This is the level of analysis we get at The New Yorker now? It's on-its-face ludicrous to suggest that "most scholars" could possibly have an opinion on such a specific issue. Who are the "scholars" in Ryan Lizza's world? They don't sound like scholars to me. It sounds political, not scholarly.
And I do note Lizza's use of the weasel word "seem." Even so, the front-page teaser is so dispiritingly political. I would like to read some serious analysis of this subject, and I am a New Yorker subscriber.
Why are these articles presented in a form that is so off-putting to anyone who's not tripping on Trump hate?
पोस्ट्स
१८९ टिप्पण्या:
If only the voters had been aware that Trump was a businessman, then we could have avoided all this messiness by electing Hillary, who certainly isn't indebted to any foreign governments. /s
I admire you, Ann, for attempting to make sense out of the NYT. I look at it every day, but find it mostly unreadable except for Sports and DealBook.
Every day that goes by, I like Trump more and more.
Dammit.
They are grasping at straws because they are now powerless. Who could have imagined this 4 months ago? It would take a heart of stone not to gloat.
Hard to imagine how you could get more lame than "most scholars seem to agree".
Hard to imagine how you could get more lame than "most scholars seem to agree".
Studies show that most scholars seem to agree.
Why are these articles presented in a form that is so off-putting to anyone who's not tripping on Trump hate?
Because Trump hate is the life-blood of their readership. It's the New Yorker, not the West Virginian.
Why are these articles presented in a form that is so off-putting to anyone who's not tripping on Trump hate? Because everyone the author knows is tripping on Trump hate. And everyone the editors know is tripping on Trump hate. Remember when the New Yorker was known for its fact checkers? They're long gone.
Given the batshit craziness coming from colleges around the country, "most scholars" serves as a warning more than anything else.
The New Yorker is just another bastion of those DemCong Operatives-with-Bylines. The propaganda is strong there.
If Obama had the conflicts that Trump has your blog would be all over it Ann. Trump still has not released his tax returns like every major party nominee has done since the early 1970s. I suspect Trump will not do so as president. If that is the case, will that cause you to finally write critically of Trump? I doubt it.
If Obama had the conflicts that Trump has your blog would be all over it Ann. Trump still has not released his tax returns like every major party nominee has done since the early 1970s. I suspect Trump will not do so as president. If that is the case, will that cause you to finally write critically of Trump? I doubt it.
"Prophylactic" by Trogan. Horse.
"Who are the "scholars" in Ryan Lizza's world? They don't sound like scholars to me. It sounds political, no scholarly." Very sweet of you to make the distinction, but after decades of feminism and postmodernism and critical race theory and Foucault and Butler and Cornel West, and now the 1400 law profs, "scholars" all, united against Jeff Sessions, it's dead and gone.
Like Sarah Palin, whatever else one might think about Donald Trump, there is no denying he has all the right enemies.
Why would a House of Representatives with a massive GOP majority impeach a President from their own party? Has this ever happened in the entire history of the Republic?
These Scholar geniuses must be from Texas A&M:)
I hasten to point out to them that Hillary Clinton is nowhere in the order of succession, in the unlikely event that Trump is impeached and removed from office. That's just the toughest of shit.
Most scholars ON MY ROLODEX seem to agree...
Those three words make all the difference.
Once written, twice...written, because you can't figure out the "Publish Your Comment" button.
Is that 97% of all scholars? Is the science settled?
Because they're click bait, of course.
The New Yorker is not about serious analysis; it's (evidently) about smug-pseudointellectual-left posturing and reassurance.
In other words, nobody not looking for a Trump hate-fest is going to look.
Ann, I blame David Remnick. Even moreso, than the lineup of predictably leftwing writers themselves. (Yeah, there was Sy Hersh, and there is now Jane Mayer and yeah these people are transparently political players.)
You and I are both old enough to remember a different New Yorker. Always liberal; always Manhattan-oriented; always progressive. But never as nakedly partisan as in the era of Remnick, and especially Remnick's object of idolatry, Barack Hussein Obama.
Why are these articles presented in a form that is so off-putting to anyone who's not tripping on Trump hate?
When 98% of your audience loves something do you worry about the 1% that is put off?
I can't take "Once written, twice" seriously until she starts dropping peaches out of her hoo-hoo in public to speed along Trump's impeachment.
Douglas said...
I admire you, Ann, for attempting to make sense out of the NYT. I look at it every day, but find it mostly unreadable except for Sports and DealBook.
It's funny, how often Althouse makes a post like this one, and one of the Althouse commenters confuses the New York Times, and the New Yorker.
Of course in some sense it is a distinction without a difference, but then again it's a pretty poor discussion when the basic facts are being botched.
Original Mike said...Hard to imagine how you could get more lame than "most scholars seem to agree".
--
"consensus"
I can't wait to see the celebrity-sentence-finisher video about this.
And I was just thinking how sophisticated the Kelefa Sanneh piece was.
btw, Ann; does your public radio lineup in Wisconsin offer "The New Yorker Radio Hour"?
It's part NPR, part New Yorker "Talk of the Town," and LOTS of David Remnick.
I mention it because I know you have a liking for aural experiencing of literature and news. (Books on tape, etc.) I think you'd find it much like the magazine. Sometimes fascinating, sometimes infuriating, mostly stimulating, and increasingly partisan.
http://www.wnyc.org/shows/tnyradiohour/
It's starting to get more fun. I don't see Trump taking this advice like he should. Trump has the support of not quite half the voters. The rest don't want him. Go for it Donny, chose the most arrogant position you can :-)
IMO we are witnessing the same reaction to an unexpected and unqualified President that once got this treatment from Dewey, MacArthur, Marshall, Eisenhower, and the surviving Roosevelts in 1945.
Fortunately, Truman had DJT''s leadership and intelligence to do a good job. Bring on 2020, you SOBs.
You know, most Hollywood figures seem to hold even worse views of Trump. I wonder how plumbers and watresses view him? Auto repair workers? Farmers and fishermen? Factory workers?
I love the USA.
"Even when all the experts agree they can still be mistaken." - Bertrand Russell
Even if you don't agree with the Left, you must do what they say.
--Some Fucking Lefty
Okay, New Yorker, let's, for argument's sake, impeach the Trumpster.
Next in line, VP Mike Pence.
Next after that, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.
Then, Orin Hatch.
And if we're down this far because SMOD whacked us all, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.
Ya see anybody ya liked, or was it just turtles all the way down?
A conflict of interest is the pulley on which good character is hoist into public view, Coleridge wrote in an op-ed in 1800.
Take Augustine's advice: think the best of somebody rather than the worst. It's soul-saving. Back then it's what charity meant.
The more the New Yorker loses its mind over this, the more amused I become. It acts as an inverse index of outrage: if it were to approve of something, I would grow suspicious of it.
