Monday Night Open Thread: This and That

I have seen zero news today and just got home -- our last open thread is about full, so here's a new one while I catch up.

First catch up: Donald Trump took a "public swipe" against AG Jefferson Sessions
. Is it time to start the Sessions countdown clock? I see Ted Cruz' name being tossed around as a possible replacement. We'd go right from the frying pan into the fire. While Sessions is ultra-conservative in his views, I don't think he's a liar. As for Ted Cruz, I don't trust a word that comes out of his mouth. Plus he looks like the grim reaper.

Jared seems to have gotten a pass today playing the innocent mistake and bumbling neophyte cards at his closed door hearing. No links due to auto-play video on every article I checked.

On a lighter note, this GQ article on spin classes at the gym may be the funniest article on exercise I've ever read. By the time I got to the end, I was laughing out loud.

Last but not least, James Corden is finally back tonight on the Late Late show after a three week absence. James, you were missed. Congrats are also in order for James and his wife -- they are expecting their third child.

Also, I like that James and T.J. Miller are complimenting each other comedic skills -- both are in the new Emoji movie. I drove T.J. to school for years on my carpool day. He was funny even then. As for his parents not speaking to him because of the Emoji movie, I'm pretty sure that's a joke, he has incredibly supportive parents. Who throw great parties. I would have liked to grow up in that household.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Jefferson Sessions vs. Sergey Kislyak: Whom to Believe? | Repeal of Affordable Health Care Act Advances in Senate >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    So today, Der Trumpenführer traveled to ... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jul 24, 2017 at 09:46:38 PM EST
    ... Beaver, WV to address the attendees at the 2017 National Scout Jamboree, and despite promising the Boy Scouts of America that his speech wouldn't be political -- well, hey, what's one more broken promise at this point, right?

    "Who the hell wants to talk about politics when I'm in front of the Boy Scouts?"
    - President Donald Trump, to the attendees at the BSA's 2017 National Scout Jamboree (July 24, 2017)

    For Heaven's sake, why does this bubble-headed bleached blond have to make everything about him? I swear, the guy's political insecurity reeks so bad, the stench could knock a hungry buzzard off a three-day-old buffalo carcass.

    By the Boy Scouts of America's own rules, its members are expressly prohibited from attending political events while in uniform, and yet that's exactly what Trump turned the Jamboree into with his provocative and polarizing statements.

    Sadly, the organization's leadership now finds itself in the uncomfortable position of having to formally disavow POTUS if they are to ever restore the BSA's often-battered institutional credibility, and otherwise avoid the now-inevitable comparisons to Die Hitlerjugend.


    Die Hitlerjugend (none / 0) (#4)
    by linea on Mon Jul 24, 2017 at 10:21:44 PM EST
    that's really bad!!

    i actually dont understand the BSA. but i do have the impression that it is more popular and active in the more conservative states.

    i read (i think on wiki) that the BSA have a congressional charter. but i dont understand the politics of it. why doesnt the american democratic party have a youth wing?

    p.s. thank you for correctly using blond/blonde in english.


    The national leader of BSA (none / 0) (#47)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 12:08:22 PM EST
    is Randall Stephenson, CEO of AT&T.  I expect a mild rejoinder since AT&T is in the midst of a merger with Time Warner.  But, maybe, somewhere in the BSA bylaws, is the capability at the local levels to impeach Trump--the honorary president of BSA.  This would be a good civics lesson and decency counter-point to the bilious speech to the scouts, including that Trumpian role model  cited who is rich, has orgies on a yacht, and, like Trump, is a serial husband.

    That rally, excuse me, jamboree (none / 0) (#116)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 01:24:57 PM EST
    was held in West Virginia, a state where people can't decide what they want more: to MAGA, cut their own Medicaid, or more opioids. Last I heard it was a three way tie.

    The first two (none / 0) (#117)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 01:26:26 PM EST
    Requiring the third

    I would've loved to have been a reporter (none / 0) (#124)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 01:55:33 PM EST
    on the scene, so I could get an exclusive with a few of the folks in crowd leading those USA! USA! chants. I have a feeling it wasn't any 11 and 12 year olds.

    Yep - and their response ... (none / 0) (#126)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 02:16:08 PM EST
    ... was pathetic.  Our local council came out with a statement indicating they do not condone Trump's speech and suggested it was contrary to the values in the Scout Oath and Law.  Personally, I would've preferred an even stronger statement, but it was far better than the national BSA statement, which didn't even address Trump's speech.  I was a scout 35 years ago and have been a leader with my sons for the past 17 years.  I don't want my younger son to miss out on an experience due to this, but I'm seriously considering it.  If there was an alternative to the BSA locally, I wouldn't even hesitate.

    Glad to hear you're involved (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by fishcamp on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 10:38:51 AM EST
    with the Boy Scouts Yman.  The Sea Scout Base is here in Islamorada and has a big marina with about 15 large sailboats and several smaller dive boats.  The boys learn sailing, diving, fishing, knots, and water safety.  It's a wonderful program that I wish had existed back when I was a Boy Scout.  

    My final merit badge to become an Eagle Scout had me camping alone (I brought my dog) in some cold rainy forest near Tillamook, Oregon.  It would have been more fun to sail and dive down here.


    Right there with ya (none / 0) (#177)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 12:23:28 PM EST
    I was a scout in PA - no Sea Scouts near us.  I've always loved the ocean and I was fascinated/a little jealous of the boys who had a Sea Scout troop.  I'm at the Jersey shore, now, and we have one not too far away, but my sons wanted to stay with the regular troop and their friends.  If we stay with it, I'd love to go to Sea Base down there, but he has a couple more years before he's old enough.

    ... has issued a formal apology on behalf of his organization for Trump's behavior at this year's jamboree in West Virginia:

    "I want to extend my sincere apologies to those in our Scouting family who were offended by the political rhetoric that was inserted into the jamboree. That was never our intent. The invitation for the sitting U.S. President to visit the National Jamboree is a long-standing tradition that has been extended to the leader of our nation that has had a Jamboree during his term since 1937. It is in no way an endorsement of any person, party or policies. For years, people have called upon us to take a position on political issues, and we have steadfastly remained non-partisan and refused to comment on political matters. We sincerely regret that politics were inserted into the Scouting program." (Emphasis is mine.)

    Nuf ced.


    My forehead just can't take anymore damage. (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 08:11:57 AM EST
    I get to work, scan through the news, and my head hits the desk. Harder each day. How long can this go on? How can there not be open rebellion by now? Has there ever been a more dysfunctional in the history of this country? Banana republics in Central America get more respect the clown occupying the White House.

    There are quite a few of us (none / 0) (#16)
    by Anne on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 08:45:20 AM EST
    walking around with these bruised, red lumps on our foreheads...

    Maybe this will help - someone sent it to me yesterday, and it was good for a laugh.


    I still have to remind myself (none / 0) (#93)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:38:03 PM EST
    it is really happening. My brain won't fully accept it. Every minute another disaster from the buffoon in chief.

    The New Normal... (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:50:51 AM EST
    Y'all remember the drivers manual you got to prepare from your drivers license written and road tests?  What do at a railroad crossing, right of way, all that jazz...well, the new Arizona Driver's Manual has a "don't get shot by the police" section.  I sh*t you not!

    I guess it's a good idea, but damn it's depressing...

    It might help but this part is troubling (none / 0) (#87)
    by McBain on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:10:09 PM EST
    From your link...
    In the wake of that incident, Bolding said he reached out to eight different police departments, asking them what motorists should do to avoid becoming victims.

    "I got eight different recommendations," he said.

    Chris Rock has some good advice here

    "obey the law", "use common sense" and several other tips.... Warning for language in the link


    That Chris Rock dose (none / 0) (#91)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:26:13 PM EST
    of ( mostly) common sense is utterly undermined at the end by that typical bit of conservative bullsh*t-with-bells-on about MLK being a Republican.

    Do right wingers want to avoid having their credibility kicked to sh*t? Start by not telling obvious lies.


    Here's a better link (none / 0) (#97)
    by McBain on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:57:14 PM EST
    Without the added MLK statement at the end.  I agree with some of what MLK says in the quote but I'm pretty sure Chris Rock wasn't the one who included it in his comedy video.

    I don't have any problem (none / 0) (#102)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 04:49:16 PM EST
    with the MLK statement, just with that completely unnecessary lie at the end about King being a Republican.

    Come to think of it though, I also have a Big problem with the insinuation that the victims of police brutality are always responsible for the police's behavior; as if cops suddenly have carte blanche do anything they want simply because someone's broken the law and isn't 100% cooperative.


