|
Post by Optimus on Sept 6, 2018 21:35:41 GMT -5
CBC seems to think the author might be Pence or someone trying to frame Pence:
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Sept 6, 2018 21:48:53 GMT -5
You don't seem to see Trump as the catastrophic shitshow that he is. I do see Trump for the shit show that he is. I just don't think it's a good idea to rip apart the government as a means of dealing with him. Rip apart the government? Please with the hyperbole. It's just theoretical, but if a murderous despot were running the US government with no impeachment possibility in sight, would it be wrong to post an anonymous Op-Ed while trying to mitigate damage, as opposed to resigning and going public? It is extremely hard for me to believe that you're equating subduing amoral, narcissistic, poorly considered, knee-jerk tantrums of a president with "working against the President." I said: isn't it just as likely that the people he picked have become increasingly horrified by his behavior. I.e., as opposed to being bad people he picked, who now write anonymous meanie mcmeanie OpEds about him. ETA: I don't know how meaningful any of this is -- I just find your (and others') outrage in regard to proper protocol from government officials to be wildly out of sync with your outrage (or lack thereof) in regard to Trump's 20+ months' worth of appalling behavior.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Sept 7, 2018 6:12:58 GMT -5
CBC seems to think the author might be Pence or someone trying to frame Pence:
This rabbit hole could go deep, if the whole thing is really some sort of conspiracy/feint.
I'm sure the NYT knows who it is - they wouldn't have run the op-ed if they couldn't verify they weren't being played. If it's really the VP, that would be huge, probably too huge not to be leaked at some point.
But what I still can't figure out is, if the letter is genuine, why would they trigger the witch hunt to find them that's now going on in the White House? Obviously their effectiveness at undermining the President is now going to be reduced. So are they trying to rally more opposition? Provoke Trump into becoming even more paranoid and crazy? Or fit up someone? Or are they just trying to "secure their legacy" (and, as I said earlier, have their cake and eat it too) by putting themselves on the record as being against Trump, should he go down (but staying in the shadows in case he doesn't)?
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Sept 7, 2018 8:29:12 GMT -5
I don't know how meaningful any of this is -- I just find your (and others') outrage in regard to proper protocol from government officials to be wildly out of sync with your outrage (or lack thereof) in regard to Trump's 20+ months' worth of appalling behavior. I expect the worst from Trump as a matter of course. He's an egomaniacal, belligerent, bigoted grifter. He has been for decades. And it became quite obvious early on in his Presidency that he wasn't going to adjust his behavior in the least, just because he was the President. That sucks, obviously. And Trump sucks, obviously. But none of this means I need to accept any and all conduct from others simply because they're opposing Trump in one way or another. So again, I think having people in an admin actively working against that admin is a serious problem and shouldn't be waved off simply because of Trump (nor should it be waved off as "protocol"). I'll point back--again--to Max's OP: And read the bit Cass quoted--and agreed with--from Frum: Protocol. Lol.
|
|
|
Post by maxinquaye on Sept 7, 2018 8:56:59 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2018 9:14:44 GMT -5
I see the "secret grownup" aides' behavior as a huge problem, yes -- but it's not, in this instance, because they are actively working against this president. This president, unfortunately, requires people to work against him because if he went unchecked, it would be a disaster for the country.
My problem is that secretly undermining him while enabling the continuation of his presidency, pretending everything is fine and Trump is a good leader, is not what one should do when faced with an unfit president. Especially if the reasoning is "But Gorsuch!"
If faced with an unfit president, the thing to do is to work against the president to remove him, not cover up for him. And yes, I do share Frum's fear that the op-ed has enflamed Trump's paranoia and empowered his willfulness, thus endangering whatever covert controls his aides have managed to place on him thus far.
Hence, if the purpose of the op-ed is to assure Americans that grownups have this shitshow under control, it is a massive fail--not only is the shadow government situation described in the op-ed unacceptable, but by writing the op-ed, the author has seriously endangered (indeed, probably doomed) its ability to continue.
On the other hand, if the purpose of the op-ed was to wake up the American people to the fact that the president is an unstable mess and the security of the country hangs on the ability of a few aides who could be canned at any second to switch papers on his desk and distract him with shiny toys, hence increasing public support for Congress and/or the cabinet to act, well...that might be a good thing. Clearly, Congress and the cabinet aren't going to do a damn thing unless we make it clear it's Trump's head or theirs.