It is hard for me to envision a serious conflict of interest arising from Trump's financial position. He did not take this job to get rich; a fact that distinguishes him from Clinton. He may make decisions that at the margin help his businesses or his partners; equally his decisions may hurt them. Either way I doubt he will allow himself to be tied in ethical knots by people who desire exactly that.
As the saying goes, "close enough for government work."
Impeachment is the goal. The Left never rests. More articles like this coming.
if Trump doesn’t take the prophylactic approach to his conflicts
"The prophylactic approach"? What? Is he supposed to meet with Putin wearing a body condom?
Just a weird choice of words there. A legalism, probably, but still weird.
The hyperventilating on the left makes me realize even more strongly what a bullet we dodged in not getting Clinton elected.
It's still not that I think Trump is likely to be a significant improvement, especially on economics. But the world-is-ending hyperbole, coupled with some interesting cabinet picks so far that suggest he may actually mean it when he talks about draining the swamp, go some ways toward reassuring me.
I was prepared to vote from him because I figured he'd either get co-opted and be no worse than most Republican presidents, or would be such an utter catastrophe that Washington would lay in smoking ruins and we could rebuild the America of 1776 from that. But who knows? Maybe he'll actually turn out to be good.
Hold the presses! Trump is appointing a Kennedy .... who is anti vax?? ..... to lead a vaccine safety committee/commission?
First, I am not a Kennedy gossip scholar, but isn't this the man who's been married a bunch and had something strange happen in the divorce from his last wife? I don't care what it is, really, but he doesn't seem like the best choice to safeguard the populace from infectious disease. And, wasn't he addicted to heroin? I'm sorry for the hell that life must have been, but still.
What a dumbass move.
It's still not that I think Trump is likely to be a significant improvement, especially on economics. But the world-is-ending hyperbole,
As a once proud member of the Democratic Party, I'll agree. I will point out that the "opposition" to Sessions - the little I heard on the radio of the hearing - was half-assed at best. As most predicted, easy confirmation, and best not to get overheated about other people's overheatedness.
We will be paying for having a subpar politician as president for a while.
> Hard to imagine how you could get more lame than "most scholars seem to agree."
>> Studies show that most scholars seem to agree.
>>> It has been reported that studies show most scholars seem to agree.
>>>>According to The New Yorker, it has been reported that studies show most scholars seem to agree.
Local Man suggests that according to The New Yorker, it has been reported that studies show most scholars seem to agree.
We will be paying for having a subpar politician as president for a while.
That's OK. By now we're used to it.
HT: "We will be paying for having a subpar politician as president for a while."
True. But Obama only has ten more days as President.
I suppose emollients are out too.
Why would a House of Representatives with a massive GOP majority impeach a President from their own party? Has this ever happened in the entire history of the Republic?
These Scholar geniuses must be from Texas A&M:)
"If Obama had the conflicts that Trump has your blog would be all over it Ann."
And if Trump had the conflicts that Hillary Clinton has, you still would've lost, boy
Once written, twice... said... [hush][hide comment]
If Obama had the conflicts that Trump has your blog would be all over it Ann. Trump still has not released his tax returns like every major party nominee has done since the early 1970s. I suspect Trump will not do so as president. If that is the case, will that cause you to finally write critically of Trump? I doubt it.
Taxes? That is so yesterday. Guess you missed it, he gonna release taxes when we see Obamas transcripts, which are no doubt being created in some liberal hellhole as we speak.
Latest lib talking point in my county is "He not gonna build a wall or repeal Ocare, haha"
Because its the US MSM propaganda weapon system at work.
Its centralized, organized, coordinated.
If you want to know why something was done, its because someone was directed to do it, to affect public perceptions strategically, and assist any ongoing tactical operations.
This is a Cold War.
"Go for it Donny, chose the most arrogant position you can."
And if it continues to piss off you and your leftist ilk, that's just fine by me.
Bay Area Guy said...
"Why would a House of Representatives with a massive GOP majority impeach a President from their own party? Has this ever happened in the entire history of the Republic?"
Althouse, you wanted to read some serious analysis of this subject? Bay Area Guy has just published a discussion right here on your blog that covers the matter fairly comprehensively.
HT said...
Hold the presses! Trump is appointing a Kennedy .... who is anti vax?? ..... to lead a vaccine safety committee/commission?
First, I am not a Kennedy gossip scholar, but isn't this the man who's been married a bunch and had something strange happen in the divorce from his last wife? I don't care what it is, really, but he doesn't seem like the best choice to safeguard the populace from infectious disease. And, wasn't he addicted to heroin? I'm sorry for the hell that life must have been, but still.
What a dumbass move.
Yeah, it is unbelievable. I emailed one of the hundreds of various links to that story, to Althouse a few hours ago. I hope she blogs it.
It is unbelievable. Trump wants certifiable nutjob Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead a Trump-appointed commission, to study the vaccine-autism link. That link, that has been studied by medical experts all over the world, and found not to exist. The link that was proposed in an issue of The Lancet, and later found to be so scandalously fraudulent that they ran a correction, and an apology, and then ultimately a complete withdrawal, and the author was stripped of all of his UK medical and research privileges.
This is like Trump wanting to use the federal government to help him win a bar-bet that he lost five years ago. A personal window into the insanity that is Donald Trump.
Trump really is a Truther, a Birther, a Vaxxer and a Draft Dodger. Any time, it seems, that any of those epithets seem to get stale, Trump himself creates a new basis to revive the charges.
It's also a general embarrassment to Republicans, insofar as Trump is seen as representative of Republicans. We Republicans are constantly harassed as a political party conducting a war on science. And idiocy like this gives the critics more ammo.
Does the average New York city resident get up, and start tripping on Trump-hate while having their breakfast? What a sad way to live. Even the last 8 years of Obummer I wasn't obsessing about him every day. Most days I didn't even think about politics.
I know that the peril is far from past, and any jubilation is premature. But as guilty pleasures go, it is hard to beat this;
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/01/10/obama-staffers-cant-find-work-in-trumps-dc-there-are-no-jobs/
Read the whole thing. Twice. Heh. Then read the comments. Snicker. Then the article again. Guffaw. O, I exult!
The analysis I've seen glosses over the fact that Trump doesn't own anything other than stock in his corporations, most of which are owned by other corporations. Trump doesn't rent the space from post office for the DC hotel. He doesn't even own the stock of the company that runs the hotel. He owns one of the companies that own the company.
It would take years for him to have any kind of orderly sale of all his interests in various private companies he owns or indirectly owns.
> Hard to imagine how you could get more lame than "most scholars seem to agree."
>> Studies show that most scholars seem to agree.
>>> It has been reported that studies show most scholars seem to agree.
>>>> According to The New Yorker, it has been reported that studies show most scholars seem to agree.
>>>>> According to Ryan Lizza in The New Yorker, it has been reported that studies show most scholars seem to agree.
>>>>> My Gender Studies professor told me that according to Ryan Lizza in The New Yorker, it has been reported that studies show most scholars seem to agree.