    The original youtube poster's (none / 0) (#105)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 06:41:02 PM EST
    other videos give a clear picture of where he's coming from: the "brilliant" Dennis Prager and David Horowitz..the global warming hoax..the fools who laughed at the Trump campaign..

    Yeah, he's an Idie alright.


    I used to listen to Dennis Prager (none / 0) (#106)
    by McBain on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:20:38 PM EST
    when he had a TV show in the 90s.  Haven't heard much from him in years.  The only David Horowitz I remember was the consumer advocate who had the "Fight Back With David Horowitz" show in the 80s. Probably not the same guy.  

    I once unfriended someone (none / 0) (#112)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 12:48:38 PM EST
    On FB for posting Prager.

    Can't be done here.  Sad !


    Prager has chutzpah (none / 0) (#114)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 01:17:02 PM EST
    as in the original illustration of the meaning of the word, which was a kid who kills his parents and then pleads for mercy on the grounds that he's an orphan.

    You've also gotta love his little columns advising wives to 'submit' to their husbands even if they're not in the mood, the interests of maintaining a good marriage..

    Of course, there's a certain Biblical- marriage, police-beating-applauding tribe that Prager's neverending stream of offal in print appeals to..


    That you and whatever other....person think (none / 0) (#103)
    by vicndabx on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 06:01:18 PM EST
    Chris Rock was being serious and not using satire is...odd.

    the 'Top Five' writer, director and star tackles Hollywood's third rail as he explains what it's really like to be black in the entertainment industry (hint: you get asked to be Huggy Bear, not Starsky or Hutch) and the "slave state" of Mexicans: "If Kevin Hart is playing 40,000 seats a night, and Jon Stewart is playing 3,000 ... why does Kevin Hart have to cross over?"



    Pretty sure Rock is blending comedy and truth (none / 0) (#107)
    by McBain on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:26:42 PM EST
    in that video.  It's a classic. This is my other favorite police traffic stop video....

    and here's another more recent interview (none / 0) (#104)
    by vicndabx on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 06:18:56 PM EST

    So, to say Obama is progress is saying that he's the first black person that is qualified to be president. That's not black progress. That's white progress. There's been black people qualified to be president for hundreds of years. If you saw Tina Turner and Ike having a lovely breakfast over there, would you say their relationship's improved? Some people would. But a smart person would go, "Oh, he stopped punching her in the face." It's not up to her. Ike and Tina Turner's relationship has nothing to do with Tina Turner. Nothing. It just doesn't. The question is, you know, my kids are smart, educated, beautiful, polite children. There have been smart, educated, beautiful, polite black children for hundreds of years. The advantage that my children have is that my children are encountering the nicest white people that America has ever produced. Let's hope America keeps producing nicer white people.

    Looks like the new (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 12:42:52 PM EST
    and improved Trumpcare will be repeal, a little,  replace, a little, and kick the mess over to a Senate/House committee.  There all the promises to get just that far can be jettisoned. But, they will have passed something.  Trump can tweet in peace, for a minute or two.

    Republicans are calling this the "skinny bill" which is apt in that McConnell and the lobbyists are the only ones who have the skinny on this bill.  The rest can only surmise...maybe just 16,000 kicked off insurance; premiums up 20 percent, and co-pays skyrocketing.  A reduction of some taxes on individuals and a big reduction on heath industrialists is a given.  Which means, cuts everywhere, and mostly, in all likelihood, for the poor and children by slashing Medicaid.

    deader (none / 0) (#50)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 12:47:08 PM EST
    than Elvis

    I hope you (none / 0) (#83)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:46:53 PM EST
    are right. I wish they would just completely drop the who POS but I'm willing to bet we are going to be dealing with this into next year.

    wouldnt be that surprised (none / 0) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:54:28 PM EST
    why is that a bad thing?  why is an open debate that will be covered in eye glazing detail a bad thing?  why is it a bad thing that every single citizen will understand what is happening and who is responsible for it?

    it would be great if there was just one vote and we got what we want.  barring that open and extended debate is a good thing.


    Well, I have (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:16:54 PM EST
    a cousin who has a child born with a heart defect and she's torn up not knowing whether her child is going to be covered by insurance or not. Her husband is a contractor. One acquaintance has a child whose meds cost her more than her take home pay every month. It's causing a lot of stress for these people. I read here in GA they are getting ready to do even more mean things to the citizens if this bill passes. I'm afraid the longer it goes on the worse the bill is going to get and the more pressure there is going to be to just pass something to get it over and done with.

    if they do nothing (none / 0) (#92)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:28:35 PM EST
    i hope you dont think they will allow Obamacare to survive.  they will not.  im sure there are 10 million stories.

    IMO its time to face it.  they will kill OCare if they have to.

    this process, as F-ed up as it no doubtedly will be, is all we have got.  

    this house bill will die.   it will.  after that we are in uncharted territory.  i personally believe there are enough republican votes to insure the worst does not happen.

    untill we elect a better congress its all we have.


    Oh, no, (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:59:39 PM EST
    I fully realize that they can do something even if the bill survives. I said years ago the fatal flaw in Obamacare was the funding mechanism and all the GOP has to do is screw around with that and lots of people will lose insurance. However funding is easier to fix that some disaster the GOP passes.

    You (none / 0) (#88)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:10:54 PM EST
    are assuming this "debate" will be enlightening to the general public. I have my doubts. The Republicans will repeat their lies and demagoguery and the Democrats will respond with reasoned argument and facts. Guess which one produces eye-glazing(not in a good way) among the public?

    Debate in itself is fine (none / 0) (#94)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:39:54 PM EST
    But this vote seems like a gateway drug to get Senators used to the idea to vote yes on the whole mess. We need to keep up the pressure till it is well and truly killed.

    i assure you (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:42:38 PM EST
    the pressure will be kept up.  the vote was invaded by shouting protesters.

    im tellin you the longer this is discussed, the more sunlight hits it, the better it is for us.


    No coincidence I think... (none / 0) (#115)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 01:21:55 PM EST
    that the Troll-n-Chief has moved on to transgender Americans being barred from joining the military today...the old social wedge issue distraction play.

    He really isn't happy unless he's (none / 0) (#118)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 01:28:03 PM EST
    bullying someone - and it seems that when he's having a bad day, that's his go-to for relief.  

    There's a special place in hell for someone who feels better knowing he's making someone else feel worse.

    He will share that place with those who stand idly by and allow it to continue.


    No, not a coincidence (none / 0) (#122)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 01:48:56 PM EST
    at all.  Trying to shore-up his base in the face of Sessions blow-back.  As Trump sinks deeper, we can expect more of the old culture war stuff.

    bingo (none / 0) (#125)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 01:59:34 PM EST
    KD gets the cigar

    but wait (none / 0) (#127)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 02:18:32 PM EST
    theres more


    Trump's sudden decision was, in part, a last-ditch attempt to save a House proposal full of his campaign promises that was on the verge of defeat, numerous congressional and White House sources said.

    The president had always planned to scale back President Barack Obama-era policies welcoming such individuals in combat and greenlighting the military to pay for their medical treatment plans. But a behind-the-scenes GOP brawl threatening to tank a Pentagon funding increase and wall construction hastened Trump's decision.

    Numerous House conservatives and defense hawks this week had threatened to derail their own legislation if it did not include a prohibition on Pentagon funding for gender reassignment surgeries, which they deem a waste of taxpayer money. But GOP leaders were caught in a pinch between those demands and moderate Republicans who felt the proposal was blatantly discriminatory.

    "There are several members of the conference who feel this really needs to be addressed," said senior House Appropriations Committee member Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.) on Tuesday. "This isn't about the transgender issue; it's about the taxpayer dollars going to pay for the surgery out of the defense budget."

    I don't see what difference it makes... (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 02:38:14 PM EST
    to the taxpayer if somebody signs up for the college money or for gender reassignment treatment.

    Uncle Sam got money and needs cannon fodder, whatever the cannon fodder labor market demands!


    College? Haven't you heard? (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by Anne on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 02:48:51 PM EST
    College is bad, kdog, bad.  Colleges are full of radical liberals leading our children over to the dark side.

    Betsy DeVos is on that case, though - she's busy deconstructing K-12 and paving the way for more charter and religious schools.

    I swear, I can almost feel a ban on women in the military on its way, possibly followed by women only being allowed to attend school until the 8th grade.  

    Who gave this guy the keys to the Wayback machine?


