|
Post by maxinquaye on Sept 5, 2018 16:18:01 GMT -5
... is having unelected bureaucrats decide which of his policies are acceptable and which aren't, and then deciding which policies are done and which aren't.
I mean, really... This is pure bullshit.
Principled civil servants and democratic politicians don't serve institutions run by fascists or proto-fascists. They quit, and protest publicly.
Mussolini's or Franco's or Pinochet civil servants were not less responsible because they cried into their beer about what they had to do. And they certainly wouldn't be excused if their defence was "We chose which policies Mussolini/Franco/Pinochet could do because if we didn't, the other party would chose and that would be worse than having Mussolini/Franco/Pinochet in charge."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2018 16:30:07 GMT -5
I just read this piece today over lunch, and was just...I can't even.
Okay, on the one hand, I suppose it is better to have some grown-ups in the room saving us from Trump's worst instincts than it is to have Trump simply running amok with no one trying to keep a check on him.
On the other hand, WHAT IN THE HOLY FUCK. THE WHITE HOUSE STAFF AND CABINET KNOW PERFECTLY WELL HE IS UNFIT. THEY KNOW THAT WITHOUT CONSTANT VIGILANCE HE IS FULLY CAPABLE OF DOING SOMETHING DISASTROUS. THIS IS WHAT THE FUCKING 25TH AMENDMENT IS FUCKING FOR. AS PRESIDENT, TRUMP DOESN'T NEED ANY PERMISSION TO DO SOMETHING COMPLETE BATSHIT, LIKE, SAY, FUCKING NUKE ANOTHER COUNTRY. WHAT IN THE HOLY FUCK. THIS IS NOT OKAY. THIS IS MOST DEFINITELY NOT FUCKING OKAY.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2018 16:41:27 GMT -5
Since some of you may not have NY Times access, I am going to quote some key portions of the op-ed Max is linking to.
It is headed by this note:
There's more at Max's link.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2018 17:07:52 GMT -5
For those who want to argue that this is consoling and everything is fine, please keep in mind that Trump has a 60% staff turnover rate, and that the only person he can't fire is Pence.
Also the fact that Trump has his finger on the nuclear button, that his staff can't actually physically prevent him from doing things, and if the alleged grownups don't get to Trump in time before he does something disastrous or don't succeed in preventing him from doing it...whoopsie!
-- Cass, most definitely not consoled.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2018 18:06:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gaild on Sept 5, 2018 18:13:09 GMT -5
....and that the only person he can't fire is Pence. More's the pity. That man is even more dangerous than Trump. Waaayyy more dangerous. If Trump was ousted, Pence would take over, right?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2018 18:28:08 GMT -5
Honestly? Though I dislike Pence intensely and I'm sure he'd do many, many things I hate, I would rather have Pence.
Pence isn't batshit irrational. He won't launch a nuclear attack out of pique. I think he knows who our allies are, and absent Trump, would not fanboy Putin and Kim Jong Un. And I don't think he'd make daily attacks on the free press, law enforcement agencies, or the judicial branch.
Policywise, name me a policy Pence would put in that he couldn't convince Trump to happily sign off on. Indeed, I think there are many horrible policies Trump would put in place that Pence would be less likely to put in --e.g., the family separation policy. We'd get pretty much the same roster of judges, with slightly less chance of Justice Pirro or Arpaio. We can do no worse. Seriously.
Add to that the fact that if Pence took over, he'd be in a weak spot, having taken over midway through a batshit president's term. Probably he'd do some unpopular pardoning, which would hurt him with principled conservatives and moderates. And Trump's base would be screaming about the loss of their orange god. They will not rally behind Pence the same way--or IMO at all. They are not conservatives; they are populists.
Pence would be a weak, half-term, lame duck president -- but he'd be a hell of a lot less erratic than Trump. I'd sleep better. Trump scares me for reasons that go way beyond policies (and, like I said, I don't think Pence could or would put in worse policies. He does not have the support to enact The Handmaid's Tale--at least not more than Trump does).
I say bring on President Pence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2018 18:47:06 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2018 19:01:50 GMT -5
An opinion, for what it's worth:
I think most in the White House and most GOP Senators and Reps would prefer Pence to Trump. But they know Pence will not inherit the crazypants alt-right portion of the base. The alt-right who genuinely love the Trump crazy will be furious and will abandon the GOP if it casts off Trump. Absent the crazies, the bottom falls out of GOP support -- at least until such time as they can regroup and convince moderates to trust them.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Sept 5, 2018 20:05:25 GMT -5
Please mark this day as one of those rare, bizarre days when the sun rose in the West and set in East, lions and lambs laid down together and the Cleveland Browns actually win a football game. I agree with Donald Trump. Whomever this supposed member of "The Resistance" is, he or she is gutless. Gutless as hell. I don't call them a resistor. I call them a coward. Those whom consider themselves part of the true Resistance should cast some serious side-eye toward anyone who claims they have surreptitiously gained entrance into the White House for the purpose of foiling and undermining the nefarious schemes of the Trump Administration.
