July 20, 2017

Trump has a script?

"Trump goes off-script and fumes about Sessions and Russia probe." (Politico.)

365 comments:

1 – 200 of 365   Newer›   Newest»
Michael K said...

Politico has a script.

I thought they were complaining about his uncontrolled Twitter stuff.

traditionalguy said...

Trump has a new script. It is written to prepare the battle space to fire the Mueller lead Clintonistas assassination squad.

Look for a series of campaign rallies coming soon.

And Trump just sent a message to Ryan The Rino that his time is coming. If he will do that to his own guy Sessions, then all coalitions with the GOP Trump haters are off. DJT will either win or he will go down fighting for us.

Kevin said...

Off-script: not watered down to nothingness and likely containing inconvenient truths.

Kevin said...

Trump says the darndest things.

Chuck said...

"Trump has a script?"

What a great question. But even according to the White House, they tried to create a script. We had Energy Week, and Infrastructure Week, and Manufacturing Week, right?

And every time, Trump went off on some tangent through his Twitter account. And blew up whatever "week" it was.

Best line of the week was reported by Jeff Zeleny of CNN, quoting a senior Republican as saying that the president was playing with a fire truck and trying on a cowboy hat as the [Senate healthcare reform]bill was collapsing and he had no clue.

https://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/trump-fire-truck.jpg



KittyM said...

@Michael K Trump's well known for his freewheeling tweets but I think the point is that his aides have tried to control which interviews he gives and to whom. I read that his people were quite shocked by what he said in this interview.

n.n said...

Trump is frustrated with Democratic and Republicans obstacles to progress.

Water Closet, Podesta's password, DNC collusion with a post-coup government in Kiev, etc. are yesterday. They are the lasts gasps of the old regime. Certainly not progress in the popular sense.

Trump wants progress. How can anyone oppose progress?

traditionalguy said...

Seriously, Trump does have a script. It is called Primordial Traditionalism. And it is one reason that I fall into agreement with Trump.

Learn more about it in Deal With the Devil. Steve Bannon wrote the script, and then Trump advanced it 20 years ahead in a magnificent communication job so admired by Scott Adams.

Trump is such a fast learner that he leaves everybody behind, sooner or later.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Media have a script.

Fernandinande said...

Startled and scrambling in the dark trouble obsessed furious kicked unsettling weird frustrated tensions unsuccessfully uncharted taken aback baseless.

Any questions?

roesch/voltaire said...

His thoughts are a script in the wind blowing every which way.

Birkel said...

KittyM, fresh off worrying about a free press, accepts the MSM reports uncritically. These press reports are generated to reduce support for Trump. The reports have failed; support is higher than two months ago.

The free opposition press is free, is oppositional, and is losing.

WisRich said...

Is this "off script" similar to a "political gaff"? (i.e. speaking the truth)

David said...

I stole your comment and used it elsewhere. I am so ashamed.

Earnest Prole said...

Trump has a script the same way the media have integrity.

AMDG said...

Given his stance on Civil Asset Forteiture I hope he goes.

It should have been Trey Gordy in the first place.

harrogate said...

In 6 months he has cried and complained more than any full-term President in memory.


How strange to have been a member of the elite ruling class since birth, and now to be President, and still to yammer on about being persecuted and treated unfairly.


Sad!

Chuck said...

Birkel said...
...

The free opposition press is free, is oppositional, and is losing.

So why is Trump giving all of these millions of page-hits for the last 14 hours to the New York Times, instead of "the free opposition press"?

Is it because the New York Times is a "great, great American jewel"?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/22/business/media/donald-trump-new-york-times.html

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

If Trump made money with Russian deals - media will get to the bottom of it.

If Hillary made money with Russian deals - media will ignore.

Mike Sylwester said...

Our President Trump needs to go even more onto the offensive. He should declassify all documents in the bogus Russiagate investigation. Today he can declassify the following:

* the FISA application of June 2016, along with all its supporting documents.

* the transcript of the Flynn-Kislyak telephone conversation, along with all related documents, including Sally Yates' memos and correspondence about Flynn being vulnerable to RUSSIAN BLACKMAIL for violating the LOGAN ACT.

* all documents related to the Steele dossier, including all FBI documents about paying Steele.

** Let the public investigate the investigators. **

sunsong said...

Trump shows no loyalty! He should stand by Sessions. But then Trump is not an honorable man...

Chuck said...

Now Is the Time! said...
Why hasn't Sessions appointed a special prosecutor to go after Hillary? That tells you everything you need to know about how far in the tank Sessions is for the Deep State.

Why a "special prosecutor"? What exactly is the "special prosecutor" in your question? Would it be an attorney working under the auspices of the Department of Justice? If so, under what legal/departmental/statutory authority?

Or, are you just blowing off steam with a few legal-sounding phrases thrown in, like a drunk in a bar near closing time?

grackle said...

… and scroll through the comments of some of this blog's regulars, to see what they said when Sessions was nominated, when he had his confirmation hearing, and when he testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee, etc.

I get a kick out of the change in tone; as long as Sessions was a favored star in the Trump firmament, he was loved. Now, not so much.


I guess the commentor didn’t see my comment back on March 5. For the commentor’s enlightenment I offer it again:

It’s obvious to me that Obama wiretapped Trump Towers. Obama didn’t find anything other than the ordinary, normal fact that meetings and conversations took place which is why there was no reason for Sessions to recuse without, apparently, even discussing it with his boss(Trump) that he was going to do so.

But the MSM is very good at taking the normal(Trump and/or his people speaking to foreign diplomats) and promoting it as something ominous or illegal. It’s called “fake news.”

Keeping this in mind I would not be surprised if Sessions resigned at Trump’s request at some time in the future. Sessions revealed a disturbing lack of character by jumping through this recusal hoop at the command of the MSM/Democrat/eGOP coalition. You just cannot scare that easily. A Trump Attorney General is going to have to have a good set of cojones in order to weather the inevitable fake news storms that will come his way. Too bad. Other than lack of courage I think Sessions was a good choice.

Chris N said...

Did someone say ScriptKeeper?

Nonapod said...

Personally I was never a big fan of Sessions. I never liked his tripling down on the whole "War on Drugs" thing, so I don't care that much if he either resigns of his own volition or is asked to resign by Trump.

It seems as though Trump's patience is wearing thin. At some point soon he's probably going to straight up fire Mueller and repeal of the special counsel regulations. This of course will cause a firestorm of biblical proportions. It's going to get even crazier before long.

Chuck said...

It’s obvious to me that Obama wiretapped Trump Towers.

Lulz.

Precisely because Jeff Sessions was willing and able to follow well established Justice Department protocols, and recuse himself, I stand by my original feeling that Sessions' nomination as AG was one of the few good moves by President-elect Trump.

And so what, if Sessions recused himself? Why is Sessions' recusal a big deal at all? I thought Trump's claim was that the whole Russia investigation was an unserious "witch hunt"? What's Trump got to worry about? Sessions or not; Special Counsel or not; what is the difference? Why is Sessions' proper and prudent decision to recuse himself from a DoJ investigation into the Trump campaign (wherein Sessions was a senior advisor and strategist) so important? Why does it matter who leads any investigation, as long as it is a good and fair and thorough investigation? What would be different, if Sessions had not recused himself?

eric said...

The media keeps thinking Trump is McCain, or Romney, or Bush or any other number of Republicans from the past.

So, when Trump says, "Had I known Sessions would recuse himself I never would have hired him in the first place." This sounds like a huge scandal to the media. It's, OMGOMGOMGOMG! Time. But this is normal Trump. And this is why the whole Russia story is completely stupid.

