in Kokomo. I mean, I have lived 45 mins from there for most of my life and I had to look this up, because...well...who the heck WANTS to know anything about Kokomo???
   286. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:33 PM (#5739463)
I agree that mass resignations followed by voluntary testimony to congressional committees** would be the best course, and certainly a more honorable one than writing anonymous op-eds, but jeez, let them have a bit of sadistic fun first.

I don't give a #### about random Republican flunky's future career prospects.


Neither do I.

Random Republican Flunky swore an oath to the constitution, and if this President is as dangerous as they say, they have an obligation to take actions that remedy that situation constitutionally.

Again, we are literally talking about suborning the will of the people and substituting your own judgment for the law you swore to uphold. And writing this op-ed is making it worse. You're now putting a dangerous and reckless man in a corner and forcing him to prove that he's really calling the shots.

The actions of random Republican flunky are disgraceful.


I may be the only person here with this opinion, but what I think we're seeing now is the gradual lancing of a a boil, and not an imminent Constitutional crisis.

But given congressional realities and the proven spinelessness of every congressional Republican, the first serious attack on that boil can't take place for two months. And for the time being it's probably good to have a few relatively sane people in place to prevent Trump from launching a war.

Christ, with Trump's proclivity for personal loyalty uber alles,** he'd probably replace rRf with Eric Trump, and go downhill from there. It's doubtful at this point that Trump really trusts anyone outside of his immediate family.

So while on one level I consider that rRf to be as disgraceful as you do, the alternative would likely be replacing the "adults in the room" with even more Deplorables than we have surrounding Trump already. And I'm afraid that for now that's the best we can hope for, until the new Congress takes over, or Mueller forces the issue.

** See the Comey meeting, etc., etc.
   287. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:34 PM (#5739464)
You get there fast and then you take it slow.
   288. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:35 PM (#5739466)
272/
Gore was not a "senior administration official." He was the VP, which is of a different class. (The op-ed even refers to "many" senior administration officials. There's only one VP.)

True. But if they said the author was “the Vice President in the Trump Administration” I think that would have been too obvious, don’t you?
   289. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:39 PM (#5739470)
True. But if they said the author was “the Vice President in the Trump Administration” I think that would have been too obvious, don’t you?


Yes, and?
   290. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:42 PM (#5739474)
Bernie Sanders plans to introduce legislation next month to give large employers like Amazon and Walmart the choice to either pay workers a higher wage or to pay taxes equal to the total cost of food stamps, public housing, Medicaid and other federal assistance programs their workers use.

The proposal aims to raise taxes from large corporations equal to the amount that the company’s low-wage employees use in federal benefit programs each year. If an Amazon employee uses $100 in food stamps, Amazon would be taxed $100.

Guys. Guys. Guys.

He introduced it today. And it's called. The:

Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies Act.
   291. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:42 PM (#5739475)
289--Well the whole point is that the author wanted to be anonymous.

It's like the "Lisa S. No wait, that's too obvious. L Simpson" thing.

Think about it.
   292. Howie Menckel Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:46 PM (#5739481)
who the heck WANTS to know anything about Kokomo???

I once had to stay at the Ramada there on a 1990s Indy 500 weekend (long story).

I was intrigued by the lesson my colleague gave me on the trip down to Indy.
first off, you can pick any road, because they all go due south.

also, there were patches of blacktop not in front of the houses, but a bit ahead of them.
reason being that the prevailing wind would blow the dusty road dirt from the oncoming car right into the house. so they figured out how far ahead of the house they needed to put the blacktop to avoid this issue.

while it LOOKED funny, I found it ingenious.

...............

"Bernie Sanders plans to introduce legislation next month to give large employers like Amazon and Walmart the choice to either pay workers a higher wage or to pay taxes equal to the total cost of food stamps, public housing, Medicaid and other federal assistance programs their workers use.

The proposal aims to raise taxes from large corporations equal to the amount that the company’s low-wage employees use in federal benefit programs each year. If an Amazon employee uses $100 in food stamps, Amazon would be taxed $100."

I can't speak to the workability of it, but would classic conservatism object to this? I guess they don't like taxes - but they don't like social spending, either. or would this make some heads explode, like a battle between a humidifier and a dehumidifier (Letterman did that once, back when he was funny).
   293. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:47 PM (#5739482)
289--Well the whole point is that the author wanted to be anonymous.