But make no mistake: I don't think this is CLOSE to a normal presidency or, for that matter, that we currently have a decently functioning executive or legislative branch. That being the case, I have no problem at all with people working against Trump, inside or outside of the administration. The country may depend on it. It's a matter of how they do it.
IMO, the writer needs to quit, come out openly, and advocate for the president's removal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2018 9:24:58 GMT -5
Well, of course.
Personally, I actually don't give much of a shit who wrote the op-ed. What I do care about is the dire situation described in it. It's dangerous and unsustainable.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Sept 7, 2018 10:56:18 GMT -5
Just so you all know, the amount of work in my job ebbs and flows with the number of consultations and the complexity of the patients I'm currently following. Every once in a while, it gets very busy including time I help cover for colleagues when they're on vacation or sick. These last couple of weeks have been hectic. It's starting to calm down but I won't have as much time to engage here.
That said, I wanted to add a few of my own thoughts to this thread, though I agree very much with several things that have already been stated here.
The American people who voted for Trump did so knowing much about his character (or lack thereof), and knowing he was not a true Republican nor a true Democrat. And we did so knowing he was not a career politician. And part of the reason we voted for him was to see someone try a new approach, "drain the swamp", have the guts to be different from the decades of entrenched political maneuverings before him. I was excited to see what he could do, and hopeful he could step up his behavior to become more "presidential".
Because this unique sort of candidate won, to the great surprise and disgust, anger, devastation of a lot of people, this presidency has had enemies of a number and vocality I've never before seen in my fifty plus years on this planet. From day one, "The Resistance" has been trying to unseat this POTUS, in ways legitimate and in ways illegitimate. The shrillness of this movement has been hard to take at times, and yes I think a fair amount has been hysterical. But what makes it truly frightening, is that factions of this movement include the mainstream press, and now as is apparent, members of Trump's own administration.
Because the hatred of Trump has become so great, and the disgust with him is reinforced by so much bloated, exaggerated, and at times blatantly false information even by what should be trusted sources, the movement has become self-legitimized. And over the months, increasingly worrisome actions by the resistance are looked upon as heroic -- Heck if this "respected Senator" is willing to break Senate rules to expose confidential emails to thwart Trump's SCOTUS nominee, then he's a hero. If the Obama DOJ can obtain sketchy FISA warrants to thwart Trump the candidate, good for them! If mainstream media outlets can put false stories out there from "anonymous sources" to make Trump look terrible, awesome! (And there are many examples of this I don't have time for now) 'It's all part of the resistance. And now, this Op-Ed piece from the NYT is the scariest part of all, because seriously, this is subversion of our duly elected leader.
The thing is, yes we all agree Trump is narcissistic, temperamental, impulsive, irreverent, unconventional. BUT THOSE ARE NOT REASONS in and of themselves, TO UNSEAT A POTUS. And because someone like me, who sees the media bias as working specifically against this presidency from day one, it is so difficult to know what is actually true and to what extent. Bear with me here - it is clear to those from my side of the political spectrum, that the media is seeing themselves more and more as a righteous part of the resistance to this POTUS. With that in mind, it's very difficult to know what to believe and what to take at face value.
Is Trump REALLY unhinged to the point of needing to invoke the 25th Amendment? Many here seem to be so sure he is. I would say to you, if he IS, then WHY HAVEN'T THE MANY GOOD PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THIS ADMIN made moves to do that yet? Certainly people like Mattis or Pompeo or Kelly have no particular loyalty to Trump as opposed to their country. They would give their lives on the front lines, I doubt they would worry about their jobs or reputations at this point, if Trump truly were deranged as people are claiming. We've had DJT for almost two years now. Certainly these outstanding individuals (two of the above are 4 star generals, for Christ's sake) in the most intimate parts of the Administration would be privy to this "unhinged" behavior and if our country was truly in danger, would be taking appropriate steps to remedy the problem. Or if not these men, there must be other principled people in the admin who would?
So without actual evidence that Trump is truly unfit, rather than simply infuriating or temperamental or annoying, and without evidence that he has committed high crimes and misdemeanors, then allow the man to do his job, the job that we elected him to do, with all of the appropriate advice and steering that ANY POTUS receives from his most trusted high-level team members, and the job that so far isn't doing bad at all for our country.