Now trending on Twitter....
Would anyone at The New Yorker know a 'scholar' if she tripped over one in broad daylight?
I've read speculation that Trump's youngest son possibly being autistic is the reason for the antivax stance. Regardless, it's irresponsible to be sending such a message. Have the conversation, yes. Continue to fund research into vaccine components, yes, absolutely. The mediums and ingredients are worth having a detailed conversation about.
Because I'm certain that I'd be criticized for a link to NPR, or NBC, or the NYT on the astonishing Trump-Kennedy vaccine commission, here's a link to...
Breitbart:
http://www.breitbart.com/news/vaccine-skeptic-robert-kennedy-to-head-trump-commission/
Like I have said many times, Donald Trump is not going to put the New York Times out of business. And he isn't going to put MSNBC, or even the Fox News Channel out of business. He is going to put The Onion out of business.
You just cannot make this sort of batshit up.
"Why are these articles presented in a form that is so off-putting to anyone who's not tripping on Trump hate?"
Because New Yorker subscribers put Trump hate on their cereal in the morning.
Yeah, Chuck, everybody is worried all those idiot antivaxxers are suddenly going to identify as Republicans. Good one.
My Gender Studies professor told me that according to Ryan Lizza in The New Yorker, it has been reported that studies show most scholars seem to agree.
Game, set, match.
Trump is throwing a poison bone to the left w/ Bobby K JR the anti vaccine nutcase. He will be on some silly commission and be out of trouble in NY. LOL. See, bi-partisan.
Professor Althouse's critique of this photograph caption is laughable.
Of course, the photograph caption is not on-its-face ludicrous. Not in the least, at least not to competent readers. You can readily and reasonably fill in the elided material to make sense of this: most scholars who have considered the issue, who have expressed a position on the issue, who were contacted by this author. Of course, pragmatic concerns and contexts determine which of those (or other) options is fairest, and given that completion, this photograph caption could well be false. And it is also true that the caption might be ambiguous in a way that reflects poor drafting. But only by ludicrously denying that pragmatics inform meaning can Althouse maintain that the text is on-its-face ludicrous. How someone could study textual interpretation and claim what Professor Althouse is now claiming is puzzling.
And I have no idea what to make of the bizarre suggestion that the scholars sound political, not scholarly. Of course they do--don't all of you right side of the aisle folk think that most of the academy is political?
Chuck said...
"Trump really is a Truther, a Birther, a Vaxxer and a Draft Dodger. Any time, it seems, that any of those epithets seem to get stale, Trump himself creates a new basis to revive the charges.
It's also a general embarrassment to Republicans, insofar as Trump is seen as representative of Republicans. We Republicans are constantly harassed as a political party conducting a war on science. And idiocy like this gives the critics more ammo."
It certainly seems to have given you more ammo. As you pointed out, Trump is seen as representative of Republicans. That is because he was our nominee, and led us to victory, despite your repeated assurances that he would lose. WHile many of us had severe reservations about the man, we are getting to like his style. And boy, does he have all the right enemies! If yo ucan't get behind him, maybe it's time for you to become a lifelong Democrat.
'Hard to imagine how you could get more lame than "most scholars seem to agree."'
"The science is settled."
Incidentally, that RFK jr story hasn't been confirmed.
Jupiter: what about this Vaxxer business?!?
Incidentally, that RFK jr story hasn't been confirmed.
From the blog of your favorite reservation-leaver:
Trump Asks Anti-Vaccine Activist Robert Kennedy Jr. to Lead Panel on Vaccine Safety
https://theintercept.com/2017/01/10/trump-names-anti-vaccine-activist-robert-kennedy-jr-lead-panel-vaccine-safety/
Birkel said...
Yeah, Chuck, everybody is worried all those idiot antivaxxers are suddenly going to identify as Republicans. Good one.
Trump IS ONE OF "those idiot antivaxxers"!
This is not some routine presidential commission. This is like putting Oliver Stone in charge of a commission to review the Kennedy Assasination. This is like putting Al Sharpton in charge of a commission to review police shootings.
The New Yorker claims that nine out of ten scholars recommend Crest.
Fake News
I think Kennedy even accepted. But then this:
Update | 7:05 p.m.:
After news of the appointment was widely criticized, Hope Hicks, a spokeswoman for Trump, said in a statement he had not yet decided for certain if he would form a presidential commissioned on the issue.
“The president-elect is exploring the possibility of forming a commission on Autism, which affects so many families; however no decisions have been made at this time,” Hicks said.
I'm more than a little amazed at how lame the Democrats attempts to stop a Trump presidency have been. First, a selective 3 state recount that was thrown out in two states and increased Trump's margin of victory in the third. Plus the "unexpected" finding in Detroit that more votes were recorded in heavily Hillary districts Tha were actually cast. Can't wait to see how that comes out.
Then the campaign to get electors to cast their votes for someone other than Trump in order to throw the election into the House of Representatives, while forgetting that the Republicans hold a large majority there. We'll thought out, that one.
Then the objections filed during the actual electoral voting by dumbells that forgot that a corresponding member of the Senate was needed before the objection could be heard. Even Slow Joe couldn't stomach that one.
Now objection to Trump's appointments which is starting to look like a big fizzle, complete with one of my esteemed senators from my home state of NJ about to demonstrate what an A-hole he is. Smart.
Next comes the comes the calls for impeachment based on supposed conflicts of interest - all of which were easily anticipated by an electorate that didn't care.
At what point do the Democrats wake up and get a clue that with each dumb maneuver they cement the opinion among normal people that they have lost their minds and are not fit to lead. Ever.
Craig,
With all those mealy-mouthed caveats you employed in your analysis, you end up proving just how meaningless and worthy of critique that text is.
"If Obama had the conflicts that Trump has your blog would be all over it Ann."
Aside from the Annennberg Challenge, at which he failed, Obama has never done anything but go to school.
Not only impeachment, but maybe even charges of treason.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/
"Intel chiefs presented Trump with claims of Russian efforts to compromise him."
Please don't tell me none of you saw this coming.
Craig
Were the "scholars" cited by name in the article? If they had opinions then where did the "seem" come from as opposed to "said" or "wrote." The New Yorker was once noted as a stickler for the proper use of words in their magazine and many writers were spanked unmercifully by their editors. Apparently not so much any longer.
The sentence quoted is a non-sequitur in any event.
At what point do the Democrats wake up and get a clue that with each dumb maneuver they cement the opinion among normal people that they have lost their minds and are not fit to lead. Ever.
These gestures are to reassure their supporters, who live in a fantasy land, that the Dims have their interests at heart.
Not the country's. Just the left. The hysterical left.
"Please don't tell me none of you saw this coming."
Exhibit one. Crazy from day one.
Unknown
So the CIA believes what the Russians tell them? Good to know. You know much about espionage, counter intelligence, etc?
> Why are these articles presented in a form that is so off-putting to anyone who's not tripping on Trump hate?
