192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 04:38 am
@roger,
Quote:
I still don't believe anyone is paying to get their message out to such a small group of people that aren't going to be influenced by anything they don't already agree with.

Yeah. It's pretty much a preposterous notion. As I've noted before, over the years, I've been accused of this a dozen times.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 04:43 am
NYT headline today
Quote:
Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus to End Its 146-Year Run


Well, how are they expected to compete with Trump?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 04:54 am
Pumping chicken **** into the Trump swamp
Quote:
A legal fight to clean up tons of chicken manure fouling the waters of Oklahoma’s bucolic northeastern corner — much of it from neighboring Arkansas — was in full swing six years ago when the conservative lawyer Scott Pruitt took office as Oklahoma’s attorney general.

His response: Put on the brakes.

Rather than push for a federal judge to punish the companies by extracting perhaps tens of millions of dollars in damages, Oklahoma’s new chief law enforcement officer quietly negotiated a deal to simply study the problem further.

The move came after he had taken tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from executives and lawyers for the poultry industry...
NYT
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 05:02 am
Good explanatory piece on the investigation of Comey from Michael R. Bromwich who served as Justice Department inspector general from 1994 to 1999. WP
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 05:29 am
Quote:
The head of Austria's far-right Freedom Party called on Saturday for a total ban on “fascistic Islam.”

Heinz Christian Strache told an audience in Salzburg that he wanted to see a ban of Muslim symbols, something like the Austrian law that bans Nazi symbols. And he warned that Islam posed an existential threat to Europe. “Let us put an end to this policy of Islamization,” he said. “Otherwise we Austrians, we Europeans will come to an abrupt end.”
WP
Fine. Just so long they follow up with some solution to that Jew problem.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 06:07 am
Quote:
Professor Angelia Wilson, from the University of Manchester, believes the trail of scandals in the President-elect’s wake has become an “embarrassment” to the Republican party, leaving him vulnerable to impeachment by members of the party seeking reelection to the House.

“I think it is highly likely that he will be impeached in the first 12 to 18 months,” she told The Independent.

"Whether it will be about the Russia dossier or other scandals that are undoubtedly there, he has become a liability for the Republican party. At some point they will need to distance themselves from him in order to solidify reelection for the House."
Independent UK

I think this is a distinct possibility but it will be a very complicated business because of all the vying interests and personalities involved.

First, if Trump's favorability rating remains low and if he keeps behaving as he consistently has behaved, there will be serious damage done to the party he's associated with and who has supported him. Future electoral consequences (as that is perceived by party people and candidates/office holders) will probably be determinative. They'll need to somehow get rid of him. But that poses problems as regards the base who they need for votes and activism. And it poses the problem of open and loud divisiveness or warfare, which is always to be avoided (singularity of messaging is very important to the conservative mind). So a very big scandal or an accumulation of them would be necessary background factors.

And how would Trump react? Not well, that's for sure. The hounds will be set loose. And the sectors of the right wing media apparatus presently in support of him will likely continue that posture. Even a big scandal, nearly impossible to deny, will be denied for as long as that can be managed.

It will be very, very ugly. But it is possible with Trump in a way it has never been with any other conservative leader.
Frugal1
 
  -3  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 06:27 am
https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s480x480/15940996_1266175963442401_133179231889817360_n.jpg?oh=1a7a5e9b54d2d1871c96c196f8a8d5ea&oe=59203F41
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 07:00 am
Quote:
...According to three senior officials on the transition team, a plan to evict the press corps from the White House is under serious consideration by the incoming Trump Administration.

...Another senior official, however, suggested a more pointed motivation for the move. According to the official, the potential relocation reflected a view within the transition team that coverage of Trump has been so hostile as to indicate that the press has abandoned its role as neutral observer.

"They are the opposition party," a senior official says. "I want 'em out of the building. We are taking back the press room."
Esquire

Nothing authoritarian about this. Perfectly normal. It's what the founders had in mind all along. And totalitarian types everywhere but that's just coincidental.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 09:52 am
@wmwcjr,
Quote:
I wouldn't say that D'Souza has risen to the top. At least with regard to this incredibly stupid comment about Rosa Parks, who has had far more moral courage than he's ever had.
Blatham, I suppose you're being sarcastic.

Yeah. Definitely being sarcastic. D'Souza is held as an intellectual heavy-weight by many movement conservatives and he ain't that. The only sensible use of the term with him would be to add a qualifier, as in intellectual prostitute. He's a felon and was booted from his position at the Christian King's College in NY for humping someone while his wife was at home doing the dishes.

He's a typical right wing hustler who, like Coulter, Hannity, Limbaugh, Ingraham, Beck, Gingrich, Robertson and many others, has made millions suckering a huge right wing audience who, apparently, can't go a day without sending some portion of their wages or pensions to the very, very lucrative right wing scam machine. When he was an undergrad, he supported apartheid in South Africa and printed an article using minstrel dialect to mock blacks (h/t Jeet Heer on that bit of history).