This op-ed is horrible and frightening for many reasons, depending on the extent of the truth it contains, but to me, the greatest is not because of the outrageous claims it is making about Trump. If Trump is that bad, then use appropriate protocol to get him out. If Trump is not that bad, then this subversion has to stop, and respect must again be given to the rule of law and the office of the POTUS and to appropriate procedure for our Constitutional Republic. IMO, 'the resistance' is out of control.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Sept 7, 2018 11:46:18 GMT -5
So, your theory is that it's the "resistance" at fault, and haters in the media radicalized someone in the White House?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2018 11:53:52 GMT -5
Good heavens, ce. Faced with the choice that either (a) Trump is indeed an unfit president, or (b) a vast unfair Deep State conspiracy exists to make Trump look bad that includes not only liberals and Democrats and the entire mainstream media, but also prominent Republicans of many decades standing and members of Trump's own administration, you have chosen (b). And this despite the fact that the man's own behavior, own words, and own actions daily (nay, hourly) demonstrate his unfitness. I can't even. Occam's razor here -- the simplest explanation for all these many, many people speaking out against Trump to say he is dangerously unfit, is that they do indeed believe he is dangerously unfit. The simplest explanation for Trump's acting like a lying, unstable, erratic, malicious cretin unfit for the Oval Office is that he is in fact a lying, unstable, erratic, malicious cretin unfit for the Oval Office. You seem to think this is an unanswerable question. Not even close. It's horribly easy. (1) Like you, these "good people" think Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and their beloved tax policy (the one adding more than a trillion to the deficit, but whatever), is worth risking everything for. They think they can keep Trump in sufficient check while they get those policies through. (2) Sure, if Trump goes down, they'd get Pence, but they know that if Trump goes down at this point, the Republican party and their beloved policies take a huge hit, for several reasons: - Trump's alt-right base -- without which the GOP cannot currently win elections -- will be furious if Trump is removed, and will not support the GOP. They are not conservatives--they are populists. The GOP will lose not just the midterms, but in 2020, and unless the GOP seriously retools, elections beyond that. And they won't just abandon the GOP -- they will turn on it.
- Sure, Pence would be a lot easier for establishment Republicans to deal with. But if Trump is removed against his will, Pence will lose the support of the base, and hence will not be able to carry out the agenda so dear to Republican hearts. He'll limp in lame duck fashion to 2020, plagued by controversy, unable to get anything past a Democratically-controlled House (and possibly Senate).
- Trump himself will turn on the GOP, and lead his followers against it. Surely you do not kid yourself that he's a loyal Republican? Or someone who puts the good of the country above himself (as even Nixon did when he resigned)?
- Pence is simply not a very compelling figure. Face it, he'd never win a presidential election on his own steam. I personally prefer him because he is at any rate mentally stable. But from a pure GOP partisan perspective, Pence is not the guy to pick up the pieces of a shattered Republican party and put it all together again after Trump implodes it.
- I also submit that certain Republicans (ones who've done a very mysterious and abrupt turnaround on Trump) may be compromised themselves and believe keeping Trump in power will protect them. You think that's crazy? I point you to the growing pile of indictments, convictions, and guilty pleas.
(3) ETA: The yuuuuge hurdles to invoking the 25th Amendment with the cast of characters currently on hand(see my next post) What we have here is an astounding display of party before country, and a profound lack of courage. It's horrible, but it's not at all hard to understand.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Sept 7, 2018 12:01:19 GMT -5
So, your theory is that it's the "resistance" at fault, and haters in the media radicalized someone in the White House? Close.
It's quite possibly the "resistance" at fault, and haters in the media plus both political parties radicalized someone in the White House.
If the op-ed is true, then what is to be gained by publishing it? Besides Trump becoming enraged and more insecure than he already is, and therefore inflaming an already tenuous situation? The decision to write the op-ed could only do damage to the admin. So yes, this sounds like the work of someone who is radicalized, not someone who is trying to keep the admin functioning as well as possible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2018 12:05:10 GMT -5
So, your theory is that it's the "resistance" at fault, and haters in the media radicalized someone in the White House? Close.
It's quite possibly the "resistance" at fault, and haters in the media plus both political parties radicalized someone in the White House.