I suspect it's because they've tried the old forms, and they haven't succeeded in convincing a single person that their point of view has much merit, so hey, why not just preach to the choir.
The thing that strikes me when I listen to the cultural and political left is that they still have absolutely no idea why Trump won. I didn't vote for Obama, but I early on figured out why people voted for him. The left doesn't just live in a bubble. They live in a bubble that has a funhouse mirror on the inside.
YoungHegelian :) - you beat me to it!
More seriously, "prophylactic" is a medical term. Its use here is as a kind of metaphor. But, it's not clear to me just what these alleged anonymous scholars would consider a prophylactic approach to consist of.
If you think the NYT is crazy, check out this stuff: http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2017/01/10/buzzfeed-trump-caught-in-perverted-sex.html?via=desktop&source=copyurl
Chuck, who supports anything anti-Trump, missed my point precisely.
Mulligan?
Twitter said ...
Among the compromising material - "kompromat" - that Russian authorities had obtained on Mr Trump was a claim that Mr Trump hired the presidential suite of the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Moscow where Mr and Mrs Obama had stayed during an official trip to Russia.
He hired prostitutes to perform a sex act commonly known as a "golden shower" on the bed where the Obamas had previously slept, the material read.
"The hotel was known to be under FSB [Russian secret service] control with microphones and concealed cameras in all the main rooms to record anything they wanted to."
The event was believed to have happened in 2013, the British operative's memo said.
A source told the operative that Trump's "unorthodox behaviour in Russia over the years had provided the authorities there with enough embarrassing material on the [then] Republican presidential candidate to be able to blackmail him if they so wished."
Trump supports Revitalization, Rehabilitation, and Reconciliation. This hits the pocketbooks of the welfare industry, social complex, and civil rights groups.
Trump supports ending Obama's adventures in social justice and immigration "reform" (e.g. refugee crises).
Trump disagrees with conducting wars for social justice and assassinating sovereign leaders in numerous coups.
Trump does not see dead Soviets standing in the way of securing Russian natural resources.
Trump does not believe that establishment of monopolies in national laboratories (e.g. Obamacare) precedes actual reform.
Trump is not a [class] diversitist and opposes reconstitution of institutional racism, sexism, etc.
Trump does not have a deeply held twilight faith that denies life to unwanted, inconvenient, and cannibalized wholly innocent human lives.
A lot of men and women stand to be deprived of their wealth, pleasure, leisure, and democratic leverage.
Bay Area Guy said...
"Why would a House of Representatives with a massive GOP majority impeach a President from their own party?"
Because Trump isn't really a Republican (see RFK Jr. to lead an antivax panel), but his successor is. Same reason a massive Republican majority tried to remove elected-on-the-Republican-ticket-0but-not-really-a-Republican Andrew Johnson.
Let's think about this.
There is no law that requires Trump to divest of anything or to separate himself from his business interests. There is a fairly recent tradition whereby some presidents have put stocks, bonds and other financial instruments into blind trusts. None have been required to do so. There has been no oversight of the trusts or trustees, and we really have no idea what went on in these entities.
Therefore, they want to impeach a president for violation of a tradition of moral probity.
Bill Clinton, you were one lucky man.
Birkel why don't you make whatever point you've got in plain, clear language. And I promise to try to reply.
Because, I gotta tell you, I love this story. In my email to Althouse I called it the winner of the Trump Weirdest Story of the Week award. Which is always highly competitive. And it's only Tuesday!
Chuck, you are not, to my knowledge, a medical researcher. If you are, please make your profile available. Children receive many more vaccinations today than they did a couple of generations ago and there have been insufficient data to conclude that the sheer quantity of immunization responses might not adversely affect the immune system, perhaps leading to more autoimmune diseases. I'm not saying I think it does but I don't think we know yet for certain. It's irresponsible to ignore possible correlations.
@Barry, well it's the only news they have.
Oh yes it is, mockturtle. It IS irresponsible to keep floating this bullshit. It is not harmless.
The irresponsibility in the disproven autism-vaccine "link" is that kids who don't get vaccinated are at risk of disease, and spreading disease to the very rare subset of kids who are immuno-compromised for more complex reasons.
Trump is going to get backed down on this. One way or another. Like the Obama birth certificate.
@Chuck,
"Trump really is a Truther, a Birther, a Vaxxer and a Draft Dodger."
This is funny, I must admit.
But here's the deal, Chuck. If Trump gets Sessions as AG, and Sessions nails these sanctuary cities, shores up the border, and reverses the policies of the Holder/Lynch Justice Department of the past 8 years - none of that bullshit matters.
Ditto - if he appoints Janice Rogers Brown (or someone like her) to SCOTUS.
Forward looking, friend, forward looking.......
Twitter said ...
How much urine can you get on you before you turn too orange? Asking for a friend.
If the headline 'Urine trouble' doesn't get a mention tomorrow I'll be very disappointed.
You would think urination scandals would be more the territory of wiki-leaks .
Trump is going to be pissed about this report.
@Birkel (5:30), both of them?
@Steven,
Andrew Johnson was a Democrat, hated by the Republicans, because he sympathized with the South.
Paul Ryan and the House are not going to impeach Trump. If the Dems win the House in 2018, the impeachment odds drastically improve.
Bay Area Guy;
I understand all of that.
But what about his being a Birther, a Truther, a Vaxxer and a draft dodger? Answer directly.
So, to summarize the Lefts latest Hail Mary: the Russians claim to have blackmail-level dirt on Trump which compromises Trump....
.....And they leak that info publicly...
....Rendering the blackmail issue moot...
Genius.
That's something only dems and "lifelong repuvlican" Chuck (but I repeat myself) would buy into.
If you are talking about TD2 which is increasingly being thought of as autoimmune in addition to a metabolic disease, there is case after case of people new to this country with or having recently developed T2D who have had 0 previous vaccinations. There's a lot to be examined, for sure, but to head up a vaccine safety commission with such a person is sending a strange signal. At least to me, and so I was somewhat heartened to read the "update" on The Intercept, so we shall wait and see.
Chuck said...
"Jupiter: what about this Vaxxer business?!?"
OK. What about it? Did it grab your pussy?
Trump did call himself the golden boy, didn't he?
Drago said...
And they leak
No one will be concerned over this little piddly thing....
Chuck is a single-issue poster. Other than bashing Trump, he has little to say.
Jupiter, you answered a question with two questions. So I have two answers.
No, it did not "grab any pussy." And as for what it is about, I suspect that it is yet another profound Donald Trump pathology that will not heal. A YouTube user posted a video that purported to use public-domain news video to suggest that Barron Trump has some symptoms of autism himself. Rosie O'Donnell did something similar. Melania Trump's lawyer Charles Harder extracted from the YouTube user a deletion of the video, a complete apology and God only knows what else. (Harder is the Peter Thiel-retained attorney who prosecuted the civil action versus Gawker Media and bankrupted it.) Rosie O'Donnell likewise issued a very sudden and comprehensive retraction/apology.