    8th Grade? (none / 0) (#130)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 03:12:05 PM EST
    Nah...maybe 4th grade tops, then Newt has jobs jobs jobs for the little ladies at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory...once Trump brings it back from Bangladesh.

    Oh, c'mon (none / 0) (#132)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 03:46:22 PM EST
    These people have been claiming they want "to take our country back." Now you know what they meant. Back to the 1940s (or is it 1840s?).

    yeah (none / 0) (#131)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 03:22:02 PM EST
    college and sex reassignment pretty much equally bad

    Taxpayers pay for all sorts of elective surgeries (none / 0) (#200)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jul 30, 2017 at 12:25:32 PM EST
    So that military surgeons can practice. I could have had my whole face rearranged for free the first year of the Iraq War. I know someone who did. I don't know why she thought she had a weak jawline, but she thought she did. They took bone from her hip and grafted it into her jaw. Mother nature usually knows best though. It was a shocking outcome. And they severed the nerves on one side of her face cutting the jaw apart for the implant. And no recourse when the military administers faulty healthcare.

    Lots of free breast implants though and such as they tried to prepare new surgeons for the injuries of war.


    also (none / 0) (#86)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:59:06 PM EST
    i think McCain likey laid out the roadmap of where we are going.  this thing will die.  he said that.  then we will start REGULAR ORDER where the committees responsible have hearings and take testimony from experts and maybe just maybe something acceptable might happen.

    heres the true facts.  its that or nothing.


    House passes increased Russia sanctions (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 04:34:27 PM EST
    The U.S. House voted to strengthen sanctions against Russia and rebuked President Donald Trump, whose campaign is being investigated for possible ties to Moscow, by preventing him from unilaterally lifting penalties.

    The measure, which also would impose new sanctions on Iran and North Korea, passed the House Tuesday on a vote of 419-3. The bill now goes to the Senate, where members of both parties have spoken in favor of revisions made to a version of the legislation they passed last month.

    House Passes New Russia Sanctions That Would Curb Trump's Power

    While (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 05:55:03 AM EST
    tRumps transgender ban is sucking up all the oxygen, this seems more ominous
    "The sole question here is whether, as a matter of law, Title VII reaches sexual orientation discrimination. It does not, as has been settled for decades. Any efforts to amend Title VII's scope should be directed to Congress rather than the courts," according to the DOJ's brief.
    It concluded "that Title VII does not prohibit discrimination because of sexual orientation."

    The Sessions Pence axis is gaining power.

    Yup, we're on a whole reverse the wheel motion (none / 0) (#152)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 07:01:18 AM EST
    I was told yesterday before DOJ filed this amicus that the Trump trans ban in the military would not hold up to the scrutiny of the courts. DADT was going down the same road, so our legislators chose to legislate that little embarrassment away. Who planned all this? They waited until the last hour of the last minute of the last day to pull the trigger on both barrels.

    There was a little hold up being ironed out about who showers with who (because it's un-American to not have a let's all shower together plan). That looks to me like that was the "slow roll" to setting this ambush up.

    The military is going to take one hell of hit on this. The pain has only just begun. Some buffoon spouting "my generals" and using that social structure to harm one of the weakest and most vulnerable groups in our nation? I hope Mattis wasn't part of this, but if he was he's about to find out he doesn't know $h!t about fighting an insurgency. The LGTBQ will roast him forever.


    Yes, ominus. (none / 0) (#179)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 02:18:56 PM EST
    But, not unexpected from the Sessions DOJ. Sessions is probably still smarting from the very passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1967, let alone its Title VII's scope.

     The interpretation in Hivley v Ivy Tech (7th Circuit, 2017) is too reasoned and logical to be considered by the likes of any Trumpette.

     In Ivy, a three-judge panel of the Court found that "the line between a gender-non-conformity claim ..a claim that is covered under Title VII and a sexual orientation claim is hard to discern, (as a woman in a same sex relationship, Livley did not conform to expectations of an opposite sex couple) and en banc (all eleven) reconsidered) and found that Title VII's prohibition on sex discrimination included discrimination claims based on sexual orientation.

    It determined that it is not really possible to take sex our of sexual orientation.  The Circuits have been split, but hopefully, this view with prevail, despite Sessions et al.

    However, it is probably not necessary to order Trumpian ominousness. The Trans ban in the military is ominous on many fronts, being the canary in the mine shaft.  If Trump succeeds unscathed in his reprehensible treatment of such a vulnerable class, all bets are off on all rights of sexual minorities, women in the military, on and on.  But,you are correct, it is hard to keep up with the outrages with each sucking up the oxygen,  each in its own right.


    Rachel was warning (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jul 24, 2017 at 09:15:20 PM EST
    About a recess appointment to replace Sessions.

    She is a bit of an alarmist sometimes but I suppose it can't be considered impossible

    WaPo (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jul 24, 2017 at 09:24:06 PM EST
    3 hours ago

    Another scenario is that Trump could make a recess appointment, said Steve Vladeck, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law. Under that plan, Trump could choose an attorney general during the August recess who would serve until the end of the next Senate session, which could be early January 2019. That person would have the same authority as someone who is confirmed by the Senate, Vladeck said.

    Why replace him? (none / 0) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 05:07:51 AM EST
    What does Trump gain? Does he think a new AG can shut Mueller down? Or does he need someone to kick?

    He just needs (none / 0) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 06:47:22 AM EST
    someone to kick I have decided. With all this news of Trump wanting to fire Mueller I would think Mueller has prepared for that. I'm willing to bet everybody in the special counsel office is aware of the status of the investigation and even without Mueller it will continue should it come to that.

    However the fool does not realize that every firing he does is another count of obstruction of justice that can be levied against him.


    Yes (none / 0) (#18)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:32:12 AM EST
    The Attorney General (but not Sessions) could fire Mueller. So if Trump dismisses Sessions, expect the first act of the new AG (who could be installed during the August recess)to be the firing of Mueller.

    With a new AG, the decision would leave the hands of Deputy AG Rosenstein and revert back to the newest AG who in no way will recuse if he/she accepts the job.



    spin class (none / 0) (#5)
    by linea on Mon Jul 24, 2017 at 11:19:23 PM EST
    the article is funny!!

    it's a humorous male perspective because it is a GQ (Gentlman's Quarterly) article. my favorite is, 'I have never climbed a mountain this big. There are no mountains this big.'

    i've never done spin class.

    i had to google pitbull to understand the reference is to a music band that plays really bad music (in my opinion).

    thanks, it is GQ (none / 0) (#6)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:47:48 AM EST
    rather than Esquire as I initially wrote. Glad I'm not the only person who thought it was funny, and I didn't know who Pitbull was either.

    my favorites were (none / 0) (#7)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:57:10 AM EST
    32.    Stop yelling about how I feel good. I don't feel good. I want to die. Why don't you play a song about wanting to die? I'm sure Pitbull has one of those.


    34.    It's going to be pretty cool when I have zero upper body definition but the legs of Hercules. The tailor will be fascinated.

    Musical tastes are entirely subjective. (none / 0) (#8)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:20:51 AM EST
    My younger daughter likes Pitbull. As for myself, I think I'd rather listen to someone operating a leafblower outside my bedroom window at 1:00 a.m.

    But I would never characterize artistic output or expression which I otherwise don't particularly care for, as somehow "lousy" or "really bad." I grew up with older folks who never missed an opportunity to denigrate and demean my own particular tastes in music and art, and I swore that I'd never do the same to the kids today.

    We don't have to like the music that the kids like. But we ought to at least respect the fact that they like it, and not seek to diminish them for it. When they get older, they'll likely outgrow their pop culture tastes, much as we did our own.

    Well, okay, sometimes we don't. ;-D


    maybe a link warning next time? (none / 0) (#108)
    by linea on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:04:51 PM EST
    cuz #eeewww

    isnt there objectively bad architecture? romanians eat borscht; isnt that objectively bad? even if romanians like it?

    in contrast, this is an objectively good music video as is this music video. even some 80s music is objectively good even though, in general, i dont like old music.


    ... about a link to an Los Angeles Times review of a recent Iggy Pop concert in SoCal? You're hardly a snowflake, linea, so suck it up and be an adult about these things. Iggy Pop is a contemporary of Andy Warhol, Lou Reed and David Bowie, and as such he's considered something of a rock'n'roll pioneer and countercultural icon -- if only because he qualifies under the ruthless L.A. land baron Noah Cross's definition of "respectable" in Roman Polanski's classic 1974 film noir Chinatown.