If the op-ed is true, then what is to be gained by publishing it? Besides Trump becoming enraged and more insecure than he already is, and therefore inflaming an already tenuous situation? The decision to write the op-ed could only do damage to the admin. So yes, this sounds like the work of someone who is radicalized, not someone who is trying to keep the admin functioning as well as possible.
So it's okay if we have an unelected shadow government actually running the show, sneaking letters off Trump's desk before he can sign them, etc., as long as everyone pretends it's not happening and the American people don't know about it? I've got to ask -- who could speak out against Trump saying he's unfit that you would be unable to dismiss as a "hater" or someone who was "radicalized"? What if that person turned out to be the author of that op-ed? (I would caution you not to believe the denials various administration members have given. Of course this person was prepared to have a finger pointed at him, and unless he planned to come forward voluntarily, he was prepared to cover his tracks and deny it.) Why is it so difficult to believe that a guy who says and tweets the horrible batshit stuff Trump does is in fact dangerously unfit? Why is it easier to believe that instead the majority of the country, including Trump's own selected aides and prominent long-time loyal Republicans, have been "radicalized"? ETA: One more question -- assume that what is described in the op-ed (and in Woodward's book, and Omarosa's book, and Wolff's book...) is really what is happening. (I for one don't doubt it for a second. Note that Ben Sasse said the contents of the op-ed are what he's been hearing regularly multiple times a week from those inside the WH. Or has Sasse also been "radicalized"?) I'm genuinely curious. You seem to be arguing against impeachment or the 25th Amendment. So. Do you want this aide and like-minded aides to stop, shut up, and let Trump do his thing, because hey, he was elected? If not, what do you want them to do if Trump is threatening to do something detrimental to the nation's interests? What if it's really, really, really bad -- something that might result in war or would devastate the economy? And what if, nonetheless, not all of the cabinet will agree to act (because of, e.g., the reasons I put forth in my last post). I suspect the answer is that you want them to keep sneaking letters off Trump's desk, etc., to keep making policy themselves, blocking Trump and ignoring him -- but you want them to shut up about it, to keep smiling and saying everything is teh awesome. ETA: I have a theory that some of Trump's cabinet may indeed favor invoking the 25th Amendment (if the op-ed writer is being truthful, it's been discussed), but they need them all on board, and most especially Mike Pence. By the way, that isn't the end of it, even if they all agree. If Trump resists the attempt to remove him -- and he will -- they would still need the votes of 2/3 of both houses of Congress to remove him. Right now, it's going to be DAMN hard to get a 2/3 vote in both houses of Congress, no matter what Trump has done. That's because too many Republicans are more afraid of Trump's base than anything else. And if the cabinet attempts a 25th amendment coup and fails...well, it's pretty disastrous for them and for the country. They might rethink after the midterms. Meanwhile, we have President Loco Loose Canon out there, needing constraint. We have too many voters saying " Well, he can't be that bad or they'd remove him, and Gorsuch and taxes, so I'm just going to smile and whistle and assume everything is fine." I find myself wondering whether Anonymous wanted to wave a flag -- "YO, PEOPLE, IT'S NOT FINE, NOT FINE AT ALL. REST ASSURED WE'RE HANDLING IT FOR NOW AS BEST WE CAN, BUT YOO HOO, IF THIS BOTHERS YOU, DEMAND YOUR REPS ACT, FFS, BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH LONGER THIS SHIP CAN FLOAT."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2018 13:38:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Sept 7, 2018 17:47:52 GMT -5
But none of this means I need to accept any and all conduct from others simply because they're opposing Trump in one way or another. So again, I think having people in an admin actively working against that admin is a serious problem and shouldn't be waved off simply because of Trump (nor should it be waved off as "protocol"). I have no idea why you're so hung up on my use of the word "protocol." What word should I use? And I'm not saying because of Trump you should accept any and all conduct from others. I am saying: in the instance of this unprecedented situation -- where Trump has been impulsive, ignorant, unhinged, AND where Congress apparently knows, has known about these instances (like with Ben Sasse saying "we hear about stuff like this three times a week") and yet does not show ANY signs of moving to impeach him -- what are the people working for him supposed to do? The ones who resign get replaced and forgotten. The ones who express concern get ridiculed by Trump and his base, covered by the media for a day or two and forgotten. Maybe, just maybe, these people (who are Republicans, much to the disgust of Dems) actually care about not letting Trump blow up the world and don't see just walking away and letting someone else deal with it an option. I'm not saying these people are saints. I'm not saying they're completely devoid of self-interest or political motivation. I probably