"Golden Showers"!
ARM, I cannot recommend strongly enough that you continue on this line.
I think you are on to something. You should really amp it up in fact.
Unknown said...
No one will be concerned over this little piddly thing....
Didn't Trump assure us that he has big 'hands'.
Big Mike:
No, the phone was busy when he called the second one.
"Bay Area Guy said...
Paul Ryan and the House are not going to impeach Trump. If the Dems win the House in 2018, the impeachment odds drastically improve."
It's better odds that the current house will do it.
Chuck, who supports anything anti-Trump: "Answer directly."
In which Chuck demonstrates his misunderstanding of the internet rules.
The Russians can't blackmail Trump. He has no shame. He's the Honey-Badger-in-Chief. He don't give a shit.
Birther: Factually wrong, since Obama was born in Hawaii. Stupid idea, but Obama could have cleared it up years before, but chose to milk it for political benefit with a nice Political judo move, Obama 1, Trump 0
Truther: Factually wrong. I don't think 9/11 was inside job, and don't think Trump thinks so either. You might be confusing Trump with Michael Moore.
Vaxxer: Not a huge issue for me. Probably, a few folks have had allergic reactions to vaccines, causing injuries. I was deemed allergic to pencillin way back when, but don't dispute the massive benefits of penicillin to general population. Haven't heard Trump's opinion on this - wasn't part of the campaign.
Draft Dodger: You're wrong here. Many folks in 1970 got legal deferments, didn't move to Canada, didn't lend indirect support to the VietCong. Trump didn't serve, but don't think he dodged a la Clinton.
Why are you focusing on trivial opinions or past actions, as opposed to prospective policies?
DJT cemented Ryan on his side by hiring Reince. The Impeachment attackers will have to wait.
And in two years DJT will have found out and fired the CIA moles who are out to get him. All he has to do is stay out of open limousines in kill zones for two years.
... the prophylactic approach to his conflicts, ...
Is that what they're calling the Nobel Peace Prize now?
"And in two years DJT will have found out and fired the CIA moles who are out to get him."
Is it just me, or is it a bad sign when this is the sorta thing a PEOTUS's sycophants are suggesting even before the inauguration? Is there a historic precedence?
Carry on.
If Trump and Putin colluded to affect the election, it's treason charges he'll be facing. We know you true believers don't care that he's a freak who hires prostitutes to piss on him.
"We know you true believers don't care that he's a freak who hires prostitutes to piss on him."
Traditional Dude is into that stuff. Number two, too.
Why are these articles presented in a form that is so off-putting to anyone who's not tripping on Trump hate?
Because the people who write, edit and publish them don't know anybody who isn't tripping on Trump hate.
So now, in addition to being a "lifelong republican" and a legal beagle but somehow missing the lawfare conducted against Sarah Palin in Alaska (unexpectedly), "lifelong republican" Chuck is launching "draft dodger" charges against Trump. Something even the Dems aren't doing because it is so hilariously false.
Is this the point in the conversation where we thank Chuck for his service to his country?
There was that Lincoln dude from Illinois. Before he could even get inaugurated 7 States formed their own Army to attack DC and kill him. His train went through Maryland with him in hiding and surrounded by his own hired Pinkertons security.
And the British wanted to declare the Confederate States winners so they could attack and kill him.
And his own Cabinet scorned him and his best General wanted to arrest him and declare himself Dictator, but settled on running against him in 64. and would have won but for Sherman winning at Jonesboro forcing surrender of Atlanta.
Drago:
By no means should you discourage the current snipe hunt upon which Chuck and all the Lefties are currently embarking.
Pack their bags for them.
"Chuck is launching "draft dodger" charges against Trump. Something even the Dems aren't doing because it is so hilariously false."
DJT was a Vietnam hero, and Kerry was a draft dodger, and folks who got captured are losers, everybody knows that.
DJT = Lincoln
Got it.
Ann - now that you have a little more free time, why don't you look into this very important legal issue and give us your well-reasoned opinion?
Trump is a war hero because he never caught an STD or a UTI from hookers during the Vietnam war years.
LyinPB, keep running with that one as well.
One of these accusations has to bear fruit at some point!
Don't give up!
Lyin'PB:
And the Rosenbergs were innocent?
And John Kerry has the hat to this day.
Fun game!
Golden showers are only half of it; the Russians have hacked into his cell phone so they can read his twitters first.
Unknown: "Trump is a war hero because he never caught an STD or a UTI from hookers during the Vietnam war years"
I'll bet Randolph Churchill wished he had been as careful.
So your latest complaint regarding Trump is that he plans ahead and avoids STDs?
I'll bet Charlie Sheen wishes he had planned ahead. And to think his father was a famous President!
#Winning
Golden showers are only half of it; the Russians have hacked into his cell phone so they can read his twitters first.
"Fun game!"
Presumably you're proud of whatever it is you think you've accomplished w/ you comment.
It doesn't seem like you're denying DJT was a draft dodger, and it seems like you know Kerry went to war, and you don't seem to believe POW's are losers.
Anywho, that's fun, to you, for some reason.
"I'll bet Charlie Sheen wishes he had planned ahead."
Don't forget Magic.
Trump Intelligence Allegations. Report
Magic didn't have a pretend President daddy, so clearly, you go with Sheen.
It's a good thing that memo was classified otherwise it might have leaked out!
Drago said...
leaked
Donald Trump was a birther; his being a birther was one of the stupidest things Trump has ever engaged in (that's saying a lot), but the general issue is the least toxic for Trump, since he did an un-Trumplike thing, and quit the fight.
This is Trump at his "Birthiest," when he was spouting off about how he had his own investigators in Hawaii, "and they cannot believe what they are finding:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Blckpwk1voQ
This is Trump, ending that claim. But of course, at the same time Trump did the Trumpiest thing, by claiming that Hillary Clinton started it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWci3a0-EKM
There is a pathology there, in the way that Trump promoted the conspiracy theory and then ended it, saying "Who cares?"
Trump as truther; this one is not so literal, as it is hateful. Here is Trump, in his own words, claiming that the Bush Administration "lied" to take the country into Iraq:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4ThZcq1oJQ
It does not require Donald Trump's thinking that 9/11 was an inside job; it is bad enough that Trump thought he saw "thousands" of Muslims in New Jersey cheering the fall of the World Trade Center. It is bad enough -- and should have been fatal to the candidacy of any decent Republican -- that Trump claimed that President Bush "lied" our way into a war in Iraq. And people here think I amd the one with questionable Republican credentials?!?
Trump as Vaxxer; this one has been going on longer than all the others. Maybe it really is related to something with his son Barron.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2016/12/trump_s_endorsement_of_slow_vaxxing_explains_his_appeal.html
Trump as draft dodger; his deal was ultimately not merely a matter of educational deferments. When his educational deferments were all done, Trump got a diagnosis of heel spurs (which he never had surgically repaired, which is the treatment of choice for debilitating heel spurs) and instead he went skiing. We shall see, what his presidential physical says about any history of heel spurs.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/celebrity/deferments-helped-trump-dodge-vietnam
Yes ARM, we read that the first time you posted it.