    Iggy!!!!!! (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 10:57:12 AM EST
    Was listening to "I Want To Be Your Dog" just yesterday at work. Iggy was a punk before punks were punks.

    i actually think (none / 0) (#171)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 11:18:47 AM EST
    70 yo Iggy is cooler than 20 yo Iggy

    Yep. How many 70-year-old men ... (none / 0) (#190)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jul 28, 2017 at 03:10:01 AM EST
    ... are still kicking it like Iggy? The guy was punk before it became cool and fashionable, and he avoids self-caricature because he is genuine, doesn't compromise, and really doesn't give a sh*t about what other people think of him. My elder sister's old high school boyfriend first turned me on to him when he was the frontman for The Stooges. Later on, he was David Bowie's companion in Berlin in the late '70s when they were both trying to kick their drug habits, and both of them arguably reached their creative peaks during that period in their lives, and did some of their best work.

    really Donald (none / 0) (#159)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 09:03:13 AM EST
    old music.  from the 80s.

    so last year.


    i listening to Motzart (none / 0) (#160)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 09:07:22 AM EST
    is that "old"

    um (none / 0) (#161)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 09:07:58 AM EST

    you're right. (none / 0) (#188)
    by linea on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 09:28:57 PM EST
    im not a snowflake. i think i was trying to be humourous or cute or something. thus the hashtag.

    i liked the definition of respectable in the film. never saw that film clip before. almost didnt watch it because 'polanski.' i've heard of iggy pop but i dont actually know any of his songs.


    Do make an effort to see "Chinatown." (5.00 / 1) (#192)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jul 28, 2017 at 03:42:50 AM EST
    Don't allow your dislike of Roman Polanski the man to dissuade you from seeing one of the all-time great American films. You won't be disappointed, linea.

    There are some who'd argue with some justification that "Chinatown" is perhaps the best film noir ever made. From my perspective as a big fan of noir, it certainly ranks right up there with director John Huston's "The Maltese Falcon" (1941), Billy Wilder's "Double Indemnity" (1944), Robert Siodmak's "The Killers" (1946), Wilder's "Sunset Boulevard" (1950) and Orson Welles' "Touch of Evil" (1958). Robert Towne's exquisite screenplay has been hailed as one of the finest ever written for the big screen.

    Incidentally, John Huston also acted on occasion, and he's Noah Cross in that "Chinatown" film clip I linked which you liked. Further, Huston also co-wrote the screenplay for Siodmak's "The Killers." It's been said that Polanski cast Huston in "Chinatown" out of his eminent respect for the older man's work in film noir. And Huston didn't disappoint; his characterization of Noah Cross has been recognized by the American Film Institute as one of the great onscreen villains in cinema history.



    Oops. (none / 0) (#193)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jul 28, 2017 at 03:45:03 AM EST
    Don't know how that first comment posted while I was still editing. I obviously goofed somewhere. My bad.

    thank you (none / 0) (#194)
    by linea on Fri Jul 28, 2017 at 07:23:49 PM EST
    i actually dont have any opinion of polanski at all. i just assumed by the name that the movie was old and uninteresting and filmed in black-and-white. i dont watch anything that isnt colour.

    Kind of limits (5.00 / 2) (#195)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jul 28, 2017 at 08:01:50 PM EST
    The film noir choices

    Do make an effort to see "Chinatown." (none / 0) (#191)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jul 28, 2017 at 03:33:39 AM EST
    You won't be disappointed, linea. Robert Towne's screenplay has been hailed as one of the best ever written for the big screen. There are some who'd argue with some justification that "Chinatown" is the best film noir ever made, certainly right up there with director John Huston's "The Maltese Falcon" (1941), Billy Wilder's "Double Indemnity" (1944), Robert Siodmak's "The Killers" (1946) and Orson Welles' "Touch of Evil" (1958).

    Incidentally, John Huston also acted on occasion, and he's Noah Cross in that "Chinatown" film clip I linked which you liked. Further, Huston also co-wrote the screenplay for Siodmak's "The Killers."

    It's been said that Roman Polanski cast Huston in "Chinatown" out of his respect for the older man's work in noir. And Huston didn't disappoint; his characterization of Noah Cross was recognized by the American Film Institute as one of the great onscreen villains in cinema history.



    Why is Trump trying to force Sessions out? (none / 0) (#9)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 05:06:01 AM EST
    What is Trump's gain in doing that?

    The idea seems to be that a new AG (none / 0) (#12)
    by Anne on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 07:03:12 AM EST
    could shut down the Russia investigation by firing Mueller.

    And now the utterly vile Ted Cruz is being floated as a Sessions replacement.  Ted Cruz.  Ugh.

    And Chris Christie is somewhere jumping up and down and shouting, "pick me! pick me!"

    I don't think any of these people will be nominated, although Trump could make a recess appointment that wouldn't require confirmation.

    Trump's obsession with loyalty is disturbing, but not surprising - he really does not understand the separate but equal branches of government or the Constitution, and all of this makes him dangerous.

    And so far, there doesn't seem to be anyone, or any group, that can stop him.  If he starts making appearances in a fake military uniform with lots of fake medals and gold braid, it may be time to explore other living arrangements.


    the recess appointment thing (none / 0) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 07:58:17 AM EST
    is very troubling.  no one much seems to think this is possible but "possible" seems to to have a pretty low bar just lately.

    Christie would have to recuse himself for the same reason Sessions did.  i think he has said Sessions did the right thing.  as did Rudy.

    that leaves Ted.  who seems like the dream pick from Trumps point of view.  probably the only person in government as craven and evil as Trump.
    a literal Wormtounge for the presidential ear.

    i love my new house.  i would really hate to sell it but, yeah, new living arrangments.


    But Howdy, where would you go? (none / 0) (#17)
    by fishcamp on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 08:47:19 AM EST
    They don't like us at all in other parts of the world.  I still have 15 acres in the mountains of Oregon that my grandparents Homesteaded in the early 1900's.  We could re-homestead it, look for Federal grants, and grow mm for the needy citizens.  We would be surrounded by Republican loggers, but we will have goods to trade.  Go Ducks.

    dont f-ing tease me fish (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:46:03 AM EST
    we have been through this

    Canada (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:06:18 AM EST
    Hey, not being liked has never stopped (none / 0) (#96)
    by ruffian on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:44:07 PM EST
    me when push comes to shove! they will just have to put up with us when we bring them our retirement money.

    Who takes such a recess appointment? (none / 0) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:36:03 AM EST
    Anyone taking the job would be an instant villain in the eyes of a majority of Americans.

    Trump is so desperate right now. Why? We the little people don't have evidence of full Russian collusion but it must exist. Mueller must already have it.


    yupp (none / 0) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:47:11 AM EST
    Cruz is already a villian.  trust me.  he would take it in a heartbeat.

    No Republican Senators answering (none / 0) (#29)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:56:22 AM EST
    Their office phones today.

    Can't see it being Cruz (none / 0) (#20)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:39:01 AM EST
    Even Trump must know that Cruz is a lying and conniving bastard that is loyal to no one but himself and would likely give Mueller a bonus for taking out Trump.

    Yeah, I'm not so (none / 0) (#22)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:42:48 AM EST
    sure Cruz would do the bidding of Trump. He's in love with evil revenge as much as Trump is and Trump has given Cruz plenty of ammunition to be motivated for revenge.

    Can you see the hearings now? Sen. Cruz how did you feel when Trump called your wife ugly? Sen. Cruz what did you think when Trump said your father assassinated JFK? After all a recess appointment is only temporary I understand and will have to go through confirmation.


    Temporary (none / 0) (#24)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:46:11 AM EST
    but it would last for 17 months before expiring without a Senate confirmation.

    exactly (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:47:52 AM EST
    But Cruz gives up his Senate seat (none / 0) (#31)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:20:26 AM EST
    Just as Sessions did, in order to serve a President who can't be trusted? As the Republican party destroys itself, the only possible thing that could politically save you is incumbency.

    Cruz is despised in the senate (none / 0) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:31:55 AM EST
    he has done nothing there.  he has passed nothing.  IMO he always saw it as a stepping stone.

    he would sell his family into slavery to be AG.  IMO of course.


    He's such a snake (none / 0) (#35)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:35:33 AM EST
    I can't tell what is important to him. Trump is really full of himself though yesterday and today. It's like he doubled his viagra.

    Rumors that there is supposed to be a 3 pm Trump press moment.


    The (none / 0) (#37)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:47:39 AM EST
    problem being that tRump would be willing to throw him overboard the minute he lost his usefulness or failed to show sufficient loyalty. I think Cruz is smart enough to realize he could end up with nothing and his political future crippled by being seen as both a toady and an enemy to the dear leader.

