192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
blatham
 
  4  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 05:34 pm
@snood,
Quote:
Trump just tweeted that John Kelly was in, and Priebus was out
No surprise re Priebus. But get a load of Trump's statement today
Quote:
“One of our real stars. Truly, one of our stars. John Kelly is one of our great stars.”

This man has not taken his brain in for regular scheduled maintenance.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -2  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 05:41 pm
@layman,
You don't get to be a General in the U.S. military without repeatedly demonstrating that you're capable of decisive action, good judgment, giving and enforcing orders, detecting traitors and cowards, and deftly handling potentially unruly mobs (as soldiers can be).

Kelly won't be playin, and he aint about "politics."
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -3  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 06:02 pm
@oralloy,
This country got by just fine for well over 100 years without the 17th, eh?:

Quote:
Passed by Congress May 13, 1912, and ratified April 8, 1913, the 17th amendment modified Article I, section 3, of the Constitution by allowing voters to cast direct votes for U.S. Senators. Prior to its passage, Senators were chosen by state legislatures.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  6  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 06:09 pm
Another record set!
Quote:
Dave Weigel‏Verified account @daveweigel 3h3 hours ago
Reince Priebus was the shortest-serving White House chief of staff in American history, edging out Ken Duberstein.
Congrats, Trump and team!
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -2  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 06:16 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
Well we'll just have to agree to disagree. Casting aspersions on any aspect of the service of a man who endured any time in the Hanoi Hilton is to me "vicious."

OK, fair enough.

I wonder if you agree with the head of the VFW (a Democrat) who claimed (without specifying how) that Trump "attacked" a gold star family?

The MSN ran with that one, bigtime, and now it's an established "fact" in Trumpian lore.

I never did see anything he said that amounted to an "attack," but, then again, cheese-eaters "see" a lot of **** that I never do.

blatham
 
  5  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 06:29 pm
A very good piece on press tactics employed by Wall Street/finance persons and entities (the world Scaramucci comes from).
Quote:
Scaramucci is already showing signs that he won’t worry too much about whether stories are true before he attacks them. Less than a week after his kissy debut at the White House lectern, he blamed the press for capitalizing on “leaks” that were in fact on-the-record quotes he himself had made. Then he demanded an FBI investigation over how Politico obtained his financial disclosure form — which is public information . On Thursday night, he tweeted that he’d “made a mistake in trusting a reporter,” Ryan Lizza of the New Yorker, who had quoted his on-the-record comments about White House colleagues. “It won’t happen again.”

So forget the pleasant tone and the cheerful smiles that Scaramucci brought at first. The White House press corps now faces a much more aggressive, much more personal fight than the Beltway is used to. It’s not crazy to believe that a few more journalists may lose something beyond their access to the White House — they may lose their beats or even their jobs.
WP Re the bolded part, at one point in that interview, Scaramucci stipulated that what he was about to say was "off the record" (and Lizza obliged) which means that everything else not so stipulated was available for Lizza to quote.

So let's just assume this is all going to get worse.
oralloy
 
  -4  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 06:35 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Well we'll just have to agree to disagree. Casting aspersions on any aspect of the service of a man who endured any time in the Hanoi Hilton is to me "vicious."

I attack McCain's service worse than Trump ever did.

I'll happily agree to the accusation that I am vicious in doing so.

But in my defense I'll assert that my viciousness is entirely justified. McCain is appalling and deserves to be viciously attacked.
blatham
 
  5  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 06:36 pm
An absolutely justified rant from Paul Waldman. Here's the first three graphs but do read it all
Quote:
This has been quite a week in Washington, a week full of terror, intrigue, suspense, backstabbing and outright chaos. While we might not have been able to predict the particular contours of the catastrophe that complete GOP rule has been, we should have known it would turn out something like this.

Guess what, America: This is what you get when you elect Republicans.

It goes much further than their repugnant and disastrous effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act, but all the contemporary GOP’s pathologies could be seen there: their outright malice toward ordinary people, their indifference to the suffering of their fellow citizens, their blazing incompetence, their contempt for democratic norms, their shameless hypocrisy, their gleeful ignorance about policy, their utter dishonesty and bad faith, their pure cynicism, and their complete inability to perform anything that resembles governing. It was the perfect Republican spectacle...
WP
oralloy
 
  -3  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 06:37 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:
I send this one to the judges panel...

ATTENTION, A2K JUDGES!

Finn will not answer the question "What has Trump gotten done that you wanted him to do?"