disagree with them on most political subjects. But I also can see, rationally, that: (1) as Republicans, they like a large part of the Republican agenda, which is a totally normal thing (2) they don't entertain fantasies about a GOP Congress hearing their concerns about Trump the Unhinged and actually DOING anything, because they're not stupid and (3) they have a legitimate interest in keeping Trump from initiating WWIII, which quite frankly, I appreciate, things being how they are. If instead of subverting Trump's dangerous instincts, they resign and go on CNN and talk about how crazy Trump is, what would that accomplish? Probably nothing. And then Trump finds a replacement who may or may not faithfully follow orders. And if they do... god forbid. Again, I think this situation is unprecedented, not only because of the level of Trump's derangement in some areas but also because of the apparent unwillingness of this Congress to do anything. Why that is, is a whole other topic, but I think it's safe to say. I've read Max's posts here, and I don't get the sense that his complaints are entirely aligned with your complaints. That's an opinion, and speculation as to motive, which doesn't support your argument, at all. (Nor does any other poster's agreement with your opinion, btw) I'm aware that I'm in an apparently tiny minority here. The Dems want this Op-Ed coward to come forward and spill the details so impeachment can begin (lol). The Trumpers think the worst of the writer, even to the point that he's been "radicalized" (FFS). Some Never-Trump conservatives seem to be the most sympathetic while still having concerns, which I share but I'm not willing to condemn this person wholesale on criticisms that amount to nothing more than "but principle!" And I could be wrong. Maybe this Op-Ed guy is self-seeking pond scum. I'm not ruling the possibility out. It's the majority of other folks who seem to be ruling out any other possibility.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Sept 7, 2018 19:25:40 GMT -5
If faced with an unfit president, the thing to do is to work against the president to remove him, not cover up for him. And yes, I do share Frum's fear that the op-ed has enflamed Trump's paranoia and empowered his willfulness, thus endangering whatever covert controls his aides have managed to place on him thus far. I like David Frum and despite our differing political philosophies ( hello, celawson!), I find him to be a reasonable, rational, true blue red conservative. The sort both the Republican Party and the nation needs more of. However, this time though I do not share Frum's fears. If Trump gets any more inflamed and willful he'll keel over from a stroke. Flabby 72-year-old men whose only exercise comes from golf and doing elbow curls to shove Big Macs in their piehole need not to exacerbate their poor health by getting overly excited. Donny T. needs less stress in his life, not more. Either way, I don't really give a fuck about Trump's bad temper and rash responses anymore. He's gonna do whatever it is he wants to do and if McConnell, Ryan, Kelly, Ivanka, Jared, and Melania cannot or will not calm his crazy ass down, worrying ourselves sick about a situation we cannot control is a massive waste of time.
All this palace intrigue frankly doesn't intrigue me all that much. This was entirely predictable. When the ship of state begins to take on water, the rats scurry for safety. Twas always thus.
The American people who voted for Trump did so knowing much about his character (or lack thereof), and knowing he was not a true Republican nor a true Democrat. And we did so knowing he was not a career politician. And part of the reason we voted for him was to see someone try a new approach, "drain the swamp", have the guts to be different from the decades of entrenched political maneuverings before him. I was excited to see what he could do, and hopeful he could step up his behavior to become more "presidential".
As far as Trump becoming more "presidential" goes, how's that working out for ya? Seeing any signs your boy is becoming more "presidential?"
Here is the sad truth about Trump, celawson. This guy was NEVER going to become anything more than what he already was: Pompous, arrogant, greedy, selfish, piggish, elitist, racist, sexist, xenophobic, hateful, cruel, thoughtless, malicious, petty, vicious, and stupid. Trump was all those of things are worse before he got the job. You'd have to be smoking some pretty primo dope to think otherwise.
Any man who cheats on his pregnant wife with Playboy models and porn stars isn't capable of changing for the better. Any man who refuses to disavow the racists among his precious "base" isn't capable of changing for the better. Any man who grovels and sucks up to a former KGB operative while insulting and treating this country's allies like crap isn't capable of changing for the better. Any man who lies all the time isn't capable of changing for the better. Any man who continually brags about winning an election where he may have colluded with a foreign power to do so isn't capable of changing for the better. Any man who rants and raves how his opponents don't love the country, will turn violent if they don't get what they want and are waging an all-out war against religion isn't capable of changing for the better. Any man who mocks the physically disabled, Gold Star families and tells a soldier's widow her dead husband, "knew what he signed up for" isn't capable of changing for the better.