    One hopes (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:59:36 AM EST
    But then we have others who took Trump jobs when the writing was clear. Tillerson? McMaster?

    McCain is flying in to vote? If McCain isn't flying in to destroy Trumpcare, it is an epic betrayal of the people. If he doesn't use his final breaths to channel Ted Kennedy and scream, he's using his dying breath to harm us all.


    Yes, if the route (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 11:46:24 AM EST
    Trump takes is to replace (a given) Sessions with an Acting AG (likely in any event, since confirmation hearings would be dangerous to Trump), that Acting AG would be an apparatchik, who would take the deserved infamy all the way to the bank.  

    Someone like the Mooch (a Harvard Law graduate) or, of course, someone like Joe Lieberman.  Just do the nasty deed, and move on to right wing media glory and riches.

    It will be disheartening to see a standing tribute to McCain on his return to the senate during a risky interregnum between brain clot/brain tumor surgery and radiation/oncology treatment, so as to vote to proceed to take health insurance away from 22 million to 32 million Americans.

      Of course, best wishes should be extended as he undergoes the best treatments and receives the best care available, but his return so as overturn  and undermine health care for tens of millions of others is grotesque.


    McCain (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 12:50:46 PM EST
    is returning to support the "MTP".  motion to proceed.  absolutely consistent for him.  

    I hope McCain has had some time (none / 0) (#53)
    by Anne on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 12:51:37 PM EST
    to reflect on the great good fortune of having superior insurance coverage as he faces what may be the last great challenge of his life, and makes the principled decision to call BS on many of his colleagues for betraying the trust and needs of those considerably less fortunate.

    I guess we will know soon enough whether McCain's coming back to help his colleagues save face on legislation that is soundly hated by the majority of Americans, or if he's coming back to give voice to the people of Arizona, who would be harmed by this - whichever one it is - bill.

    There's a part of me that knows that if he was planning to vote "no," he didn't need to travel across the country; I just hope he's not coming back to play the mortally wounded hero who "saves" America from the "17"-year long disaster of Obamacare.  

    It would be a shame if the legislative coda to McCain's career was a strident "wah-wah" of a "yes" vote, because ignominy will follow his name until the end of time.


    McCain (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:07:23 PM EST
    has been pretty vocal about his feeling about the bill as it exists.  

    what he is doing, or might do, is return to support the motion to proceed so it can be debated.

    i agree with this.  IMO it absolutely should be debated.

    if he votes for the bill i will judge that separately.  debate is good.


    We'll find out how McCain (none / 0) (#59)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:07:37 PM EST
    Is going to finish his stint on earth soon. Not everyone gets such a chance to write their own eulogy and start carving on their own headstone.

    Trump smears fellow Republicans on Twitter, threatens them during speeches, talks orgies with Boy Scouts. McCain has a once in a lifetime opportunity today. How will he spend it?


    and he was singled (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:11:31 PM EST
    out for a very specific kind of trashing by Trump early on.

    want to talk about betting?

    McCain will not be the vote that puts this pig of a bill over the line as it is.


    I have that dream (none / 0) (#61)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:31:40 PM EST
    Heller and others are voting for this (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:34:13 PM EST
    I doubt McCain will be needed.  it should be debated.

    I completely disagree. (none / 0) (#84)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:51:52 PM EST
    CaptHowdy: "Heller and others are voting for this[.] I doubt McCain will be needed.  it should be debated."

    Seriously, Cap'n, what's the point of agreeing to debate the scant merits and considerable demerits a horribly bad idea for its own sake -- theatrics and spectacle?

    It's been my own considered experience in this process that the longer a bad piece of legislation is allowed to fester and an acrimonious debate is purposely prolonged, the greater the likelihood that some mutant variation thereof will somehow emerge as either session law or statutory law.

    At some point, many legislators in the majority caucus will become vested in the confrontation posed by process itself, and the actual contents of the measure under consideration will begin to recede in importance. Some will myopically see its successful passage as proof of their manhood and legislative bona fides, while many others will vote in favor out of sheer spite and malice toward the political opposition.

    The inherent risk posed here by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's tactics is that this challenge becomes personal and therefore, a d*ck-swinging exercise of "Quien es mas macho?" within the majority caucus. And more often than not, that is exactly how many ill-advised ideas subsequently become bad law and lousy public policy.



    i think Cruz is smart (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:52:40 AM EST
    and crafty enough to turn that around on Donald if needed.

    I don't (none / 0) (#42)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 11:01:34 AM EST
    Once again, everyone around Nixon went to jail. The President is insulated. Trump has already destroyed smarter people than Cruz.

    Trump (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 11:11:58 AM EST
    is absolutely not Nixon.  Nixon was a smart man.

    Hard to fathom he suffers any (none / 0) (#48)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 12:18:57 PM EST
    Consequences Capt

    you mean Trump? (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 12:48:36 PM EST
    there would/will be consequences.

    ill take that bet.


    Well let's not let Armando outshine us (none / 0) (#54)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 12:53:11 PM EST
    On betting

    I don't understand over/under. Might not be able to make THAT sort of structured bet. But let's wager. There is no other way to apply levity to this overwhelming horror show that I'm interested in.


    enlighten (none / 0) (#55)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 12:54:26 PM EST
    i do not follow armando

    He's just a betting sort of pundit (none / 0) (#56)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:00:10 PM EST
    and what is he betting on (none / 0) (#57)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:01:15 PM EST
    if anything in this case?

    Dunno, but he seems to bet on everything (none / 0) (#62)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:33:21 PM EST
    McCain just getting off the plane now

    Murkowski and Collins vote NO (none / 0) (#64)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:35:43 PM EST
    McCain can nullify their effort. He's going to make a statement

    it would be awsum (none / 0) (#65)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:41:30 PM EST
    if he flew in and voted no.

    but i dont expect that.  as i said it should be debated.  IMO stopping debate would be in its own way a victory for Mitch and crew.


    The whole debate thing is a sham (none / 0) (#68)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:48:53 PM EST
    They've already been debating and they're no where.

    im sorry (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:03:35 PM EST
    they have not.  there has not been a single public debate or hearing on this bill.

    not one.

    heres what i think.

    Obamacare is can be made to die.   thats sucks but i think its a fact.  Trump and the republicans can easily see to that.  there is a thousand ways they can do that.  and when it fails it will still be Obamacare and can still to some extent be blamed on the original ACA.
    if they do "anything" they own it.  the disaster that absolutely will follow will be theirs and theirs alone.  and they WILL reap the whirlwind.


    i do not think for a second that is going to happen.  this motion to proceed is meaningless in spite of the hysteria and teeth gnashing on cable by the likes of Ron Klaine.  the battle lines are drawn.  the nos are going to stay nos.

    debate is a good thing.


    Yes they have Capt (none / 0) (#70)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:08:26 PM EST
    They are "reconciling" now with the House Bill. But they have nothing to reconcile. They passed no bill

    Ron Johnson (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:12:22 PM EST
    could kill the whole thing.

    reportedly that would make it 49 to 50 no saving  by Pence.

    dont hold your breath.  IMO.


    He didn't (none / 0) (#74)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:14:25 PM EST
    He voted to reconcile the House bill, or what snake oil salesmen called "debate".

    You just got the House bill (none / 0) (#71)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:11:24 PM EST
    That much is now known. Maybe someone will argue to improve it and win or maybe they won't. ACA is over.

    this is exactly my point (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:13:16 PM EST
    the house bill will never pass.

    Hate to break it to you (none / 0) (#75)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:16:52 PM EST
    But it's over and we lost. It's going to be breaking little balls now everyday. Much easier to do.

    its not over (none / 0) (#76)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:20:47 PM EST
    It's over (none / 0) (#78)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:23:26 PM EST
    You won't get single payer. It's done

    i did not expect (none / 0) (#79)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:25:54 PM EST
    single payer.  we will revisit "done"

    Heller and Paul are yes (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:42:39 PM EST
    that means it passes with Pence, right?

    Yes (none / 0) (#67)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 01:47:14 PM EST
    If everyone else R is yes

    Recess appointments bypass confirmation, (none / 0) (#27)
    by Anne on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:52:59 AM EST
    I guess because they are temporary (although, if made in the first year of a 2-year session, could last a year or more. A lot of damage can be done in that time!).

    What a mess we are in.


    totally enough time (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:55:12 AM EST
    to fire Mueller.  as has been noted.  Trump lives in the moment.