Is it:
A) because such a list would be exhaustive, and Finn doesn't want to bore us with a tedious screed?
B)because the question is below someone of such elevated perception and wisdom as Finn, and he can't be bothered?
C)because he knows like everyone else knows, that Trump hasn't accomplished jack squat, and he knows his list would look ridiculous?

Use the button panel placed under your seat before the show, to vote.

It's a variation of "B".

Snood never offers serious discussion and only ever engages in childish name-calling. Little point in responding to him.
layman
 
  -1  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 06:47 pm
@oralloy,
Poor Snooty, eh? He's fishing for agreement with his absurd claims, but still can't seem to get it, even from cheese-eaters.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  7  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 06:53 pm
@blatham,
Quote:
their outright malice toward ordinary people, their indifference to the suffering of their fellow citizens, their blazing incompetence, their contempt for democratic norms, their shameless hypocrisy, their gleeful ignorance about policy, their utter dishonesty and bad faith, their pure cynicism, and their complete inability to perform anything that resembles governing.


Yes!
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 06:53 pm
Interesting tweet
Quote:
ChuckGrassley‏Verified account @ChuckGrassley 5h5 hours ago
@realDonaldTrump I'm always happy to go to WhiteHouse to discuss w u Tell Scaramucci not to use that filthy language around me he toldmedia
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  4  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 06:54 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

A very good piece on press tactics employed by Wall Street/finance persons and entities (the world Scaramucci comes from).
Quote:
Scaramucci is already showing signs that he won’t worry too much about whether stories are true before he attacks them. Less than a week after his kissy debut at the White House lectern, he blamed the press for capitalizing on “leaks” that were in fact on-the-record quotes he himself had made. Then he demanded an FBI investigation over how Politico obtained his financial disclosure form — which is public information . On Thursday night, he tweeted that he’d “made a mistake in trusting a reporter,” Ryan Lizza of the New Yorker, who had quoted his on-the-record comments about White House colleagues. “It won’t happen again.”

So forget the pleasant tone and the cheerful smiles that Scaramucci brought at first. The White House press corps now faces a much more aggressive, much more personal fight than the Beltway is used to. It’s not crazy to believe that a few more journalists may lose something beyond their access to the White House — they may lose their beats or even their jobs.
WP Re the bolded part, at one point in that interview, Scaramucci stipulated that what he was about to say was "off the record" (and Lizza obliged) which means that everything else not so stipulated was available for Lizza to quote.

So let's just assume this is all going to get worse.


It seems apparent to me: Mooch is the leaker.

Then he points his finger at someone else.

Then he gets the job as top anti-leak enforcer.

Then he leaks some more. It's foul-smelling leakage.
layman
 
  -4  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 07:01 pm
The Atlantic wrote:
Trump Tests the F-Bomb Policy at The New York Times

The New York Times likes to think of itself as a family newspaper. It is also the self-described paper of record. It may not be either, but it’s definitely not both all the time.

Take, for example, the moment when the Times had to choose whether to quote the new White House communications director in a particularly colorful tirade against his colleagues.

Many publications try to avoid gratuitous foul language, even in quotes, unless the meaning of the thing being conveyed depends on it. Plenty of people curse in casual conversation; rarely is it actually meaningful.

The Times published Scaramucci’s profanity only after top editors, including the executive editor Dean Baquet, “discussed whether it was proper,” Clifford Levy wrote. “We concluded that it was newsworthy that a top Trump aide used such language."

There was the Access Hollywood tape last fall, which featured Trump bragging about being able to grab women without their consent.The Times repeatedly printed the vulgar terms h e used. It also published an offensive term—uh, rhymes with “blunt”—that a Trump adviser had used to describe Hillary Clinton, only to remove the word from an op-ed after the fact with a brief editor’s note flagging the change.

“I made a mistake in trusting in a reporter,” Scaramucci tweeted on Thursday night. “It won’t happen again.”


https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/07/a-brief-history-of-filthy-language-in-the-new-york-times/535197/

*Special* rules apply at the NYT when they think they see an opportunity to embarrass Trump or those around him, eh? Even the rules pertaining to agreements to speak "off the record" get violated
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -3  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 07:39 pm
Priebus claims he resigned.

Quote:
Returning from a speech on Long Island—both Scaramucci and Priebus had flown on Air Force One with him—Trump told reporters at Andrews Air Force Base, “Reince is a good man. John Kelly will do a fantastic job. General Kelly has been a star, done an incredible job thus far, respected by everybody. He’s a great, great American. Reince is a good man.”