OK lil guy, we've seen it. Here's a cookie, now go back and finish watching "Wayne's World".
"lifelong republican" Chuck: " There is a pathology there,..."
There certainly is.
Chuck said...
"Jupiter, you answered a question with two questions. So I have two answers."
Chuck, you strike me as the guy with all the answers. If there's anything anyone needs to know, they can just ask Chuck. Chuck will answer, and then they'll know. Right?
It seems just barely possible that you are legit, so look, we don't care, get it? Bush may not have been behind 9/11, but he didn't have a clue what to do about it either. Religion of fucking Peace! What a dipshit Republican asshole. Then McCain lost to that Kenyan sack of shit, in a most high-minded Republican fashion, I might add. After the grisly horror of Romney in 2012 (another high-minded Republican moron, running for Student Body President), I was hunkering down for eight years of watching Hillary fucking Clinton and her friends finishing what that illegitimate fucking Kenyan Socialist started. I saw a good solid chance I would be in prison or dead by 2024, assuming the Democrats bothered to hold elections that year.
Somehow, some way, that didn't happen. Hillary Clinton will never be the President of the United States! Waaaaah-hah! If Donald Trump wants to appoint some Kennedy boy-toy to a commission on Vox, or Vex, or Vax, or whatever has your knickers in a twist, more power to him. Who gives fuck zero?
Now Jamie Gorelick, I grant you, that is sick and wrong. But I am starting to realize that Trump has been in business so long he doesn't think in those terms. I suppose after you have made enough payoffs to enough corrupt union and municipal scumbags, you figure that anyone willing to be used can be useful. Trump has a long spoon. A very long spoon. Don't be surprised at anyone you see him supping with.
If I was DJT I would not let the CNN whores working for the CIA traitors into Presidential Press Conferences or Daily Briefings. He can point out they are traitors working as a CIA hit team, which he knows from The Highest Authority of secret reports that only he has access to.
Obambi's long, long, long farewell continues tonight from Democrat Murder Central.
He only has a few days left.
I wonder if "lifelong republican" Chuck has enough black suits to get him thru this difficult time.
Watch out Perfesser. This is how it starts... Neocon.
Jupiter; do you realize that I feel much the same way about Trump? That he's a hate object first and foremost because, yeah! But now he's become a rather useful hate object. He beat the Dems in a run for the White House. He'll follow the lead of the Senate Judiciary Committee on federal judicial nominations. He'll sign legislation that the House and Senate send him. I don't expect that he will fulfill any of his most notorious campaign promises but that won't bother me on e bit because I didn't like any of them, and I expect that it won't bother the Trumpkins because all they care about is Trump appearing ballsy and they won't even remember any of the campaign promises if Rush and Hannity don't remind them.
@Chuck:
Donald Trump was a birther; his being a birther was one of the stupidest things Trump has ever engaged in (that's saying a lot), but the general issue is the least toxic for Trump, since he did an un-Trumplike thing, and quit the fight.
Yes, Trump is a goofball who is more instinct than logic. But despite his opulence and ostentatiousness, Trump is much closer to the average American voter than any of the elite candidates, who live in various bubbles (e.g. coastal cities, DC, think tanks, the media, etc.) that make them far more removed from the typical American despite having net worth's a fraction of Trump's. Of course the elites, for various self-interested reasons, are for unlimited immigration of cheap low skilled labor. It's the simply the inverse of outsourcing. The elite bubble is thick enough to insulate them from the effects this policy has. In fact, they benefit tremendously: cheap mades, cheap housekeeping and line cook staff, etc.).
Trump's instincts on immigration are correct despite birther or anti-vax flights of fancy. Trying to arrest the demographic transformation being forced upon the country should be priority #1 for anyone interested in preserving the United States in a form that would be at all recognizable to recent generations. The rest of the domestic agenda, Obamacare included, is peanuts in comparison.
Now, the real area where Trump could potentially do the most damage is foreign policy. But a mile it was the issue I wrestled with the most in my support for Trump. His frequent recourse to tough talk and his preference for hardline generals with tenuous at best (and nearly delusional at worst) understandings of international affairs. I like his attitude towards Russia, and at least some non-interventionists do have his ear, but how much credence he will pay them remains to be seen. I don't like his slavishness towards Israel. And he is out to lunch on the Iran Nuclear Deal, a rare foreign policy accomplishment for the Obama administration. The phone call to Taiwan was also reckless and dumb but may end up being strategically helpful down the road in a Nixonian unpredictability sort of way.
Nonetheless, ultimately I am an American and a nationalist, and preserving the nation must take precedence over all other issues. If Trump uses military force against a country that is not an imminent to us, it would be a disaster.
Other scholars might agree that this writer should simply pull a prophylactic over his head.
I don't know how you can quantify this, but I get the sense that the left hates Trump even more than they hated Nixon. Nixon's Presidency didn't end well.......There are lots and lots of federal employees who will leak anything damaging they know about Trump, and Trump looks scandal prone. If the Dems ever win back the House, they will initiate impeachment proceedings and maybe they can find some Republicans to join in. It's stiill improbable, but I wouldn't give long odds against it happening.
J. Farmer;
I keep hearing that; that Trump speaks to, and in a language familiar to, most Americans.
Most people I know, many of whom voted for Trump, think he is a freak. Nobody we know, talks like that. Nobody is that shamelessly crass and insulting. Nobody is fooled, that these weird tangents of his are some mark of genius. None of us can explain these bizarre statements and Tweets. We are not sold on him. We think of him as awful and frightening at worst, and the best of some bad options at best.
I don't believe in "mandates," and I don't think of Trump having a mandate any more than Obama did. There are elections. There are only winners, and losers. There are legislative majorities, and supermajorities, and minorities. There are five votes, on the Supreme Court. My sole happiness is seeing (R) next to all of the names.
I didn't read through most of the comments, I apologize for that. I will after I comment. But first I wanted to say something and I hope it's not already said.
I think most of these articles are attempts in influence Trump, or the GOP. The entire point of writing them is, "Hey, we know Trump or those close to him will read this, so maybe if we make these assertions and statements and threats, they'll listen and do what we want them to do."
It's worked in the past.
I don't expect that he will fulfill any of his most notorious campaign promises but that won't bother me on e bit because I didn't like any of them, and I expect that it won't bother the Trumpkins because all they care about is Trump appearing ballsy and they won't even remember any of the campaign promises if Rush and Hannity don't remind them.
Chuck sounds like a lot of Democrats. Republicans and Trump followers are too stupid to know what's good for them. If we would have just listened to Chuck!