Trump doesn't have that weasel words gene most politicians seem to have. If he had colluded with Russia he'd be saying things like, "Everyone would have colluded with Russia!" He doesn't hide or obfuscate, he argues and justifies.

And if he likes you, he praises you. And if he doesn't like you, who says so, loudly.

I guess he expects people to be grown up and not get personally offended over every little thing.

But boy oh boy is the media trying hard to get everyone worked up.


Big Mike said...

Trump Has a Script?

Unlikely. But realistically speaking, he's just telling the objective truth. We just aren't used to it, having had two Bushes and two Democrats since the last plain-speaking president.

Birkel said...

fopdoodle,

Your argument for unilateral disarmament is noted. Trump uses the NYT. The NYT uses Trump. Both have their reasons.

Your attempt at stupid, stupid, cheap point scoring is noted.

Obergefell
Boo!

Bay Area Guy said...

On the merits, Trump was totally right. Sessions should not have recused himself. Yes, he tangled up his words in the Senate hearing about meeting with Russians -- and should have corrected it and fought back the Left's effort to mischaracterize it.

But he recused himself -- which has caused headaches for his boss.

Drago said...

harrogate: "In 6 months he has cried and complained more than any full-term President in memory."

Yes, a "p****-hat wearing", "permanent protest mode-antifa 'burn it all down' rioter wannabe", "Russian hacked the election and it's worse than Pearl Harbor!" just wrote that.

Without irony.

I now return you back to your regular programming involving non-stop claims by the left that fascism has descended on the US in the form of President Trump.

Drago said...

It's nice to see the lifelong republicans come out against the 4th amendment.

Again, clarity is a very good thing.

As Dershowitz has pointed out, this is precisely what the 4th Amendment was meant to avoid.

But as we've seen time and again, the radical left and their "lifelong republican" allies are happy to burn the constitution if it means they can railroad Trump.

And it's Trump today, and every other republican later.

etbass said...

How long before Sessions offers his resignation?

etbass said...

I have no doubt that Mueller is planning for removal of Trump by any means. Trump must start his defense against the Democrats and the Republicans who would impeach him for the dirt drug up by Mueller and team.

Unknown said...

"The free opposition press is free, is oppositional, and is losing."
------------
"So why is Trump giving all of these millions of page-hits for the last 14 hours to the New York Times, instead of "the free opposition press"?

Is it because the New York Times is a "great, great American jewel"?"
---------------

Trump is an elitist, yet his sycophants think he's 'down home' , just like them. He gives The NYTs interviews because he won't go slumming at Breitbart. He has gold gilded furniture in his Trump Towers apartment because he's such a down home guy, yep, sure is, lol. He's going to Save America from the Oligarchs!

As for having a script, his handlers tried that, it didn't work. Trump should always be Trump, he should keep giving interviews, tweeting, talking contemporaneously as much as possible. It's good to see the inner workings of that "so called" mind.

harrogate said...

First, Drago, I don't go in for the Russia caterwauling, and I challenge you to find any evidence to the contrary.


Second, even if I *were* all the things you say, so what? It nevertheless remains true that we have a billionaire, sitting President, who hasn't been able to stop crying about how persecuted he is.

Thus, Again, Sad!

Tommy Duncan said...

So he's off the script. At least he didn't diverge from the narrative.

Birkel said...

UnknownInga51,

When you ask "What's the Matter with Trumpists?" make sure to assume you know our minds better than we know our minds. We like that.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Suddenly the left are OK with Sessions. A few months ago - Sessions was a slave owner.

Unknown said...

If all Trump did was "plain speaking", his interviews and tweets wouldn't sound so much like Sarah Palin on crack. He scrambles words, doesn't finish a sentence or even a thought before wildly veering off onto another totally unrelated subject. His speech patterns are not normal. That his sychophants continue to turn themselves into pretzels trying to make sense of his mumblings and ramblings would be hilarious if not so pathetic.

harrogate said...

Dickin'

That's an odd thing to say, but hopefully you don't believe it, because if you did believe it, then there would be cause for alarm.

Chuck said...

So he's off the script. At least he didn't diverge from the narrative.

I just wish that the narrative might include actual progress on health care reform, tax reform, judicial nominations, and election law reform.

Unknown said...

"Suddenly the left are OK with Sessions."

I'd be glad to see Sessions go. He was never alright with me. It's good to see how Trump demands loyalty. The oath he wants is one sworn to him, not to the Constitution. This is your President. You people voted for this man. You people will not live this down for generations to come.

Birkel said...

So does the Left approve Beauregard these days?

Unknown said...

"So he's off the script. At least he didn't diverge from the narrative."

So what is the narrative? "We hate the left and no matter how crazy and incompetent Trump is we are happy to have him because he will stick it to the left."

Is that all you people have left?

Yancey Ward said...

Trump is right to upset with Sessions almost instantaneous recusal after confirmation, but that is water under the bridge. I think if Sessions had a do-over, he wouldn't have done it.

pacwest said...

"I just wish that the narrative might include actual progress on health care reform, tax reform, judicial nominations, and election law reform."

I see this one so often it is getting tiresome - 'But he hasn't solved all the problems yet!' Let's give that one a rest for a bit.

Chuck said...

pacwest, I explicitly said "progress," not "solved."

That's what you call a reading comprehension failure.

cubanbob said...

Chuck do tell us why a Mueller is needed for Trump but not for Hillary.

Unknown said...

"Chuck do tell us why a Mueller is needed for Trump but not for Hillary."

The Trump Crime Family puts the Clinton Crime Family to shame. They are pikers compared to the Trumps.

Unknown said...

"'But he hasn't solved all the problems yet!'"

Just what has he "solved" to date?

Bay Area Guy said...

A quick reminder:

1. We held a democratic election in November 2016. Hillary lost.
2. The Russian "collusion" story is now 13 months old. Not 1 person has been convicted of any crime. Not 1 person has been indicted of any crime -- after 13 months.

That is all.

Michael K said...

"Just what has he "solved" to date?"

860 regulations killed.

Unknown said...

"The Russian "collusion" story is now 13 months old. Not 1 person has been convicted of any crime. Not 1 person has been indicted of any crime -- after 13 months."


Don't be so impatient.

pacwest said...

"That's what you call a reading comprehension failure."

And yet, all of the things you mentioned (with the possible exception of tax reform) can be defined as having made progress albeit slow.

Unknown said...

"860 regulations killed."

Which can be undone with the stroke of a pen with a different President.

Chuck said...

cubanbob said...
Chuck do tell us why a Mueller is needed for Trump but not for Hillary.

Because Hillary Clinton is not currently serving in the Executive Branch of the United States government. She's been out of office for about four years. And that was with the State Department. She's never served in the DoJ or in the FBI.

So a standard investigation of her by the FBI and the regular staff of the DoJ is possible. She wouldn't be investigated by persons she had nominated for their positions.

And in fact, a standard investigation of her, by the FBI, was undertaken. Personally, I'd have been delighted, if she had been indicted. I thought there was every good chance that she would be. But I wasn't privy to the investigation. Nobody needs my opinion on that.

The grounds for appointing a Special Counsel are in 28 CFR 600.1:

§ 600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.

The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.


I don't think that investigating Hillary, by the DoJ, was or would be a "conflict of interest." It would be, in regard to investigating the campaign of the President of the United States, and his Attorney General. And so the appointment.

Birkel said...

UnknownInga51,

Agreed that the size and scope of the centralized government must be reduced. Power must be diffuse. That means the next president, of whatever stripe, would not be able to use Executive Orders outside the Founders' framework.

Do you really want President Worse-Than-Trump to have that power?