Priebus then got into a waiting car and departed, separate from the president’s motorcade. He later told The Wall Street Journal’s Michael Bender that he had resigned on Thursday.

The bland Wisconsinite was always a somewhat strange fit for the job. Though he’d proven himself a fairly able administrator at the RNC, he had none of the characteristics common to successful chiefs of staff: experience in government and especially the executive branch, a hard-headed ability to get his way, and an unshakeable bond with the president.

In fact, Priebus had been wary of Trump’s candidacy all along, and when a tape was released in which Trump bragged about sexually assaulting women, Priebus urged him to drop out of the race—a slight Trump reportedly never forgot.

Priebus was also held responsible for failing to stop leaks, although given that he was a frequent target, he was clearly in no position to do that.

The departures of Spicer, who resigned over Scaramucci’s appointment, and Priebus leave the GOP establishment almost entirely cleaned out of the White House.


https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/priebus-kelly/535338/

**** the "GOP establishment," eh? So long, suckaz.
layman
 
  -2  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 09:00 pm
A cheese-eater's argument against deporting MS-13 gang members

Quote:
In El Salvador, political leaders have held emergency meetings to discuss what they will do if the Trump administration follows through with its promise of mass deportations. “Probably we won’t feel the symptoms today or tomorrow or the next week,” San Salvador Mayor Nayib Bukele told The Washington Post in May. “But probably in six months or a year we’ll be feeling the symptoms … ”

If that does happen, it could very well destabilize the country more and lead to increased migration to the United States. Trump, then, will have undermined his own strategy.


https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/07/trump-ms-13/535263/

Hmmm, how do you break that kinda **** down?

What "symptoms" will cause this increase in MS-13 members in the U.S.? Don't even ask. He said "symptoms" and that's all that need be said. When you have "symptoms" that means something is wrong, see?

These "symptoms" could "very well destabilize" OTHER countries if we send the trash they have dumped on us back to them, so we should let them destabilize the U.S. instead? That seems to be the idea here.

Add in the ever-popular (among cheese-eaters) argument that if you try to do anything to protect yourself from terrorists and criminals, that will only make them mad and things will get much worse, and you're in cheese-eater logic 101.

Ya can't make this **** up.
emmett grogan
 
  4  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 10:00 pm
@layman,
Here's one from a right wing paper:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/anthony-scaramuccis-wife-files-for-divorce-over-trump-support-report/article/2630052

Here's one from a conservative paper:

http://www.businessinsider.com/anthony-scaramucci-deidre-ball-divorce-2017-7

From one of his NYC papers:

http://pagesix.com/2017/07/28/anthony-scaramuccis-wife-files-for-divorce/?_ga=2.135172536.841005650.1501300733-1035757416.1501300733

Random and unsourced? Not hardly.

emmett grogan
 
  3  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 10:03 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
Enforcing the Constitution is the job of the federal courts in our system of checks and balances.


SCOTUS has no "enforcement" powers whatsoever. That lies with the executive branch.
layman
 
  -1  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 10:23 pm
@emmett grogan,
Quote:
Random and unsourced? Not hardly.

Say what, Emmet?

One paper after another reporting the exact same thing another paper reported (and citing that paper as their source) hardly demonstrates a wide variety of "sources" or says anything at all about the reliability of that source. What is your argument here, exactly?
layman
 
  -2  
Fri 28 Jul, 2017 10:31 pm
@layman,
I'm not even saying the source is unreliable, I was just noting that the rag didn't even try to suggest that it was. You seem to have missed the point. This rings true enough:

Quote:
“Deidre has left him and has filed for divorce. She liked the nice Wall Street life and their home on Long Island, not the insane world of D.C. The source said, “Deidre is not a fan of Trump, and she hasn’t exactly been on board and supportive of Anthony and his push to get back into the White House.” “I don’t know who Deidre thought she was marrying but anyone who knows Anthony knows he’s an ambitious man.”


By the way, it is my understanding that reporters are taught to be extremely skeptical when reporting "facts" presented by one side or another in connection with a divorce proceeding. Reporters are often "used" to accomplish ulterior ends in such cases (among others).

Trump himself is reputed to have "informed" his ex-wife of his intention to divorce her by first reporting to the NYT, who put the story on it's front page, and then personally leaving a copy of it on her doorstep as soon as it was printed.

Who is this "source," and what is their relationship to the Scaramuccis? Is it one on their attorneys? Her lover? A neighbor, who hardly knows them? They won't say.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.42 seconds on 05/20/2024 at 01:33:46