    Glad I got my (none / 0) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 09:39:49 AM EST
    passport during the Obama administration for sure. Although living in Mexico I'm not sure how we would make a living.

    Last week I was in MN visiting my cousin. These northern border states are full of stories of American refugees.


    He seems to believe (none / 0) (#15)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 08:13:31 AM EST
    that the AG is just another one of his personal attorneys and should be doing his bidding. He has no understanding of how the US government is organized or is supposed to function (it's not functioning now).

    The US Govt. hasn't been functioning... (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:25:54 AM EST
    for quite sometime, unless you're one of them "corporate persons"...and we damn sure don't want it to start functioning now Chuck!  Maybe in 2018 or 2020 we can hope for restored function.

    I mean I know these are scary and embarrassing days, but one thing we have going for us right now is the total and utter civic incompetence of Cheeto and the GOP. Trump is the worst enemy of the radical right wing agenda.  We should probably thank him while we hate him, because if he was civically competent we'd be double-plus f*cked.


    i think i actually (none / 0) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:33:07 AM EST
    agree with that

    His pen is ready... (none / 0) (#36)
    by kdog on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:43:27 AM EST
    and all he can do is scratch his lumpy arse with it right now.  This makes me happy.  

    How about the Texas Rep who (none / 0) (#39)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:51:23 AM EST
    says he would like to "Aaron Burr" (shoot) some of his colleagues.

    And here I thought "we" needed to make an effort to tone down the violent, inflammatory rhetoric after the softball game shooting.

    no (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 11:13:04 AM EST
    what "we" need to do is not be "them"

    We need to (none / 0) (#99)
    by Zorba on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:59:41 PM EST
    "not be them," indeed, Howdy, and I'm not going to go around threatening anyone.
     But OTH, we are armed and we are keeping our powder dry, so to speak.
    Right wingers aren't the only ones who are armed.

    Damn right (none / 0) (#100)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 04:24:45 PM EST
    Is the Syrian Tragedy the Fault of the US? (none / 0) (#45)
    by RickyJim on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 11:21:29 AM EST
    I have found Eric Margolis pretty reliable and here is his take.
    Former President George W. Bush actively considered invading Syria around 2008 in collusion with Israel. But the Israelis then pointed out that there were no Western-friendly groups to replace Assad, only extreme militant Sunni Muslim groups. Even the usually reckless Bush called off the invasion of Syria.

    By contrast, Barack Obama gave a green light to the CIA to arm, train and logistically support anti-Assad jihadist rebels in Syria. Arms poured in from Lebanon and, later, Turkey, paid for by Saudi Arabia and the Gulf emirates. Small numbers of US, British and French advisors went to Syria to teach the jihadists how to use mortars, explosives, and anti-tank weapons. The media's claim that the fighting in Syria was due to a spontaneous popular uprising was false. The repressive Assad government was widely unpopular but the uprising was another CIA `color-style' operation.

    i posted on this general theme (none / 0) (#109)
    by linea on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 10:22:57 PM EST
    ...in the previous open topic.

    there are many foreign language articles on this topic. based on the responses on this forum, it seems to me nobody here is open to considering any level of u.s. moral culpability. also, i believe the article errs in singling out secretary clinton. from the articles i read, this is the fuctioning of the apparatus of state over many administrations.


    You really need to stop (5.00 / 2) (#113)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 12:50:15 PM EST
    The "nobody here" bullish!t.

    You have no idea what you are talking about.


    Here you go (5.00 / 2) (#151)
    by Lora on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 06:56:12 AM EST
    From the linked article (emphasis added):

    Trump's announced retreat from Syria - if it turns out to be real - will mark a major turning point in US-Russian relations. It could well avoid a clash between Russia and the US, both nuclear powers.

    Linea, this is one reason why your take on Syria is met with such annoyance here.

    Yes, yes, the US has intervened/ interfered/ meddled extensively all over the world.  No denying it.

    But, you have to ask why the current right-wing kerfuffle over any US involvement, clandestine or otherwise, in Syria right now?

    Because the Trumpire is cozy with Russia, that's why, and articles about the bad CIA operating in a clandestine way in Syria are designed to reach the folks who have objected for years to clandestine CIA operations (which, by the way, most often the right wing had no problem with).

    The purpose is to deflect from the cozying up of Trump to Putin and to create instead a moral imperative for backing off in Syria. Fake outrage.


    THANK YOU!! (none / 0) (#187)
    by linea on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 08:46:22 PM EST
    i do very much appeciate that you are explaining this to me.

    one reason why your take on Syria is met with such annoyance here... the cozying up of Trump to Putin...

    the few people who actually listen to me know that i am, for good reason, opposed to russia and opposed to putin.

    it's even more frustrating that few of my friends follow political news and i have very few outlets to discuss any of this. for example, my mayor (seattle) is involved in a serious scandal and just last weekend i had to stop myself several times from discussing the issue - and im very passionate about that issue - because most people simply dont follow political topics or political news.


    That's the trouble with politics (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by Lora on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 10:14:16 PM EST
    Politics can change all our lives for better or worse, and yet so few of us do the work of trying to figure it all out.  Add in those who deliberately muddy the waters to make it harder to understand, and we have the mess that we have.

    I like to find a common thread or theme in the speech of many politicians and pundits and try to trace it back to its origin.  I also like to look into the background of those who are coming out with opinion pieces to see which groups or organizations they are associated with and what their agenda might be.

    Anyway, keep on plugging away!


    Margolis??? (none / 0) (#123)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 01:49:46 PM EST
    The Ron Paul devotee and 9/11 Truther who was pushing all kinds of baseless conspiracy theories air Israel?  The guy who accused Israel of seeking a "final solution", killing Arafat with an untracable toxin and developing a bioweapon to attack purple with Arab DNA???



    More Ad Hominems, Little Substance (none / 0) (#140)
    by RickyJim on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 05:12:12 PM EST
    which is the usual for Yman.  I am not going to even bother looking into your claims about Margolis.  Yes, he admires Ron Paul, but a 9/11 Truther?  Why don't you refute the assertions of the link?  After you do that, here is a quote from a recent Pat Buchanan column you can also try to demolish.
    We overthrew Saddam Hussein in 2003 and Moammar Gadhafi in 2012. Yet, the fighting, killing and dying in both countries have not ceased. Estimates of the Iraq civilian and military dead run into the hundreds of thousands.

    Still, the worst humanitarian disaster may be unfolding in Yemen.

    After the Houthis overthrew the Saudi-backed regime and took over the country, the Saudis in 2015 persuaded the United States to support its air strikes, invasion and blockade.

    By January 2016, the U.N. estimated a Yemeni civilian death toll of 10,000, with 40,000 wounded. However, the blockade of Yemen, which imports 90 percent of its food, has caused a crisis of malnutrition and impending famine that threatens millions of the poorest people in the Arab world with starvation.

    No matter how objectionable we found these dictators, what vital interests of ours were so imperiled by the continued rule of Saddam, Assad, Gadhafi and the Houthis that they would justify what we have done to the peoples of those countries?

    Keep citing Buchanan (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by MKS on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 06:59:16 PM EST
    and you will keep getting the same response.

    You are asking us to agree that Buchanan has credibility and accept his column's assertions....

    No, that won't work.  And there are likely few here who will try and fact check the article.

    But, you clearly love the guy. But, since Buchanan has openly questioned the U.S. involvement in WWII in Europe, I pay no attention to him.  Credibility matters, especially when you are asserting him as an authority, or are asking us to accept his factual representations as true.

    This is not a blog that will view Buchanan favorably.   Why you keep trying to foist him on us is unclear.   But you are sounding more like someone on the Right who is just trying to provoke.  Not all that attractive.  


    The Quoted Buchanan Views (1.00 / 1) (#142)
    by RickyJim on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 07:26:35 PM EST
    are very close to what has been posted on this blog by Jeralyn Merritt.  I am not trying to foist him on anybody.  Your inability to discuss these issues except on the basis or who is for or against a position makes you have no credibility in my view.

    It appears you (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by MKS on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 07:52:51 PM EST
    rummage through right wing alt.right websites, and then post articles you find there.

    I for one am not interested in what you find dumpster diving on right wing websites.  



    No, you have it wrong (none / 0) (#144)
    by MKS on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 07:49:04 PM EST
    If you want to discuss issue of U.S. involvement overseas, then discuss that issue without holding up Buchanan as an authority.

    The "one" is for the insult. You are trolling.  


    Hahahahahaha .... (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by Yman on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 07:40:41 PM EST
    From Margolis to Pat Buchanan????  Are you trying to be funny?