Birkel said...

A fopdoodle forgets the part of the law that requires a criminal investigation before the appointment of a special counsel.

Counter-intelligence investigations are outside the scope.

Unknown said...

A good article from Lawfare on the Trump/ NYT's interview. Was Trump mad because Sessions didn't lie under oath?

https://www.lawfareblog.com/president-vs-federal-law-enforcement-trump-attacks-everyone

"His complaint? They’re all, in different ways, not serving him. And serving him, he makes clear, is their real job.

It’s a chilling interview—chilling because of the portrait it paints of presidential paranoia, chilling for its monomaniacal view of the relationship between the president and law enforcement, and chilling for what it says about Trump’s potential readiness to interfere with the Mueller investigation.

If Attorney General Jeff Sessions does not resign this morning, it will reflect nothing more or less than a lack of self respect on his part—a willingness to hold office even with the overt disdain of the President of the United States, at whose pleasure he serves, nakedly on the record.

To add insult to injury, Trump also heaped scorn on the then-nominee’s inability to give satisfactory answers about his meetings with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during his confirmation hearing—on which he blames the recusal. “Sessions gave some bad answers,” he said. The president went on: “He gave some answers that were simple questions and should have been simple answers, but they weren’t. He then becomes attorney general, and he then announces he’s going to recuse himself. Why wouldn’t he have told me that before?”"

Chuck said...

pacwest said...
"That's what you call a reading comprehension failure."

And yet, all of the things you mentioned (with the possible exception of tax reform) can be defined as having made progress albeit slow.

No thanks to any Trump "narrative." The Gorsuch nomination was so effectively handled, because it was outsourced to the Federalist Society, Heritage, AEI, and Mitch McConnell.

Health care reform was a colossal bust, because Trump never got it, and rarely worked on it.

Election law reform might get somewhere, thanks to smart, devoted people like Kobach and von Spakovsky who've been working the issue for years. If they accomplish anything, it will have been despite all of Trump's unscripted off-narrative Tweets and stray comments.

Unknown said...

Regarding Trump's criticism of Sessions' testimony; it's hilarious to hear Trump demand concise and clear language from Sessions, while being the poster boy for ADHD,

rhhardin said...

Meanwhile the local Rush affiliate drops Rush for live coverage and analysis of the OJ hearing. They drop Rush for everything.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Unknown - Please prove to the class how the Trump family set up a private server while head of the State Dept and used it to funnel foreign donations into the Family foundation.

Oh right- the Clintons did that. Trump is merely a capitalist - which is criminal according to leftwing fascists like yourself.

Unknown said...

"Trump is merely a capitalist."

Delusional.

eric said...

No thanks to any Trump "narrative." The Gorsuch nomination was so effectively handled, because it was outsourced to the Federalist Society, Heritage, AEI, and Mitch McConnell.

Health care reform was a colossal bust, because Trump never got it, and rarely worked on it.


This will be the standard life long Republican response, also known as Democrat talking points, for the next 8 years.

Example: Stock market making new highs? The President has nothing to do with that.

Stock market tanking? Trump!

All good things will be excused as not Trump or accidental Trump. All bad things will be OMG Trump!

Birkel said...

A fopdoodle thinks "Kobach and von Spakovsky" got onto A commission by magic.

Obergefell
Boo!

pacwest said...

"That's what you call a reading comprehension failure."

And yet, all of the things you mentioned (with the possible exception of tax reform) can be defined as having made progress albeit slow.

Added: If I'd only I'd stayed in school and graduated from third grade I could do better with my reading comprehension skills I suppose.

roesch/voltaire said...

The Trump script is clear on one point--don't mess with my Russian business deals or else-- what firing Mueller?

Chuck said...

Birkel said...
A fopdoodle thinks "Kobach and von Spakovsky" got onto A commission by magic.


Birkel thinks that Donald Trump found Justice Gorsuch and picked him as the best nominee.

And Birkel, if you are going to try to brand me as a Republican who would like to see the Obergefell decision overturned, you are likely to make me very happy. Will I owe you anything?

Mike said...

So why is Trump giving all of these millions of page-hits for the last 14 hours to the New York Times, instead of "the free opposition press"?

Is it because the New York Times is a "great, great American jewel"?


If you don't believe a word he says, why bother to quote him one way or the other? You aren't changing anyone's opinion here either way with this tedious tripe. You remind me of the atheist that uses Bible quotes to try and disprove Christianity. What's the point?

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

How unknown - NAME THE CRIME.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Unknown is OK with the Clinton Crime Family. A-OK.

victoria said...

I suspect that NOTHING Trump does is off-script. He carefully calculates all that he does. It just seems inept. That is what he wants everyone to believe. He's a newbie, he's not a political animal. That is junk. He does not do anything that is not carefully crafted. He wants everyone to give him a pass on all the badness he does. Ah, no.


Vicki from Pasadena

dreams said...

I've noticed that it's ok for anyone to criticize Trump but when Trump criticizes someone, it's portrayed as another example of Trump being an awful person.

Chuck said...

If you don't believe a word he says, why bother to quote him one way or the other?

If you choose to believe him, are you at all concerned about the completely unhinged and inconsistent things he says and does?

More to the point here; another commenter was driving at the notion that the mainstream media was the enemy. Steve Bannon thinks that the mainstream media is the enemy. So what does it mean, when Trump is alternately threatening the Times with a lawsuit over the claims made by women who said that they were sexually harassed by Trump, and then calling the paper a great American jewel?

Trump's lawyer's threat of a libel suit against the Times last October now appears to have been complete bullshit, of course.


Sebastian said...

Apart from some barely ambiguous comments at a hearing and routine meetings with a Russian ambassador, Sessions had no apparent involvement with Russia or with campaign links to Russia. He should have recognized the hullabaloo about them for the patently phony swamp-war maneuver it was. Instead of showing spine when it counted, he put his own tender self-regard ahead of the interests of his boss and the need to fight back against the swamp. Trump is right to be pissed. But he has his own self-regard issues to deal with: he still wants to be liked by the NYT.

Unknown said...

I love how Full Moon thinks he's got some sort of scoop. "Let's all focus on the commenter named Inga, and stop discussing the TrumpTroubles", lol! Or maybe Full Moon thinks he's intimidatiing me, Unknown51? Hahahaha, what a dope.

Birkel said...

Trump supports Obergefell.
Socially conservative LLRs are not happy at that.
Milo is "the wrong type" of conservative.

Some assembly required.I

Trump won.
LLRs hardest hit.

How did that commission filled with smart guys get appointed by President Trump without President Trump's involvement.

Obergefell
Boo!

Birkel said...

As previously stated, there is no Inga. There is a person who adopts multiple pseudonyms and pretends nobody notices.

We pretend, when it amused us, not to notice.

Chuck said...

FullMoon said...
...

Means Trump is learning the hard way. Like McCain and his front page NYT "lovechild" story.
Like Bush#1 being asked about an affair and refusing to dignify that question with an answer.

So, you are making the case that the Times has a long-standing, conscious, strategic animus towards Republicans. And you raise a couple of good examples. Congrats!

So why would Trump call the Times a "great, great jewel," and give the Times its extraordinary White House exclusive yesterday?

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Birkel said...

A fopdoodle keeps his enemies as far away as humanly possible. When he gets a friend, we will know how he treats one.

Obergefell
Boo!

Chuck said...

Birkel said...
Trump supports Obergefell.

Then shame on Trump. To hell with Trump. Primary him. Fight him.

And don't anybody dare question my Republican credentials, in favor of Trump.