However, if you insist upon clinging to your happy delusion Trump eventually will come around and become more presidential, my only reply to that is the same this year as it was last year and the year before that:
I did try and fuck her. She was married. I moved on her like a bitch. But I couldn’t get there. And she was married. Then all of a sudden I see her, she’s now got the big phony tits and everything. She’s totally changed her look. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.
You didn't vote for Trump with the vain hope he'd become more "presidential." You wanted him because he was the farthest thing from being presidential and if he wanted to sex up his daughter, grab women by the pussy, or vocally support wife-beaters and sick old perverted fucks like Roy Moore, you were willing to put your principles in a blind trust so long as you got a tax cut, at least two more right-wingers on the Supreme Court, and an extended middle finger to every American ally not named Israel.
I wonder were you going off on tangents like this when it was The Tea Party depicting President Obama as a witch doctor, a Nazi or a monkey eating bananas? You want to talk about enemies? Let's talk about all the people of every color, religion, creed, gender, sexual orientation or disability Trump has shit all over and then tell me that there isn't ample reason for disgust and anger and revulsion toward this presidency and his sycophantic supporters who deny both any fact and truth that makes their Supreme Leader look like the giant cosmic mistake he is.
I could go on...and on and on and on because Donald Trump is a racist. That's not an opinion. That's not fake news or alternative facts. That's the truth whether or not you want to believe it.
Correction: YOUR duly-elected leader. Trump is not MY president. Never was and never will be. He disrespected MY president for eight years in a horrible, ugly and racist manner and I will return that disrespect back to him a thousandfold until one of us or both of us are dead, cold and gone.
That's a promise.
No, those are not reasons in and of themselves to unseat a POTUS. The best reason to dump this guy was stated by no other than you.
Let's unpack that shall we? Take it away Merriam-Webster:
YOU may be willing to trust your life to a man who is mentally deranged with the nuclear launch codes but I AM NOT WILLING TO TRUST MINE WITH TRUMP.
Every Chief Executive grows to believe the media is biased against them, but this is first one in my lifetime to declare the media is "the enemy of the people." Not a foreign power, not the drug dealers who are infesting this country with lethal heroin (17 fatal overdoses this week in my city and it's Friday night, so that number will go up), not criminals or spree killers or corporate evildoers. No, for Trump and for you I guess, the true enemy is anyone in the press that prints a critical word about the Supreme Leader.
If you see someone like me and my friends who work in journalism as the the problem, I've got news for ya, celawson. If it's very difficult to know what to believe you might want to rethink WHO is telling lies to you and WHY they want you to stop thinking critically and instead worship blindly. If it's difficult to know what to believe, you'd be well-served not to believe a man who lies to his own pregnant wife.
Who might that be?
There are four-star generals who have the steel in their spine to tell the guy that hired him he's totally full of shit and there are four-star generals who are a bit more malleable, play the game, and are willing to go along to get along. Guess what type Mattis and Kelly are? "Most trusted high-level team members?" Like Steve Bannon? Or Michael Flynn? Or Omarosa Manigault? Or Reince Preibus? Or Hope Hicks? Or Rob Porter? Who the Eff are you talking about?
You must be joking. If you're not you should be. So you think "the resistance" is out of control?
Tell me about it.
McConnell and Ryan, Trump's boot-licking lackeys don't give two shits about "appropriate protocol." As they proved time and again during the Obama Administration they dumped all over that played-out concept if they could wring even the slightest political advantage out of it (see Merrick Garland) and you were cool with that, so please don't come at me with this "subversion" b.s.
You only THINK the resistance is out of control. Nobody's taken a shot at Trump and nobody should. No, Trump should be investigated, prosecuted and imprisoned if he doesn't resign in humiliating disgrace for getting in bed with Vladimir Putin and betrayed his country.
The Resistance isn't out of control, but Donald Trump is. HE created The Resistance and The Resistance is coming for his friends in 2018. They're only the appetizers. In 2020, it's time to feast on the hog, not just the piglets. You haven't seen out of control yet.
|
|