    BTW - When you cite someone's opinion as an authority, their credibility and judgment is an important issue.  When someone cites a conspiracy theorist and then follows it with Pat Buchanan, they have no credibility.  There's no need to "try to demolish" citing something written by Buchanan - you just point and laugh.

    As far as having "little substance", you're right.  Your post had little substance because all it contained was the opinion of a conspiracy theorist, followed up with a wingnut (Buchanan).  But since you apparently don't know much about the guy you chose to cite, I'll help you out:

    He's a 9/11 conspiracy theorist

    When Israel invaded Gaza in late 2008 to stop rocket fire against Israeli towns, Margolis accused Israel of perpetrating a "final solution" -- i.e. a Holocaust. When Yasser Arafat died, he wrote a glowing ode to him in the Sun, and gave credence to the conspiracy theory that he had been killed by "an untraceable toxin" dispensed by Israel. Along the same lines, he declared that "Israeli scientists are attempting to engineer deadly micro-organisms that only attack DNA within the cells of victims with distinctive Arab genes."


    Is NPR A Better Source? (none / 0) (#182)
    by RickyJim on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 06:44:51 PM EST
    Here is an All Things Considered segment that backs up Buchanan on US culpability in the humanitarian disaster that is getting worse in Lebanon.

    Sorry Yemen (none / 0) (#183)
    by RickyJim on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 06:45:37 PM EST
    Probably (none / 0) (#186)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 07:22:27 PM EST
    Them again, your average preschooler is a better source, so that's not saying much.  Of course, that didn't really matter, since - even IF someone in the NPR piece says what you claim "NPR" is saying - it's a different issue.  He//, it's not even the same country.

    Well that'll be a shocker when McCain gets to (none / 0) (#77)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:22:30 PM EST
    Heaven and St. Peter tells him America is no longer a blessing to humanity.

    im on a 15 minute delay (none / 0) (#80)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:38:56 PM EST
    to skip commercials.  but McCain made quite a lot of sense IMO.  

    McCain broke with Senate process (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:45:35 PM EST
    In order to champion Senate process?

    Oh Dear (none / 0) (#81)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 02:42:58 PM EST
    Sure, if his vote was against MTP

    The Oxygen network just did a three part (none / 0) (#90)
    by McBain on Tue Jul 25, 2017 at 03:23:56 PM EST
    series on the juries of the O.J. Simpson (murder trial) Michael Jackson and George Zimmerman cases called "The Jury Speaks".  I watched the O.J. episode last night. Of course I love shows like these but I'm not sure they're in the best interest of our legal system.  

    There wasn't much knew in this show but it's still fascinating to hear what some of the jurors  had to say.  At the end, four of them were asked, based on everything they've learned about the case since the trial, what would their verdict be?  I won't reveal what they said in case some of you want to watch it.

    T. Rex (none / 0) (#110)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 11:45:53 AM EST
    Tillerson is off to an undisclosed location. The State Department says he deserves a nap after his hectic travels.  But, that he will be working 20 hours a day wherever he lands, while taking some days off.  Not sure if Rex is working from home (with foreign countries coming to him) or if he just plans to spend more time thinking about all those Rosneft possibilities.

    Rex is reported to be sad about Trump's Boy Scout speech (he is a past national president of BSA). And, being lectured to my White House stafflings. Hope he is OK, if anyone spies a big white-haired man with an oil drill in his truck, give him a hug.

    Rumors (none / 0) (#111)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 12:15:30 PM EST
    have been rampant that Rexxon is getting ready to bail on Trump. Maybe after Trump relaxes the sanctions on Russia and he can cash in he'll move on from state.

    Mattis is on vacation too (none / 0) (#119)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 01:36:50 PM EST
    so (none / 0) (#120)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 01:40:24 PM EST
    we learn that Sara Huckabbee Sanders has a daughter named Scarlett

    'as gawd is ma wintess a will nevah look twoo directions at once!"

    Miss Scarlett (none / 0) (#133)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 03:48:54 PM EST
    may give the Mooch an idea for Miss Huckabee S's sprucing up:  make a dress from the gold curtains in the Oval Office.

    oh god (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 04:19:39 PM EST
    I think "Went with Wind," (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 04:49:08 PM EST
    was her best, including the line about Scarlett's gorgeous dress:  "saw it in the window and couldn't resist it."  Next best, was the spoof of "Random Harvest"--Rancid Harvest.

    There goes the neigborhood... (none / 0) (#121)
    by kdog on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 01:44:01 PM EST
    Trump is coming to my ghetto 'burb this Friday afternoon to give an invite-only speech to law enforcement people about the MS13 gang.

    Just what Brentwood needs...a big time gangster blabbering jibberish to a room full of small time gangsters about some other violent gangsters. A regular gangster's paradise up in the hood!

    I expect a strong show of protest...the only thing me and my neighbors dislike more than MS13 and the police is Donald F*ckin' Trump.

    "Donnie Two-scoops" (none / 0) (#134)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 03:49:49 PM EST
    will fit in well.

    Donnie Little Hands (none / 0) (#136)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 04:37:54 PM EST
    Sphincter lips... (none / 0) (#148)
    by desertswine on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 12:40:20 AM EST
    Maybe (none / 0) (#138)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 04:52:33 PM EST
    Joey No Socks will tag along for good measure.

    you do understand (none / 0) (#139)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 04:54:38 PM EST
    he is Trumps loudest most cinsistnet and most aggressive critic on cable?

    I think you are (none / 0) (#147)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jul 26, 2017 at 10:22:29 PM EST
    talking about Morning Joe and I am talking about the gangster Joey No Socks that apparently Trump celebrates every New Year's Eve with.

    My bad (none / 0) (#149)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 05:38:16 AM EST
    He does not wear socks

    And I know you are not a fan


    Yeah, (none / 0) (#153)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 07:18:27 AM EST
    more or less disappointed that he let Trump get away with so much for so long and actually praised him which I never got because the Trump he loathes now is the same Trump he was promoting last year.

    Trump lied (none / 0) (#154)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 07:52:30 AM EST
    and lied and lied and lied

    he is now calling him on those lies.  unlike the rest of the "conservative right"


    Better (none / 0) (#155)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 08:09:15 AM EST
    late than never I suppose, but was his excuse last year. Was it ignorance or typical craven behavior?

    Anybody who ever supported tRump falls into one or both of those categories, there are no other choices.

    Just because a rat is smart enough to abandon the sinking ship, does not mean he is noat a rat.


    thats really not the point (none / 0) (#156)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 08:38:17 AM EST
    the point is he is a person with cred on the far right that rips Trump for three hours everyday.

    we need to recognize a comrade wneh we see one and stop whining about 6 months ago because he once said something that got our panties in a bunch.


    really more like 8 months (none / 0) (#157)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 08:39:23 AM EST
    by the way (none / 0) (#158)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 08:48:45 AM EST
    whats his excuse?

    i dunno
    maybe because he said he was a frind to the LGBTQ community, over and over.  he said he would protect Medicare and Medicaid.  over and over.  he had a history of contributing to democrats.  there are lots of "excuses".

    to deny someone the right to realize that was bullsh!t and trash them because the "once supported him" is IMO insane.  do you want to change mnds or ride your high horse?


    So (none / 0) (#162)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 09:26:29 AM EST
    your excuse is that he was an innocent naif who fell under tRump's magical BS spell, I'm not buying it.

    I'm not denying him any thing, better late then never and all that. I'm merely pointing out that he was probably willfully ignorant at best or cravenly calculating at worst, then and now I suspect the latter.


    who gives a sh!t (none / 0) (#163)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 09:33:33 AM EST
    he is working for us now

    Sorry (none / 0) (#166)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 09:51:22 AM EST
    just because cold hard reality has smacked him in the face and forced him to (at least temporarily) jump ship, does not make him an ally. I prefer my compatriots to not be craven, willfully ignorant connivers.  

    i believe you have also said (none / 0) (#167)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 09:56:11 AM EST
    you cant be bothered to talk to those who disagree with you.  

    that means Scarborough is doing more everyday to get to a better place than you are


    Maybe so (none / 0) (#168)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 10:19:25 AM EST
    but at least I have been honest and consistent this whole time. It is my firm belief that anybody who ever supported tRump was either craven or ignorant, I would be lying to anybody if I did not state that up front, so my efforts at persuasion are hopelessly doomed in any case.

    I do have some compassion for the truly ignorant, as Americans are shockingly susceptible to propaganda and right wing mythology but I lack the tools to break through. I have absolutely no sympathy for the likes of Scarborough who had the tools but chose to ignore reality when it really counted.