Oh, and this; why badger me with Obergefell, on this particular comments page? Do you think it advances the conversation of the subject Althouse post? Or is it just some sort of, uh, thing up your ass?

Unknown said...

More plain clear concise language and "ideas". LOL!

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/yes-trump-s-attacks-his-justice-department-are-huge-problem-n784741

"He questions Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein because he lived in Baltimore. (“There are very few Republicans in Baltimore, if any.”) And he said special counsel Robert Mueller would be crossing a red line if Mueller looked at his finances unrelated to Russia. (“I would say yes. By the way, I would say, I don’t — I don’t — I mean, it’s possible there’s a condo or something, so, you know, I sell a lot of condo units, and somebody from Russia buys a condo, who knows? I don’t make money from Russia.”) And asked if he’d fire Mueller for doing that, the president replied, “I can’t answer that question because I don’t think it’s going to happen.”"

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Chuck said...

And about Rod Rosenstein;

Trump wouldn't have the requisite memory of the federal judiciary nominating battles, to have recalled that Rosenstein was nominated by Bush to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals but he was blue-slipped by the Democrats who managed to hold the seat open until Obama entered the White House in 2009. When the nomination was withdrawn. Giving a seat to Obama for nomination.

Chuck said...

Still cannot understand why a Trump hater would vote for him, and brag about it.

The least-worst alternative, for a lifelong Republican. But of course the long term future of the party will require a thorough purging of All Things Trump, someday.

Birkel said...

"...thing up your ass..."

Obergefell
Boo!

As a traditional liberal, I get your one position on Trump: missionary.

Kevin said...

“Any senator who votes against starting debate is really telling America that you’re fine with Obamacare,” Mr. Trump said before a lunch with the senators Wednesday. He gestured at one wavering GOP lawmaker, Dean Heller of Nevada, saying, “He wants to remain a senator, doesn’t he?” and warned lawmakers not to leave town in August without a deal.

“I’m ready to act, I have pen in hand, believe me, I’m sitting in that office. You’ve never had that before,” Mr. Trump said. “For seven years, you’ve had an easy rap: ‘We’ll repeal, we’ll replace, and he’s never going to sign it.’”


Seems on-script to me.

William Chadwick said...

The idea of Trump having or (as seems more likely) not having a script reminds me of Dennis Miller, back in the early Nineties when he was making a transition toward libertarianism, saying he could respect Ronald Reagan because "at least Reagan believes his own bulls**t. . . . [whereas] Bill Clinton can't sleep at night without having to read the index cards Stephanopolous leaves on Clinton's pillow telling him what the script will be the next day." (Yes, kids, he was referring to future "objective television journalist" George Stephanopolous.)

Mike Sylwester said...

Chuck at 10:44 AM

Why is Sessions' proper and prudent decision to recuse himself from a DoJ investigation into the Trump campaign (wherein Sessions was a senior advisor and strategist) so important? Why does it matter who leads any investigation, as long as it is a good and fair and thorough investigation? What would be different, if Sessions had not recused himself?

Good questions.

Sessions should have said that he needed to inform himself about the situation before he made a decision about recusing himself. In particular, he needed to inform himself:

* Is there good evidence that Russia meddled in our 2016 election?

* If so, is there good evidence that Trump's campaign staff was involved in such meddling?

* Has the investigation already continued longer than it should have continued?

Then Sessions should have studied those questions and informed Congress that there is no such evidence and that the investigations are terminated.

He could have allowed the Congressional committees to study the evidence and verify his decision.

If the Congressional committees did find evidence, then Sessions should have challenged that decision by declassifying and releasing all such evidence, thus proving that the investigation indeed has been bogus.

Instead, Sessions lost control of the situation immediately and allowed the many Trump-haters in the Intelligence Community and in Congress to launch and conduct a never-ending witch-hunt.

Unknown said...

"But of course the long term future of the party will require a thorough purging of All Things Trump, someday."

Hallelujah. The Republican Party will have the huge burden of distancing themselves from Trump for years to come.

Chuck said...

Mike Sylevster, I understand what you might have liked for Sessions to do, but you didn't answer the question why it is a problem at all for Sessions to be recused out of the Russia, Etc. Investigation.

If the Russia investigation is a big nothingburger, what's the problem? Who cares, if Sessions is in, or out?

Birkel said...

In a world where Roe v Wade is good precedent (modified by Casey even though everybody knows it's one of the least reasonable, worst argued and most divisive cases in the history of the Court...

In a world where a Republican Congress with a Republican president cannot get a bill into reconciliation...

In a world where the ratchet turns in only one direction...

A fopdoodle believes he will get the toothpaste back into the tube.

Unknown said...

McCain, Graham, Kasich and some others, as well as the NeverTrumpers are the only people that have kept the Republican Party from complete shame and degradation in the era of Trump.

Unknown said...

"Seems on-script to me."

Too bad this is the rare occurance. What happens when he does interviews? Just too difficult to remember a "script", talking points, a narrative? Can he stay focused for only five minute bursts?

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said...

@Unknown

Keep sticking it to the Trumpski's with your facts and wit to show them the fools they are for being conned by the biggest con man there is. The legend of the snake oil salesman travelling town-to-town in the mid-West lives on.

Unknown said...

Thanks Unknown,@1:34PM, it's my pleasure.

Matthew Sablan said...

Thus far, the only investigation into the election that showed illegal collusion involves Clinton and the U.S. Postal Service.

Sebastian said...

@MS: "Sessions lost control of the situation immediately and allowed the many Trump-haters in the Intelligence Community and in Congress to launch and conduct a never-ending witch-hunt." Friendly amendment: he did not lose control, he consciously, deliberately, unnecessarily, cowardly yielded control to his and Trump's enemies.

gadfly said...

Althouse has never heard of TrumpScript? Its a programming language derived from Python. Combiining Donald Trump and Monty Python is a scary propositins but not when you consider some more "features" of TrumpScript:

-No floating point numbers, only integers. America never does anything halfway.

-All numbers must be strictly greater than 1 million. The small stuff is inconsequential to us.

-There are no import statements allowed. All code has to be home-grown and American made.

-In its raw form, TrumpScript is not compatible with Windows, because Trump isn't the type of guy to believe in PC.

-The language is completely case insensitive.

Mike Sylwester said...

Chuck at 1:14 PM

... why it is a problem at all for Sessions to be recused out of the Russia, Etc. Investigation.

If the Russia investigation is a big nothingburger, what's the problem? Who cares, if Sessions is in, or out? ...


The investigation is bogus and is a pretext to investigate and pressure all of Trump's associates.

We know that the investigation is bogus, because the US Intelligence Community released a preliminary report in January. That report indicated that the "findings" up to that point were just conjecture. Much of the report was just nonsense about RT television programs.

The report was discussed on this blog on January 6.

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2017/01/american-intelligence-officials-have.html

It's a bogus report about a bogus investigation that is just a pretext to investigate and pressure Trump's associates.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

How do we know that Trump hasn't replaced Sessions with a sex robot? Or that Trump himself hasn't been replaced with a sex robot?. Malfunctioning software would explain a lot ...

Drago said...

Left bank: "Malfunctioning software would explain a lot ..."

Well, it appears "self-awarenes" programming is missing as well.....

Mike Sylwester said...

Because this investigation is so bogus, the best thing our President Trump could do would be to quickly declassify and release to the public **ABSOLUTELY ALL** the Intelligence Community's documents.

* All the wiretap transcripts

* All the analysis of Internet traffic

* All the notes, memos, meeting minutes, reports.

EVERYTHING. It's all being leaked anyway.

The entire US population can do a crowd-source analysis of all the "evidence".