0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 10:02 am
Buzzfeed has charted out 1500 businesses, investments and corporate connections of the Trump family, advisers and cabinet picks. Nothing like this has ever been the case before with a president. And given the international connections/investments and Trump's refusal to be transparent, not to mention his prior behaviors in business, the potential for corruption is hard to overstate.

https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-static/static/2017-01/13/16/asset/buzzfeed-prod-fastlane-01/sub-buzz-11018-1484342735-1.jpg?no-auto

buzzfeed
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 10:18 am
Quote:
Plenty of Hoosiers and others with ties to Mike Pence have already landed positions in the incoming Trump administration, and more could be coming.
IndyStar

Since the election, attention has inevitably focused on Trump. In one respect, that's unfortunate because this administration will possibly be much more a reflection of Pence's extremist ideology than Trump's (that's certain to be so domestically, at least).

And as Trump is one lazy MFer without knowledge or interest in domestic policy and his pathological need to thrust out his chin to cheering crowds, the real policy initiatives and most of the daily operations of the administration will fall to Pence.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -2  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 10:37 am
@glitterbag,
Response moderated: Personal attack. See more info.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -2  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 10:38 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

I agree and double what you said; stfu.
Any citizen has the right to express their opinion about any politician.


That's where you are wrong...He's not just any citizen...He's a sitting member of Congress.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 10:46 am
Here's an interesting thing. Pence has said, re Lewis' statement on Trump, it's "deeply disappointing". In another but similar context, Conway has used the "disappointing" phrasing as well.

To be fair, it's a bipartisan phenomenon. But still, I find its use interesting. What's the intended meaning? Why do users assume this will work for them?

It is the language that a parent would use. Or someone else, like a mentor, who is looked up to. The trick of it is shaming. But it is in a senior/junior context. If a homeless guy sitting against a dumpster says it to a cop, for example, the cop's response will be, "So ******* what?"

When it gets used by a political figure, it works to frame the speaker as of a higher status or of a morally elevated position. That's why they use it.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 10:54 am
The ceaseless scumbaggery of Reince Priebus

Today on This Week, Preibus said, "You didn't have Republicans questioning whether or not Obama legitimately beat John McCain in 2008"

Actually, at that time, Trump said the election was "a total sham" when he had thought Obama had won but with fewer votes. Then he tweeted that "we should march on Washington to stop this travesty". So, there's that.

And of course the famous:
Quote:
Wake Up America! See article: "Israeli Science: Obama Birth Certificate is a Fake"
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  -3  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 10:57 am
@glitterbag,
glitterbag wrote:

If it's not yet clear to you George, I am totally uninterested in how you value my behaviour. You can't possibly think it matters, so why bother. Unless you suppose we could come to some symbiotic relationship where you scold me and I get to tell you what a freeping stuffy fuddy dud with control issues you are. Seriously, don't think for a minute I need or care about your tutalege. I think your a wanna-be elitist with an over-wrought vocabulary. You should be writing torrid bodice-rippers. I think that is much more suitable for you, and if you need more career advice or direction, please don't ask me because I will sure as **** give it to you.


Gosh ! I think she's pissed. It does seem a bit out of proportion to the offense, however 'bag gets to call her own shots.
giujohn
 
  -2  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 11:01 am
@georgeob1,
Me thinks she doth protest too much... I think she's got the hots for you.
0 Replies
 
Frugal1
 
  -3  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 11:10 am
The voters in Georgia are embarrassed by Lewis.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 11:15 am
I've just been reading something from a smart guy I follow (Aaron Bady) that's very clarifying.

Another person tweets to Aaron:
Quote:
There is not a single sacrifice -- not McCain's, not the Khan family's -- that Trump has respected. Not surprised he disrespected John Lewis

To which Aaron replies in three tweets:
Quote:
More broadly, the idea that "public service" is supposed to BE sacrifice is utterly foreign to him.

Becoming president means becoming BOSS, getting everything you want, being accountable to no one. No sacrifices.

Many "norms" being trampled, but that's a big one: the idea that government serves at the will of the people, rather than OWNING the office.


And that's just right on the money. It's the way an authoritarian type - the type who gets his sense of self-worth through visibly and loudly dominating others - will think. Add in the lifelong strategy of Trump to increase his wealth and power through promoting himself as a brand, and here we are.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sun 15 Jan, 2017 12:07 pm
the New Yorker has a helpful piece on the history of the emoluments clause
Quote:
Will Trump Avoid A Constitutional Crisis?

...Four years later, at the Constitutional Convention, Franklin’s snuffbox scandal was recalled when the framers drafted what came to be called the Emoluments Clause, an ironclad prohibition against receiving gifts: “No Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

Zephyr Teachout, whose book “Corruption in America,” from 2014, tells the history of Franklin’s snuffbox, said that, far from being an obscure provision, the gift ban was part of “the animating spirit of the Constitutional Convention,” along with other core American legal concepts such as federalism and separation of powers. “It goes to the heart of the fears at the Convention,” Teachout, a law professor at Fordham University who also ran a primary challenge to New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, in 2014, said. “The framers were worried about foreign powers because they were so strong and we were so weak. They were worried about corruption overwhelming the new republic. The question was how do we protect against it?”
more here
 

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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.48 seconds on 03/17/2025 at 03:55:12