If anyone within the Trump Administration is so distraught at what is occurring within it, the respectful thing--the only honorable thing to do---is to tender their resignation immediately or to publicly confess they never should have taken the job in the first place.
Nobody likes a rat. Or a coward. Or a cowardly rat.
I'm insulted by this chickenshit, backstabbing, punk-ass, butt-covering, snitching. A moral person would do the right thing and just QUIT. But since morality is a disqualifying character flaw in this presidency, this worm is attempting to take a Brillo pad to their conscience and air dirty laundry on a editorial page anonymously instead of a news interview or a Congressional hearing.
Let's call this craven act what it is: some old bullshit. Full of sound and fury, but signifying nothing.
Word.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Sept 5, 2018 20:16:53 GMT -5
Actually, Trump has a point. If he was anyone other than Trump, people would probably realize this (and really, it's the one Max made in the op). This is all Trump's fault, to be sure, since he's so uniquely unsuited for the job he has. Be that as it may, people in the admin do need to follow orders--even what they might see as stupid orders--unless those orders require them to break laws. If they don't want to follow them, they need to step and say so, then take what comes next (getting fired, likely). Because they knew who they were going to work for, no? Why do they have to follow orders? Well, especially in the case of foreign policy, it's because Trump is in charge. Sucks to be them, I guess, but I don't have any sympathy for the clown who wrote this op-ed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2018 20:26:22 GMT -5
Oh, I don't have sympathy for the writer. Basically they're saying "yeah, we should invoke the 25th Amendment, but instead we unelected faux resisters are just going to act as quasi presidents instead." It's cowardly,it's wrong, and it's scary.
I'm fully with Max, nighttimer, Frum etc.-- this is some serious bullshit.
But "turn him/her over to the Government?" The writer did not break the law, as far as I can see. This wasn't a revelation of top-secret info. (I doubt many of us are even very surprised, frankly--it's confirmation of what I suspected.) And the NY Times has no obligation to reveal the source. It's on Trump again for being who he is and selecting the people he did.
I think the author should step up and quit like a grown-up. But I don't think the NY Times should "turn him/her over to the government."
ETA:
I'll add this: IMO, in this situation, the op-ed writer (and his like-minded colleagues have a duty that is higher than any obligation to follow Trump's orders, and that is their duty to their country. Here, the writer and apparently lots of others in the admin feel that following Trump's orders could often be disastrous for the country. Apparently, he wants us to cheer him and his colleagues on for instead circumventing the disasters.
Except that's not the proper remedy here. The proper remedy is to quit in a noisy way and go to Congress with evidence of the president's wrong-doing/lack of fitness, and if this is really such a high ranking person and other high-ranking people feel the same way, it's time to invoke the 25th Amendment.
The situation described in the op-ed is simply unacceptable.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Sept 5, 2018 21:12:25 GMT -5
Please mark this day as one of those rare, bizarre days when the sun rose in the West and set in East, lions and lambs laid down together and the Cleveland Browns actually win a football game.
And I agreed with nighttimer.
These "resisters" want to have their cake and eat it too. They may not like Trump, but they don't want to lose their power and influence. And what exactly does this "resister" hope to accomplish by going public and letting Trump know there are rats in his administration? If I were a conspiracy theorist I'd say he's trying to spread FUD in the Oval Office, but I think it's more likely he wants to come bravely forward afterwards and say "I was fighting the good fight all along."
Bob Woodward's upcoming book apparently has a number of revelations like this. Aides literally taking papers off Trump's desk to keep him from signing them.
This is not how things are supposed to work.
|
|
|
Post by markesq on Sept 6, 2018 6:52:33 GMT -5
Anyone else dying to hear from celawson?!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2018 7:25:01 GMT -5
Anyone else dying to hear from celawson?! It's possible she'll take one look at my all-caps large-font swear-y rant in the second post and decide this thread is not a happy place. But, yes, I too am curious as to how someone who supports this administration reacts to the op-ed. Also to the snippets of the Woodward book that are coming out. Yowza. I have the book on pre-order. (Love Woodward's work or hate it, you have to know the man is going to have tapes to back up what he quotes in the book.) I gather the rest of us in the thread, whatever our political differences, agree that the situation described in the op-ed is unacceptable, and also that the person writing the op-ed should be quitting and speaking openly, not writing anonymous articles and secretly running an unelected shadow government.
|
|