But now, Chuck is going to be happy because everything is going to happen the way Chuck wanted it to happen, and all those knuckle dragging Trump supporters in middle America are going to be disappointed in Trump. But they'll be too dumb to realize just how disappointed they are.
If Republicans have any principles they will initiate impeachment proceedings, no need to wait for Dems to do so.
The New Yorker has funny cartoons.
Blogger mockturtle said...
Chuck is a single-issue poster. Other than bashing Trump, he has little to say.
This isn't correct.
He also likes to bash those who voted for Trump.
Blogger Unknown said...
If Republicans have any principles they will initiate impeachment proceedings, no need to wait for Dems to do so.
Either this is a false choice, or, the Republicans don't have any principles.
Either way, you lose.
Now what, Inga?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/10/fbi-chief-given-dossier-by-john-mccain-alleging-secret-trump-russia-contacts
"Senator John McCain passed documents to the FBI director, James Comey, last month alleging secret contacts between the Trump campaign and Moscow and that Russian intelligence had personally compromising material on the president-elect himself.
The material, which has been seen by the Guardian, is a series of reports on Trump’s relationship with Moscow. They were drawn up by a former western counter-intelligence official, now working as a private consultant."
@Chuck:
Nobody we know, talks like that. Nobody is that shamelessly crass and insulting.
At the risk of sounding "shamelessly crass and insulting" my self, who gives a fuck? Forget all the cult of personality guy you wanna have a bear with crap. With the exception of Sanders, every single primary candidate in the Republican and Democratic Party would have ensured a continuation of the status quo. They were all for more interventionism, more globalism, and more elite interests. Trump is a wildcard, but the best bet is on a wild card when compared to a sure (bad) thing from every other candidate.
Partisan tribalism is sclerotic on political change. The political parties are a sideshow. The problems are much more endemic and entrenched and cross a wide variety of interconnected self-interests. Blowing up the system is worth the potential fallout. Surgery is harming a patient in order to cure them.
Trump should get some golden slumbers tonight.
@Unknown:
The material, which has been seen by the Guardian, is a series of reports on Trump’s relationship with Moscow.
McCain has a long history of Russophobia and has been a frequent supporter of needlessly aggressive and antagonistic actions towards Russians. Extending NATO to tiny countries like Latvia and Estonia causes friction with a major global power and gets the US virtually nothing of strategic value in return. For some cold war dinosaurs, there remains a bitter desire to thumb Russia in the nose at every opportunity on the global stage. This may satisfy some base, primitive tribalism, but it is ultimately juvenile, short sighted, and counterproductive.
Chuck said...
"There are only winners, and losers."
No shit, Sherlock. It's called the Theory of the Strong Horse.
J. F.
Get a grip. You're the one who thinks DJT overlaps w/ the experiences of normal folks.
Sure, he seems to be able to trick normal folks into thinking he's one of y'all.
But, that's not what you're claiming. [Because you're one of the tricked folks.]
Anywho, I'm sure lots of everyday Americans had a chauffer drive them on their paper route when it rained. Likewise pops buying 3.5 million in chips to funnel dough to his going broke kid, not to mention all the other millions and inherited biz connections.
Anywho, DJT eats fast food! He understands the common man!
Carry on.
Eh, J farmer is just being pissy.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/01/us-intelligence-evidence-trump-russia-ties-might-be-credible
"When he dug into Trump, he notes, he came across troubling information indicating connections between Trump and the Russian government. According to his sources, he says, "there was an established exchange of information between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin of mutual benefit."...The first memo, based on the former intelligence officer's conversations with Russian sources, noted, "Russian regime has been cultivating, supporting and assisting TRUMP for at least 5 years. Aim, endorsed by PUTIN, has been to encourage splits and divisions in western alliance." It maintained that Trump "and his inner circle have accepted a regular flow of intelligence from the Kremlin, including on his Democratic and other political rivals." It claimed that Russian intelligence had "compromised" Trump during his visits to Moscow and could "blackmail him."
This is where things stayed until today, when we learned a little bit more. Apparently the intelligence community now considers this raw intel credible enough that it included it as an annex to the classified version of its report on Russian hacking."
J. Farmer: "McCain has a long history of Russophobia and has been a frequent supporter of needlessly aggressive and antagonistic actions towards Russians."
If I might take a moment to briefly rise in McCains defense on this issue alone, McCain experienced real torture (not fake US Lefty bedwetter torture) and the murder of American POWs by the North Vietnamese (whom the US liberals praised) as well as by Cubans and Soviet personnel.
So McCains antipathy should be viewed in that light.
Why does the leaked document read like it was written by enemy of Moose and Squirrel? Articles, indefinite and definite, are dropped like Palin drops "g"s. This is such shoddy work. You've got to be kidding, Inga.
It's amazing that this story from last October in the leftist "Mother Jones" by little Marxist David Corn is being recycled by CNN as explosively new.
This was the same time the lefties were pushing the Trump "secret server for Russia comms" story.
And it all originates from a paid Dem oppo research guy.
And it all originates from a paid Dem oppo research guy.
One more reek of Rodham and she's toast.
Unknown said...
If Trump and Putin colluded to affect the election, it's treason charges he'll be facing. We know you true believers don't care that he's a freak who hires prostitutes to piss on him."
Trump's pissing on the Left. And I applaud.
That stupid "golden showers" story has already been shown to be a 4Chan hoax. Of course, gullible boneheads like Unknown believe it.
Keep hope alive!!
It's cool that DJT apologists can't say if DJT had ever talked to or met Putin before the election.
DJT has claimed both.
If I was being an apologist for such a person, I'd be a bit worried about such a massive red flag. But, many here are unburdened by such details and reality. Bliss.
Carry on.
I have no doubt that most scholars agree ... on almost everything. That's the problem. That they comprise a consensus that Trump should be impeached at his inaugural is a good bet; open-minded, data driven, and sober like they are.
Stalin: murdered 8 Million in Great Famine of 1932; allied with Hitler in 1939 to start WWII in Europe.
Putin: enticed Democrat John Podesta to tender computer password in Nigerian phish scam.
Compare & contrast
Bay AG,
You're reflecting the vibe of many here. It seems like the DJT apologist POV is distancing itself from the DJT isn't doin' S w/ Putin claim. Now we're told that Putin ain't so bad.
Got it.
Carry on.
Four years of this shit - maybe eight. The left is like a bunch middle school cheerleaders. "Did you hear about....? OMG!"
This just in: Mitt Romney hasn't paid taxes in 10 years.
Plus he killed a woman by giving her cancer!
#FakeDemNews
Why is ARM pedaling fake news?
"Plus he killed a woman by giving her cancer!"
Puleez, that's notin', HRC's knows how to rack up a real body count. Not to mention the pizza thing.