** LET THE PUBLIC INVESTIGATE THE INVESTIGATORS **

grackle said...

I thought Trump's claim was that the whole Russia investigation was an unserious "witch hunt"? What's Trump got to worry about?

It’s a fishing expedition. All this public concern came at the last moment just before the election, but they have known for some time all about Russian cyber-meddling, propaganda mass-mailings, etc. They’ve been monitoring the Russian election tampering since at least before 2008, which is how far back the “report” all this is based on goes back.

One of the investigation’s functions is to serve as a fake news factory for the MSM. The MSM can’t be running the same bullshit over and over without some new fake news to squawk about. But the main function is to give employment to Lefty legal types who want Trump’s head on a pike and who I believe will manufacture evidence if they have to. They are more angry and desperate than the lot that screwed Libby. Bush Derangement Syndrome was weak stuff compared to today’s more virulent Trump Derangement Syndrome. I believe they’ll go to any lengths to get Trump or hurt Trump.

The Russians now know a lot about just what our intelligence agencies know about Russian interference. That fact can only hinder any future attempts to monitor them or block them. No one seems worried about that but why should they? The interference was always trivial and treated as such.

Lucien said...

Imagine what would have happened if, instead of raving spittle-flecked continuous "resistance" and opposition, the Democrats had tried to bring Trump into their camp and work with him in areas where the established Republic leadership had so far been ineffective?

Instead, they pushed him further to the right. Was that intended or not?

Chuck said...

So grackle what you are saying is that the investigation led by Robert Mueller is essentially corrupt; a dishonest excuse, and an attempt, to take down Trump by any means necessary. Is that right? A conspiracy, effectively, with the media and other establishment forces, to use the power of the DoJ to bring down Trump.

Worse, really, than Scooter Libby (who I desperately supported and who I wish was pardoned by Bush43); because at least Libby's fate was left up to a jury.

Is that where you are going with all of this?

antiphone said...

Imagine what would have happened if, instead of raving spittle-flecked continuous "resistance" and opposition, the Democrats had tried to bring Trump into their camp and work with him in areas where the established Republic leadership had so far been ineffective?

PRETZELS, get your fresh baked PRETZELS here!

Qwinn said...

Chuck:

I dunno if that's what grackle is saying, but the way you phrased it? Uh. Yeah. Duh.

Michael K said...

"Is that where you are going with all of this?"

We don't know yet but it looks that way, Lawrence Walsh did the same thing.

Have you read Conrad Blacks's book about his ordeal at the hand of FitzGerald ?

Kevin said...

If the Russia investigation is a big nothingburger, what's the problem? Who cares, if Sessions is in, or out?

Comrade Chuck: "If you've done nothing wrong, what's the problem with the full force of the federal government climbing through your entire life for the last 10 years?"

I really don't understand how a lifelong Republican can ask something so fundamentally un-American.

Unknown said...

"Chuck is clearly trying to be disruptive to the free flow of conversation here. He created nothing but division and conflict. I also wish he was banned."

Hahahahahaha! What a doofus. "Mommy, mommy, Chuck is making points that don't conform to the Trumpist Bible! So disruptive of our 24/7 sycophancy!"

Drago said...

Kevin: "I really don't understand how a lifelong Republican can ask something so fundamentally un-American."

Oh, the same way a supposed lifelong republican, self-described as politically informed and a lawyer could have somehow, strangely, missed the lawfare conducted against Sarah Palin.

Completely missed it.

Yet that is precisely what we have here.

You are free to draw obvious conclusions.

Chuck said...

It seems that several of you are on the same general page; that the DoJ investigation, the Russia/whatever investigation, is in and of itself corrupt. That the job of Jeff Sessions, or any replacement/future AG, ought to be to shut it down. (Implicit in all of this is that Rod Rosenstein, in naming a Special Counsel, is in on the corruption too. Maybe the center of the corruption.) Shut down the Special Counsel. That's what it's all about.

I think such a proposition reduces the 35% Trump demographic, down to about 15-20%. The people about whom it could realistically be said, that if Trump shot somebody in the middle of Fifth Avenue, they would not care.

Drago said...

Unknown doesn't realize that a poster is riffing off of a certain someones continuous appeals to Althouse!

LOL

Thanks unknown.

We needed a good laugh.

Birkel said...

Worse, really, than Scooter Libby (who I desperately AND COMPLETELY INEFFECTUALLY "supported" and who I wish (sic) AGAIN, COMPLETELY INEFFECTUALLY was pardoned by Bush43 ALTHOUGH NOTHING OF THE SORT HAPPENED); because at least Libby's fate was left up to a jury WHICH FOLLOWED THE CORRUPT AND PARTISAN FITZPATRICK, WHO IS FRIENDS WITH COMEY AND MUELLER.

But now you only care who is "the right kind" of conservative even though "the right kind" loses repeatedly and gives the country results you process not to want.

Obergefell
Boo!

Drago said...

LLR: "I think such a proposition reduces the 35% Trump demographic,...."

Note how quickly some are to advance whatever nonsense the lefty media is advancing.

Gleefully no less.

It's almost as if certain someones are completely in the lefty media camp.

grackle said...

So grackle what you are saying is that the investigation led by Robert Mueller is essentially corrupt; a dishonest excuse, and an attempt, to take down Trump by any means necessary. Is that right? A conspiracy, effectively, with the media and other establishment forces, to use the power of the DoJ to bring down Trump … Is that where you are going with all of this?

The Mueller investigation unit is an independent entity from the DoJ as a whole. Technically Mueller can be fired but he is otherwise immune from any supervision or outside management.

The question about where I’m “going” is puzzling. Other than repeat my comment, which would be silly, I can think of no answer. Was I not clear enough? A little detail about what issues the commentor may have about what I wrote would be helpful.

Unknown said...

"Unknown doesn't realize that a poster is riffing off of a certain someones continuous appeals to Althouse!"

Good try, but nope. This guy is a special case, he's very earnest. A true believer.

rhhardin said...

I wonder if I understand right.

McCain is not resigning because it's always all about him. Grandstanding to the end.

And it's one less vote for Trump too.

rhhardin said...

McCain is old enough to be a great-granstand.

Birkel said...

Profess

Drago said...

Here's an example of where this witch hunt is:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/07/today-in-collusion-3.php

"On a related note, the New York Times reports on a possible investigatory angle involving loans to Trump businesses from Deutsche Bank. According to the Times, “the bank is expecting to eventually have to provide information to Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel overseeing the federal investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.” And then comes the usual qualification: “It was not clear what information the bank might ultimately provide.” And even the Times is unable to come up with a hypothetical Russian connection to the Deutsche Bank loans to Trump businesses. As the Times puts it, “there is no indication of a Russian connection to Mr. Trump’s loans or accounts at Deutsche Bank, people briefed on the matter said.”

Unlimited scope, unlimited budget, no oversight fishing expedition staffed by Hillary supporters and led by Comey's best friend.

Nothing at all suspicious about that.

Nothing at all.

Drago said...

Not to worry though.

The opposition research/witch hunt based on a completely bogus claim made by the dems to cover their arses is being funded by your tax dollars and will continue to generate leaks and lefty/"lifelong republican"/MSM talking points for years to come.

Birkel said...

I think such a proposition reduces the 35% Trump demographic, down to about 15-20% MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE THAT TRUMP CAN WIN MICHIGAN IN 2016, BECAUSE fopdoodles KNOW MICHIGAN POLITICS LIKE NOBODY'S BUSINESS.

PAST FAILURES ARE NOT PREDICTORS OF FUTURE INEFFECTIVENESS.

What crime necessitated a special counsel? Counter-intelligence does not trigger a special counsel. Without a crime, a fopdoodle is just hoping that "the wrong kind"of Republican gets caught in a legal trap. Just like Scooter Libby.

antiphone said...

The opposition research/witch hunt based on a completely bogus claim...

That's politics!

Kevin said...

It seems that several of you are on the same general page; that the DoJ investigation, the Russia/whatever investigation, is in and of itself corrupt.

Some of us are on the page that any government investigation needs cause and due process for it to be a legitimate exercise of government power. We haven't heard anything which remotely constitutes a crime, and aren't interested in a fishing expedition on Trump, or any other American citizen.

I have some faith in Rosenstein. I have some faith in Sessions. I would feel better if more people were looking over Mueller's shoulder than less, and the recusal of Sessions for what turned out to be ridiculous reasons removes one of those people.

I don't know why investigatory oversight would be something all Americans wouldn't support. Since you're into percentages, say 100% of Americans.

Chuck said...

More proof of my earlier point. More posts suggesting that (beyond Patrick Fitzgerald's extreme over-zealousness in the Libby case) Comey, Mueller and Fitzgerald are actually corrupt agents of a kind of a rogue DoJ/FBI cabal. A DeepState cabal.

I (1) understand that there are lots of you and (2) absolutely no serious person in any position of power outside of the Trump White House agrees with you.

Unlike the low-grade nastiness and the basic untruth of yesterday's fight over Milo and "NPR," I won't even get excited about this. I can't and wouldn't hope to change anybody's mind. I would not want to waste too much time engaging in the first place.

n.n said...

Trump was supposed to confess during the baby hunts. The Democratic and Republican establishments, and their JournoListic footsoldiers, will hang every witch and warlock from here to Planned Parenthood in order to force a baby trial.

antiphone said...

Trumps enemies are a bunch of Kenyan Socialists with fake birth certificates!

n.n said...

Technically Mueller can be fired

Obama fired Inspector Generals, so there is a legal precedent.

Birkel said...

"...absolutely no serious person in any position of power..."

Agreed. No person inside the Deep State agrees that there is a Deep State. Fopdoodle are incurious creatures.

rhhardin said...

If Musk is going to teleport people between DC and NY it's time to complain that tele- is Greek and -port is Latin.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rhhardin said...

I never did business with Deutsche Bank, just American Express. I'm surprised Trump didn't think of that. Use a middleman. Traveler's checks.

Chuck said...

Technically Mueller can be fired...

But only by the attorney general, right? And since the Deputy Attorney General appointed Mueller, only the Deputy Attorney General can remove him, right? Am I right about that? I think so, but I'm not sure.

So if Trump wanted to fire Mueller, he'd have to ask Rod Rosenstein. Let's presume that Rosenstein refused. Trump would have to fire Rosenstein, and then either rely on a subordinate Deputy AG to do it (let's presume that no one would, or they'd all resign), and then try to nominate a new AG/Deputies. But they'd have to be confirmed by the Senate, to act.

That doesn't seem likely. I'd expect the Senate to object to all AG nominees under such circumstances. Gridlock.

For my part, I am going to make myself a cool beverge (several) and await the completion of Robert Mueller's complete, exhaustive, investigation.

Mike Sylwester said...

Sessions should have told Congress that he would study the investigation before deciding that he would recuse himself. Then he should have studied it and reported to Congress as follows:

I am terminating the Justice Department's investigation, which has continued for more than half a year but has not found any compelling evidence.

This bogus investigation reminds me of the investigation that the FBI's top officials for many years conducted into Russian meddling in the US Civil Rights Movement. That investigation's real purpose was to investigate and wiretap Martin Luther King and his associates so that the FBI's leadership could leak salacious information to journalists who hated King. That investigation's purpose was to enable the FBI's top officials to remove King from his leadership of the Civil Rights Movement.

When the real purpose of that previous bogus investigation was discovered, the investigation was terminated.

The situation is similar now. A bogus investigation is being conducted for the purpose of removing our elected President Trump from his office.

I am terminating the current, bogus, never-ending investigation now, and I am not recusing myself.

Feste said...

Doing script-math. Minimal factoring. 1+1=4.

1. Trump right, Sessions wrong.
2. Sessions right, Trump wrong.
3. Both right (DeMorgan’s law, isotope 1).
4. Both wrong (DeMorgan’s law, isotope 2).

5. Not doing #5 - because DeMorgan does not apply when Paul Erdős is in the room. Math not for the faint of heart. KISS.


#1. Is cooked. Stick a fork in it.

# 2. If Sessions recused himself, projecting Mueller would exonerate Trump, so Session’s recusal would stand as further Trump-justification (recusal has a place: take a hint Donald), then Trump went deep-end off-script.

We’re not hard-wired to tolerate “uncertainty.” The logos-of-our-bios doesn’t favor “uncertainty” as an adaptive behavior for hungry hunter-gatherers. We want meat - back on the menu, boys. Our intolerance of uncertainty motive-torques us to make up demons behind every Sessions-bush (or is it Bush-Bush?), just so we can have imaginary demons to kill, displaying the certainty of our peacock feathers.

Hillary is the devil (standing between us and the apocalypse - God help us).

And Trump: “I’m the only one.”

If this script does not end, it will end.

With us scripted-singing, “it’s way cold and dark, way down here.”

antiphone said...

Wonder how many anti Trumpists commenting here have fudged a teeny bit on that tax form.

Of course, and who among us hasn't laundered money through a few condos in Trump towers around the world?

Sebastian said...

I try not to respond to the LLR, but here goes:

"absolutely no serious person in any position of power outside of the Trump White House agrees with you."

"Serious" people in DC appear to believe the following: that "Russia" "hacked" the election, that Trump "colluded" with Russia in some way, that Sessions appropriately recused himself from involvement in the "Russia" "collusion" investigation, that Rosenstein was right to appoint an Independent Counsel even in the absence of an actual, stated crime to be investigated, that it is appropriate for Mueller to hire a large staff of partisan Democratic lawyers, and that it is proper for the "independent" counsel to pursue Trump's old business dealings, such as "a possible investigatory angle involving loans to Trump businesses from Deutsche Bank."

The only things they are "serious" about are thwarting the actually elected president and maintaining the swamp.

Kevin said...

Comey, Mueller and Fitzgerald are actually corrupt agents of a kind of a rogue DoJ/FBI cabal.

I argued for Constitutional oversight as a general principle. You came back with this.

It's really hard to engage with you Chuck. I think I'll stop.

Unknown said...

"Of course, and who among us hasn't laundered money through a few condos in Trump towers around the world?"

LOL! How many of us have defunct hotels in Azerbaijan?

antiphone said...

The only things they are "serious" about are thwarting the actually elected president and maintaining the swamp.

Let's not forget Baltimore, no one from Baltimore should be allowed in government.

antiphone said...

They're Baltimorans, ok? Baltimorans.

rhhardin said...

Maybe McCain realizes that if he's not a senator, nobody will give a shit.

Tank said...

Trump is right again.

Chuck said...

"Serious" people in DC appear to believe the following: that "Russia" "hacked" the election, that Trump "colluded" with Russia in some way, that Sessions appropriately recused himself from involvement in the "Russia" "collusion" investigation, that Rosenstein was right to appoint an Independent Counsel even in the absence of an actual, stated crime to be investigated, that it is appropriate for Mueller to hire a large staff of partisan Democratic lawyers, and that it is proper for the "independent" counsel to pursue Trump's old business dealings, such as "a possible investigatory angle involving loans to Trump businesses from Deutsche Bank."

I think few if any people really believe that Russia "hacked" our election. I expect most people believe that Russia interfered, with some poorly-understood media and cyber attacks, and that no one knows what if any effect it had on the election. I think no serious person would claim that the Russians swung the outcome of the election. I would not make such a claim. Some leading Democrats would like to demagogue that issue, for sure. None of them are changing anything of consequence. They have no power.

I also think that Robert Mueller enjoys nearly universal respect, and a reputation beyond reproach. And irrespective of the basis on which he was called into action, people trust him to conduct a fair and effective investigation. The only people who have questioned the integrity of Mueller are the extremist pro-Trumpists.

And finally, any criminal charges to be brought or itemized against the President (remembering that the President may be indictment-proof while in office) will need to be clear and iron-clad beyond any question. If there are any. I am not counting on it.

Just waiting, and watching, and enjoying a cool beverage.

pacwest said...

"But of course the long term future of the party will require a thorough purging of All Things Trump, someday."

Sure, then we can get back to business as usual in DC. You do understand why the Donald was elected right? Yours is a recipe for disaster for the Republican party. If Hillary hadn't been able to take the nomination from Bernie you would have been looking at Trump vs Bernie. The electorate wants a change from the status quo. The Republicans under Trump can achieve this if they can rid themselves of your mindset, otherwise Your Republican Party is dead. It died in present form when Romney (the best choice I have seen in my lifetime) lost. Presidential elections will continue to be a high school popular contest. Adapt or die.

Chuck said...

Blogger Kevin said...
Comey, Mueller and Fitzgerald are actually corrupt agents of a kind of a rogue DoJ/FBI cabal.

I argued for Constitutional oversight as a general principle. You came back with this.


Kevin, what sort of Constitutional oversight do you think is lacking with Mueller?

chickelit said...

Trump wants Sessions to act like his GC for Trump , Inc., not AG of the US.

Just a guess, but I'm thinking many of the glibertadians here are fine with open boarders. Sessions was one of the few Senetirs willing to do something about enforcing the law in that regard.

Kevin said...

Kevin, what sort of Constitutional oversight do you think is lacking with Mueller?

How is the system set up? Two people - the AG and the Assistant AG stand over the Special Counsel to evaluate his work and fire him, if necessary.

What do we have today? One person standing over the Special Counsel to evaluate his work and fire him if necessary.

Are you OK with a jury of one of your peers, rather than 12? Or do you think it matters that the system is set up for 12?

Well, I think it matters whether there is one person's opinion about how Mueller is doing his job, or whether more than one person gets to weigh in, because the system is set up for two.

Coincidentally, that's what Trump is also saying. His civil rights are less protected because Sessions recused himself and there is no provision to replace him in the system.

Fabi said...

Ignoring the fake MSM polls, has anyone seen any instance of Trump losing online supporters? I read through six or eight comment sections per week and have only seen comments in the vein of "I held my nose and voted for him but after all the attacks, I now support him completely." There have been three or four commenters here who have recently said something similar.

Drago said...

LLR: "I think few if any people really believe that Russia "hacked" our election. I expect most people believe that Russia interfered, with some poorly-understood media and cyber attacks, and that no one knows what if any effect it had on the election. I think no serious person would claim that the Russians swung the outcome of the election. "

LOL

http://www.weeklystandard.com/majority-of-democrats-think-russia-tampered-with-vote-tallies-despite-no-evidence/article/2006103

Drago said...

"And finally, any criminal charges to be brought or itemized against the President (remembering that the President may be indictment-proof while in office) will need to be clear and iron-clad beyond any question."

Scooter Libby was unavailable for comment.

As were Ted Stevens and Tom Delay and a host of others.

Drago said...

Ignoring the fake MSM polls, has anyone seen any instance of Trump losing online supporters?

Nope.

Which is why the lefties and their "lifelong republican" allies are back to the fake polls. Why, a couple were pushing those fake polls in this very thread.

Known Unknown said...

"Just a guess, but I'm thinking many of the glibertadians here are fine with open boarders."

Theoretical freedom of movement is a good thing. However, it depends upon the actions and systems of other countries in place.

Also, you can have either open borders or a welfare state, but not both. Europe is the canary in the coal mine for stupid immigration policies.

Chuck said...

Kevin, under normal circumstances, the Special Counsel answers to the AG, under the all of the DoJ's rules and oversight.

And under present circumstances, the Special Counsel answers to the Deputy AG, under all of the DoJ's rules and oversight.

If a well and widely understood case could be made that Mueller was illegally trampling on Trump's rights, I expect he could be replaced and the Senate would confirm replacements as AG/Deputy AG.

And if not, that's a different matter. As I described.

I am honestly not trying to make this tricky.

Drago said...

LLR: "Kevin, under normal circumstances, the Special Counsel answers to the AG, under the all of the DoJ's rules and oversight"

Ah yes. Those wonderful DOJ rules and oversight.

Sort of like the AG meeting with the husband of a investigative target on the tarmac and then not recusing herself.

Those "rules and oversight" sound ironclad to me!

Jim at said...

"This is your President. You people voted for this man. You people will not live this down for generations to come."

And once again, he is STILL better than the bitch you voted for.

Chuck said...

Drago, I talked about the most serious people at the highest levels of power in Washington. Not a poll.

Polls can produce, or reflect all kinds of insanity among the low-information types.

Like the PPP poll that showed 59% of Trump supporters believing that Obama was Muslim:

http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/poll-two-thirds-trump-supporters-think-obama-muslim

Jim at said...

"We hate the left and no matter how crazy and incompetent Trump is we are happy to have him because he will stick it to the left."

Yes.
Good for you.

You're finally catching on.
Took you long enough.

Fabi said...

Where in his charter is Mueller permitted to investigate Trump's business dealings [if those reports are true] for the last ten years? I'd make the claim that such an out-of-scope investigation is a violation of Trump's rights.

Fabi said...

"My Muslim faith..." -- BHO

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike Sylwester said...

Chuck at 2:10 PM

... what you are saying is that the investigation led by Robert Mueller is essentially corrupt; a dishonest excuse, and an attempt, to take down Trump by any means necessary. Is that right? A conspiracy, effectively, with the media and other establishment forces, to use the power of the DoJ to bring down Trump.

Speaking for myself, I answer YES to all those questions.

Robert "The FBI White-Washer" Mueller is essentially corrupt. His main goals are:

1) to white-wash the FBI for continuing to conduct this bogus investigation.

2) to white-wash his BFF "Crazy Comey the Leaker"

3) to imprison some scapegoat (like Scooter Libby) to make the public think that the FBI's bogus, never-ending witch-hunt of an "investigation" has been valid and worthwhile.

Kevin said...

Kevin, under normal circumstances, the Special Counsel answers to the AG, under the all of the DoJ's rules and oversight.

And under present circumstances, the Special Counsel answers to the Deputy AG, under all of the DoJ's rules and oversight.


You think in normal circumstances, the Assistant AG isn't in the meeting with the Special Counsel and the AG - asking questions, reviewing the information, and making recommendations to the AG?

Because I know in these circumstances, the AG is not in the meeting with Rosenstein and Mueller asking questions, reviewing the information, and making recommendations to the Assistant AG. His chair is just empty.

When people recuse themselves, it's not just a one-for-one swap. It's one less set of questions in the room.

I'm not saying Rosenstein is doing a bad job. We'll know later - maybe. I'm saying more people at DOJ overseeing the Special Counsel is good.

Unknown said...

"We hate the left and no matter how crazy and incompetent Trump is we are happy to have him because he will stick it to the left."
---------------
"Yes.
Good for you.

You're finally catching on.
Took you long enough."
----------------
Nope, I knew it from day one and what is says about you people is pretty bad. You say the Left is nuts, but not nearly as nuts as you haters. Hate is all ya got, pathetic...sad! As Trump would say.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
KittyM said...

@Mike Sylvester Thank you for your very straightforward and open response to Chuck's post. I am interested in how you and many other posters on this blog came to be convinced of this very deep conspiracy.

I mean, I think we can all agree that none of us posting here actually knows very much of what is going on in the White House or in the Kremlin or in the FBI. I get the impression that we are all pretty much random people who don't work in the actual centers of power but are interested in politics and current events. So we read blogs or watch TV or chat with friends and online. And we form an opinion from doing those things.

The view that for example Robert Mueller is corrupt: It's a fairly "out there" viewpoint (which, I hasten to add, doesn't make it not true!). But you must know that most Americans wouldn't agree with you. I certainly don't agree with you. But we both have the same "facts". So, how do you get there?

KittyM said...

@FullMoon Hi, I'm very new here. I find Chuck's posts articulate and enlightening. It seems to me that he engages respectfully with the other commenters and moves the discussion forward while remaining on topic.

May I ask what it is that he is doing that is (in your opinion) "breaking the rules"? Althouse says: "...try to be responsive to the post, don't make personal attacks on other commenters, bring some substance or humor to the conversation, and don't do that thing of putting in a lot of extra line breaks." Chuck's posts seem to fulfil this criteria.

Fabi said...

@4:01 -- Funniest thing I've read in weeks!

Birkel said...

The Deep State denies there is a Deep State. A fopdoodle takes the as the final word on the existence of a Deep State.

A crime must be alleged before the appointment of a special counsel. A counter-intelligence case is not sufficient.

A fopdoodle assures that Mueller is above reproach. A fopdoodle thought the same ofComey, who leaked in violation of FBI rules. A fopdoodle thought the same of Fitzpatrick, before impotently complaining about Scooter Libby's conviction.

Fopdoodles are bad at predictions.

Fabi said...

Did you miss this jewel from last night, KittyM?

"I have to give him credit, this is the first time I, an 80 year old lady of the real feminine persuasion, has ever been called a fucking asshole. Really Chuck?"

Birkel said...

To be fair, KittyM is a concern troll who is very concerned.

KittyM said...

@Fabi Yes I did miss that.

In general I am finding there is an interesting mix here of very aggressive commenters who just go straight to name-calling and the more thoughtful posters who for example were prepared to discuss things with me in a calmer way. I get the feeling that I may be missing some of the in-jokes or the humour.

Unknown said...

"I have to give him credit, this is the first time I, an 80 year old lady of the real feminine persuasion, has ever been called a fucking asshole. Really Chuck?"

So Chuck knew she was an 80 year old woman? Maybe she was acting like a fucking asshole, lord knows there's several of those assholes around these parts, lol.

KittyM said...

@Birkel What is a concern troll?

Fabi said...

Way to miss the point, Unknown!

antiphone said...

Obviously I was asking the question of anti-Trumpists who actually go long form and file taxes, not you.

I'd really like to pay more but thanks to the rigged economy TurboTax says no.

Unknown said...

"Way to miss the point, Unknown"

Nope, I got your point. You're once again trying to smear Chuck for the very same thing you do in a more passive aggressive way.

Fabi said...

It's an interesting and wonderful place, KittyM. Com boxes have unique flows, back stories, in-groups, and references -- you will pick up in those in short order. Althouse provides the best forum on the web and is unusually committee to free speech amongst the riff-raff.

Drago said...

Polls can produce, or reflect all kinds of insanity among the low-information types.

Oh yes. We all remember some low information types who believed Trump would get trounced so we are well aware of what insanity low information types can buy into.

For instance, how a majority of democrats believe the Russians literally hacked our election.

It is interesting that in all your references to "insanity" believed by "low-information types" you never quite bring yourself to referencing left wing insanity. Almost as if you seek to downplay the lunacy on the left while over-stating it on the right. Similar to your defense of dems.

Curious.

KittyM said...

Thanks Fabi. What a wonderful description; it sounds great. I think my views are quite different to many commenters here which is why I am interested in participating. I'll see how it goes.

Birkel said...

The tax forms most assuredly do allow you to pay more than the minimum. Anybody suggesting otherwise is misinformed.
Pay more if you like.

But you won't.

Fabi said...

Referencing a person's actual and recent behavior is a smear? Lulz

Unknown said...

Good luck Kitty, gird your loins.

Drago said...

Unknown: "Good luck Kitty, gird your loins"

If it proves too much for you, you are always welcome at any of the top lefty sites which do not allow opposing opinions.

Unknown said...

"Referencing a person's actual and recent behavior is a smear?"

Take the plank out of your own eye before you notice the splinter in other's eyes.

KittyM said...

@Drago But the number and type of people who hold that Russia tried to interfere with the election goes far, far beyond "the majority of democrats".

Just now I read that President Donald Trump’s chief counterterrorism adviser said Thursday that the Russian government clearly tried to manipulate the 2016 election, and declared that the Obama administration’s retaliatory sanctions didn’t go far enough.

“There’s a pretty clear and easy answer to this and it’s 'yes,'” Thomas Bossert said when asked whether the Russians worked to manipulate the U.S. election — a widely held conclusion that his boss in the Oval Office has repeatedly questioned.

I think this view is very mainstream now. The fact that Trump denies it is not, on the face of it, a very convincing reason *not* to believe it. Why are you dubious? Do you not think that the WH counter-terrorism adviser knows more than us?

Drago said...

Personally, I would think that a majority of one party's voters who actually believe, ACTUAllY believe, that the Russians changed vote tallies to get Trump elected is sort of a big deal.

But that being the dems/left/some"lifelong republicans" who actually believe that, I can see how some frequent posters here might have missed it.

Drago said...

KittyM (sounding very much like a certain other poster): "Just now I read that President Donald Trump’s chief counterterrorism adviser said Thursday that the Russian government clearly tried to manipulate the 2016 election, and declared that the Obama administration’s retaliatory sanctions didn’t go far enough."

Perhaps english is not your first language.

A majority of dems believe Russia changed vote tallies.

Vote. Tallies.

Vote. Tallies.

See if that helps.

Chuck said...

Fabi said...
Did you miss this jewel from last night, KittyM?

"I have to give him credit, this is the first time I, an 80 year old lady of the real feminine persuasion, has ever been called a fucking asshole. Really Chuck

Will you post a link/links to the context in which I wrote that?

Drago said...

This represents at least the third time where a brand new poster pops up and, sounding very much like a certain other poster, spends an interesting amount of time defending a certain other poster.

Curious.

KittyM said...

@Drago "you are always welcome at any of the top lefty sites which do not allow opposing opinions."

Thanks but I don't know which sites you are referring to? All the sites I know - left, right, center - have very open discussion policies and allow a wide range of opinion to be posted.

Why on this site does anyone who criticises Trump get immediately "smeared" (it's not a smear but it is used by the commenters who do it as such, like Birkel) as Lefties? Don't you think it is possible to be a quite ordinary, boring, staid conservative and not support Trump?

Drago said...

Will you post a link/links to the context in which I wrote that?

LOL

We've seen this ploy before.

Drago said...

KittyM: "Thanks but I don't know which sites you are referring to? All the sites I know - left, right, center - have very open discussion policies and allow a wide range of opinion to be posted."

LOL

Oh yes. The standard lefty "I don't know anything about that obvious stuff that everyone else knows so we can just pretend it doesn't exist or doesn't matter so I can return to my talking points".

Again, pretty standard lefty tactics.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 365   Newer› Newest»