It's like the "Lisa S. No wait, that's too obvious. L Simpson" thing.

Thing about it.


I mean, we can assume it's whoever we want and likely never be proven wrong. But Pence doesn't fit the category or the structure of the op-ed which describes "many" people at this level.
   294. Srul Itza Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:47 PM (#5739483)
publicly shamed for working at Trader Joe’s.



Trader Joe's is great. No shame for anyone working there.

It is required omiyage for anyone coming back from a Cali trip.

They just won't open one up out here.
   295. tshipman Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:51 PM (#5739488)
Yeah, I remember everyone walking out of Schlinder's List saying "God, I'm glad that movie exposed what a Nazi #### that guy was".


Well guys, we've solved who the leaker is. It's someone who posts on BBTF as "BrianBrianson".
   296. SteveF Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:58 PM (#5739490)
They just won't open one up out here.

At least you get to eat pineapple that's actually ripe.
   297. Srul Itza Posted: September 05, 2018 at 10:58 PM (#5739491)
Most telling/funniest line from the article quoted in 259:

“The problem for the president is it could be so many people"


Given the way this White House has leaked like a sieve from day one, the real issue is, who COULDN'T IT BE?


   298. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 05, 2018 at 11:00 PM (#5739494)
Given the way this White House has leaked like a sieve from day one, the real issue is, who COULDN'T IT BE?


Pence.
   299. greenback slays lewks Posted: September 05, 2018 at 11:26 PM (#5739504)
I may be the only person here with this opinion, but what I think we're seeing now is the gradual lancing of a a boil, and not an imminent Constitutional crisis.

But given congressional realities and the proven spinelessness of every congressional Republican, the first serious attack on that boil can't take place for two months. And for the time being it's probably good to have a few relatively sane people in place to prevent Trump from launching a war.

I don't see this at all. The bigger crisis here is that the GOP is easily the more powerful political party, and it's power comes from catering to angry white baby boomers. What was LBJ's (apparently fake) line about the Civil Rights Act dooming the D's in the south? That's the same thing R's are facing if they attempt to undermine Trump openly, and they know it. And unlike the CRA, the current Respectable R's are not even sure that openly challenging Trump will accomplish anything, because there are plenty of clowns like Steve Bannon and Roy Moore willing (and likely able) to take their places.
   300. Count Vorror Rairol Mencoon (CoB) Posted: September 06, 2018 at 01:51 AM (#5739522)
flip
Page 3 of 15 pages  < 1 2 3 4 5 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
robneyer
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 2018 2018 Nov 5 - The Trump dilemma hits the Boston Red Sox amid a wave of White House boycotts in sports
(2335 - 12:19am, Nov 13)
Last: Walks Clog Up the Bases

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(2135 - 11:51pm, Nov 12)
Last: there isn't anything to do in buffalo but 57i66135

Hall of MeritMock 2018 Today’s Game Hall of Fame Ballot
(29 - 11:21pm, Nov 12)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

NewsblogNo MLB rule changes likely until eve of spring training
(28 - 11:16pm, Nov 12)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogJoe Mauer Retires After 15 Seasons
(58 - 10:40pm, Nov 12)
Last: Sweatpants

NewsblogOT - November* 2018 College Football thread
(164 - 10:27pm, Nov 12)
Last: AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (November 2018)
(106 - 9:32pm, Nov 12)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogRed Sox: Bill James “is not an employee nor does he speak for the club”
(180 - 8:47pm, Nov 12)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogDodgers release Utley to facilitate retirement
(42 - 8:27pm, Nov 12)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogReport: Nationals Ownership Rejected Bryce Harper Trade to Astros
(21 - 8:06pm, Nov 12)
Last: Adam Starblind

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (2018-19 season begins!)
(1189 - 7:26pm, Nov 12)
Last: Mefisto

NewsblogIt's not just the worst teams not spending money in baseball free agency — it's the richest, too
(41 - 7:02pm, Nov 12)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogOT Gaming: October 2015
(914 - 3:18pm, Nov 12)
Last: Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought

NewsblogMLB owners expected to unanimously approve extension for Rob Manfred next week, report says
(14 - 2:44pm, Nov 12)
Last: shoewizard

Gonfalon CubsNow what?
(216 - 2:28pm, Nov 12)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

Page rendered in 0.7504 seconds
46 querie(s) executed