    I guess I should glad that Scarborough is finally using his soap box to do the right thing, but I refuse to give him any credit for his too little too late epiphany.    


    When Scarborough starts objecting to (none / 0) (#175)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 11:40:06 AM EST
    Trump's (and McConnell's and Ryan's and Pence's - to name but a few) policies and agenda, then I will believe that he has seen some kind of light.  But I don't think that's the case - a lot of the anti-Trump coming from the right is a rejection of Trump, not his agenda, and the minute Trump would step down, many of these anti-Trump pundits would be scrambling back on the right-wing bandwagon, happy to advocate and advance the cause.  

    If he were changing his mind on right-wing policy, someone like Joe Scarborough, because he comes from the right, potentially has more power to change the minds of fellow conservatives than those of us on the left, whose arguments and advocacy are often rejected out of hand because we are on the left.

    He - and others on the right, both pundits and regular folks - can cause people to think that if someone so reliably conservative can change his mind, maybe they can, too.

    So, while I think we can use all the help we can get in bringing this horrible experiment-gone-wrong to an end, we don't need that help so we can pave the way for someone else to step in to take up the right-wing cause - and that's what I think most of this is about.  I'd like to think that maybe the karma of Trump's election is to ultimately open people's eyes and do significant damage to right-wing ideology, but it remains to be seen whether that's what's going to happen in the end.


    I truly believe that much of the (none / 0) (#164)
    by Anne on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 09:35:30 AM EST
    conservative world thought that if they kept Trump supplied with interesting cat toys, they could just pass the kinds of bills they've been dreaming about, put them in front of Trump and he would sign them: no muss, no fuss, high-fives and happy-dances all around.

    Among those who had some doubts and were reluctantly supporting him, I think there was a sense that once he actually stepped into the job, he would adapt to his new surroundings and get with the Washington program.  I guess they thought President Trump would not be the same person as Candidate Trump, and they could manage him - that he would have no choice but to fit into their world.

    I guess they never encountered an ego so large and so damaged that it could not be managed or made to conform.

    But there was, and still is, a fairly large contingent of Never-Trumpers among the conservative pundit class - I still have cognitive dissonance when I see Bill Kristol on MSNBC and he's making sense about Trump, hasn't changed his tune on how bad Trump is.  More seem to be jumping off the surely-eventually-Trump-will-resemble-an-actual-president bandwagon.

    But it's easier in many ways for the pundit class to do this than the GOP members of the House and Senate.  Night after night, I am appalled at how completely spineless these people are about admitting that Trump is as bad or worse than anyone ever expected.  And I don't expect that to change unless and until there is some appreciable erosion among the Trump voters.

    I'd like to know just how bad it would have to get before his enablers in the Congress would go out among the people and tell them that, sorry, they just were not going to be able to continue to support a man who may be mentally compromised.

    Or maybe I don't want to know how bad it would have to get, because I think it could be bad of cataclysmic proportions and they would still be saying "nothingburger" about everything.


    excellent point (none / 0) (#165)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 09:46:16 AM EST
    much easier for Kristol nd Scarborough and Max Boot and blah blah to have serious moment than those who are most afraid of a primary challenge.

    i believe we are reaching a tipping point.

    he is, reportedly, backing off Sessions.  it was a bridge to far.

    just a matter of time till the next bridge.


    I figure (none / 0) (#173)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 11:26:35 AM EST
    it's gonna take firing Sessions, Rosenstein and Mueller to get to the point where SOME Republicans will start speaking out. I think firing those three will not move McConnell or Ryan one iota since they already seen to be on the apology train.

    Graham says nobody is firing Mueller (none / 0) (#176)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 11:41:11 AM EST
    They're talking about passing legislation to protect Mueller.

    Talking about passing legislation (none / 0) (#178)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 02:07:56 PM EST
    to prevent the firing of Mueller and actually passing that legislation is the difference between making a headline and being a statesman.

    Graham is good at the former and inadequate at the latter.


    It was reported on CNN (none / 0) (#184)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 07:00:48 PM EST
    That if the Graham bill is voted on it would easily surpass 60 votes in the Senate.

    just reading bout it (none / 0) (#185)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 07:07:18 PM EST
    at TPM

    its Graham, Whitehouse and Blumenthal


    I'm glad (none / 0) (#172)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 11:22:52 AM EST
    he's doing that. My thinking is maybe if he had been that way last year we wouldn't be in this mess. The fact that I'm glad he's now doing what he should be doing doesn't negate what he did in the past. I would love to hear why he pushed Trump last year. I'm sure he turned on him because he saw conservatism becoming toxic with Trump. However what sticks in my mind is the fact that there was no shortage of never Trumpers that saw what Trump was a long time ago and never did what Scarborough did. What did Scarborough miss that they saw? I think I would be willing to cut him more slack if there was an explanation.

    Thank God!!! (none / 0) (#174)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 11:40:02 AM EST
    Dunford says the U.S. military will continue to permit transgender individuals to serve openly until Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has received President Donald Trump's "direction" to change the policy and figured out how to implement it.

    And Graham is on saying that if Trump fires Mueller there will be hell to pay.

    With the Russia sanctions vote I'm surprised Trump isn't on the White House lawn snarling and rabid. All these underlings telling him how things are going to go down.

    Pretty soon (none / 0) (#181)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jul 27, 2017 at 05:42:55 PM EST
    we are going to have to apply the Godfather law(akin to Godwin's) to discussions about the WH.
    until then, this is pure gangster
    On Wednesday night, I received a phone call from Anthony Scaramucci, the new White House communications director. He wasn't happy. Earlier in the night, I'd tweeted, citing a "senior White House official," that Scaramucci was having dinner at the White House with President Trump, the First Lady, Sean Hannity, and the former Fox News executive Bill Shine.
    "Who leaked that to you?" he asked. I said I couldn't give him that information. He responded by threatening to fire the entire White House communications staff. "What I'm going to do is, I will eliminate everyone in the comms team and we'll start over," he said. I laughed, not sure if he really believed that such a threat would convince a journalist to reveal a source.

    "They'll all be fired by me," he said. "I fired one guy the other day. I have three to four people I'll fire tomorrow. I'll get to the person who leaked that to you. Reince Priebus--if you want to leak something--he'll be asked to resign very shortly." The issue, he said, was that he believed Priebus had been worried about the dinner because he hadn't been invited. "Reince is a f*king paranoid schizophrenic, a paranoiac," Scaramucci said. He channelled Priebus as he spoke: " `Oh, Bill Shine is coming in. Let me leak the fking thing and see if I can ck-block these people the way I c*k-blocked Scaramucci for six months.' "
    (my bold and censor)

    this has to stop (none / 0) (#196)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 29, 2017 at 08:52:53 AM EST
    it just has to stop or be stopped.  this man is not even close to fit to serve as CIC

    Trump tells police not to worry about injuring suspects during arrests

    "When you guys put somebody in the car and you're protecting their head, you know, the way you put their hand over?" Trump said, miming the physical motion of an officer shielding a suspect's head to keep it from bumping against the squad car.

    "Like, don't hit their head, and they just killed somebody -- don't hit their head," Trump continued. "I said, you can take the hand away, okay?"

    In response to a question regarding Trump's comments and the officers who applauded, the Suffolk County police quickly distanced the department from Trump's comments, saying Friday that they would not accept this treatment of people in custody.

    so in two appearances in 48 hours this idiot has given two speeches the hosts, first BSA then the police, had to apologise for.

    this is or president.

    It (none / 0) (#197)
    by FlJoe on Sat Jul 29, 2017 at 10:04:09 AM EST
    will never stop until tRump is gone and maybe even then. Pence and Sessions support his views, if not his rhetoric on unleashing LEO and filling up the prisons, with a bit of of head-knocking as acceptable collateral damage.

    perhaps (none / 0) (#198)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 29, 2017 at 10:23:28 AM EST
    still i can not imagine either of those people giving a speech encouraging brutality.

    i suppose there is an argument to be made that his idiotic blathering at least shows who they really are, and i agree the other two are certainly no better.

    but this is unacceptable.  put mildly.


    Certainly (none / 0) (#199)
    by FlJoe on Sat Jul 29, 2017 at 10:55:33 AM EST
    most Republicans would be more comfortable going back to the dog whistling days, but the cat is out of the bag(MM alert). Unfortunately, for every two people who find such talk unacceptable there is one that "loves it" and some of those happen to hold immense power at this moment.