While Althouse seems to be on the "defend Trump at all costs" kick for the past several months, there is a serious question here that you don't have to be "dripping in Trump hate" to think about--namely, how does Trump address the conflicts of interest created by having these financial interests (e.g., stakes in hotels and other properties overseas) while serving as president where his decisionmaking is compromised? There is a constitutional issue involved, but even if there weren't (and Althouse can make some argument that the Emoluments Clause doesn't apply, as I'm sure she'll try) there is still the obvious ethical problem. Any foreign government of a country where Trump's business is operating will have some leverage over him through deciding if he gets a license approved or a tax subsidy, and this can be more significant in more corrupt countries (e.g., Russia, India).
Trump can try to recuse himself from decisions involving such governments, but it is hard to see how he can do that in many of these cases (or if it would even be effective--would his appointees really be walled off from such influences?). Simply saying "my kids run the company now" doesn't work either--he still apparently would have ownership.
Anyone serious about corruption would want to see him come up with a plan to address it--if not total divestiture, something that appropriately mitigates the conflicts. And while you don't have to be "dripping with Trump hate" to take this issue seriously, you'd have to be "dripping with Trump love" to brush it off.
But where would all the little babies go? A prophylactic would close the abortion chambers and bankrupt Planned Parenthood. I don't think they thought this all the way through.
Perhaps in eight years the unhinged left (and the percentage of Democrats that fit that description is at an all time high) will say,"See! We TOLD you Trump would step down!"
Look back over these past few years.....oooops, I mean weeks, and count the times both the GOPe and the left have had these baseless fantasies about replacing Trump at the R Convention, faithless electors, recounts, and on and on.
Fascinating and chilling. We have become a nation of about 30% Rosie O'Donnells.
Like I have said many times, Donald Trump is not going to put the New York Times out of business. And he isn't going to put MSNBC, or even the Fox News Channel out of business. He is going to put The Onion out of business.
Anti-vaxxers are fucking morons. Period.
I do wonder if you can get a noted moron like Kennedy to recognize the truth about vaccines, if it will end the anti-vaxxer movement cold.
If Trump does anything to try and end vaccines or try and pimp laughably terrible science, I will join you on the cannon firing at him.
Interesting subject - a bonkers anti-Trump publcation published a story that a bunch of leftist anti-Trump profs, living in their far left academic cocoons, realize that their attempts to deny him the Presidency through selective recounts, faithless electors, etc, realize that the next step is impeachment, but ignore that a heavily Republican House isn't about to impeach a Republican President, and esp one who has signed on to many of their most fervent conservative wet dreams. And that even considering such at this point is likely to get many of them primaried out of a job in two years. Ann has pointed out she reads this publication, along with the NYT, so we don't have to. She is welcome to it.
And then we had the mutual masterbation of the most rabid of the antiTrumpers take over last night after everyone else went to bed. Still, I would ask them how exactly was the birther story (started, apparently, by Crooked Hillary operative "Sid Vicious" Blumenthal) ever debunked? With the obviously fake birth certificate that was produced so belatedly? And he doesn't really look like the rest of his putative Obama relatives. Like with Trump, it never mattered. Obama was going to be President, and nothing anyone on the right was going to be able to do about it. Still, even more than with Trump's tax returns, there continues to be a lot still studiously, and expensively buried about Obama's background. His academic credentials can't have been as bad as those of AlGore, GW Bush, or John Kerry, so why haven't we seen a single transcript of his time in school to this day? It never mattered in the scheme of things. He was going to be President, and wasn't going to be impeached, even with a Republican House, despite illegally spending billions of unauthorized funds, illegally sendiing billions to Iran, along apparently, with a bunch of uranium, illegally releasing terrorists from Gitmo, etc. Plenty of legal justifications for impeaching Obama, but it wasn't going to happen. Even by a Republican House elected due to his arrogant overreaching. Essentially the same Republican House that is now supposed to impeach Trump.
My answer to my question of why the Republicans couldn't impeach Obama, and almost assuredly won't impeach Trump, is that both are where they are because of movements. Clinton was never a movement guy, nor were the Bushes. Reagan, Obama, and Trump were/are. Few outside Monica Lewinski and a handful of other skanky women actually really loved Bill Clinton, esp after his disgracing the Oval Office with his sexual antics. Along with the cocaine and beer fueled pizza parties there. He snuck into the White House, thanks to a strong third party candidate, and never had the sort of fervent support that either Trump or Obama had. So, he was vulnerable to impeachment, while the weren't.
"I do wonder if you can get a noted moron like Kennedy to recognize the truth about vaccines, if it will end the anti-vaxxer movement cold."
Anti-vaxxers like Kennedy are generally well-off and well-informed and yet persist in their nonsense beliefs because they reject anything going against them. I'd be shocked if he comes out saying "I guess I was wrong about it".
If these nuts try and legitimize the anti-vax movement, screw 'em. People die because of this crap and it brings out the worst in the self-righteous tools who currently enjoy the advantage of a society that used vaccines to mostly wipe out a lot of diseases that used to ravage our population.
"So, he was vulnerable to impeachment, while the weren't."
A partisan House majority could certainly impeach (not this House with this Prez, but if the Dems took the House back somehow) but the only thing that will bring about an actual removal is a Prez so vastly unpopular that even his own party abandons him enough in the Senate that you can get 67 votes to remove. That hurdle has never been met, even with Andrew Johnson.
Nothing like this will happen with the GOP holding the House, and even if it lost the House it'd take a massive shift in public opinion to get enough Republican senators to agree to remove.
Trump is much closer to the average American voter than any of the elite candidates, who live in various bubbles (e.g. coastal cities, DC, think tanks, the media, etc.) that make them far more removed from the typical American despite having net worth's a fraction of Trump's.
This has got to be one of the most ridiculous statements ever made on this blog, and that is saying a lot.
Trump is the definition of coastal elite. He was born rich in fucking New York City. His main business is casinos, high end hotels, and expensive real estate. His primary residences are Mid Town Manhattan and Palm Beach! I bet he hasn't driven his own car in years, let alone taken the subway.
How on earth can you claim he is close to the "average American voter"? The denial among Trump fans is mind boggling.
OMG!
Freder has a point and not just the one on top of his head.
However.(saw that comin' didn't you Freder}
In the course of his career as a casino and hotel owner he's had to interact with a lot working class people. From the trades to the maids. As it were.
He knows how hard a bricklayer works, or a drywaller, or the pot scrubber in a restaurant. He has to know. He employs them. He writes their paychecks.
Yuge difference between the coastal elites who distains all those jobs and all those people and the elite who actually knows what goes into the job their doing.
You want a real education in economics and psychology?
Start a business and meet a payroll.
They really thought they would rule forever.
They really are this stupid.
It's glorious.
most reasonable trump fans agree w/ damikesc - trump's trying to bring anti-vaxxers into the fold
i don't mind if there are concessions to them - unnecessary (?) safety tests for example if it increases the amount of immunization out there in the wild
i also don't mind if some malfeasance by the vax industry is uncovered (i doubt it will be), if trump can sell it as "and now you can see we're completely transparent about it and you can trust what remains"
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा