GOP2020: What Becomes Of The Collaborators Post-Trump?

Morganna said:
Which advisor? Stephen Miller? Shaun Hannity? Rudy Giuliani?
We are way out there in Swampland.

 Wasn't it supposed to be Kelly's job to the be the "adult in the room"?


ml1 said:


Morganna said:
Which advisor? Stephen Miller? Shaun Hannity? Rudy Giuliani?
We are way out there in Swampland.
 Wasn't it supposed to be Kelly's job to the be the "adult in the room"?

She seems like a believer. Before they stopped using her as a guest on MSNBC, I used to lose it whenever she argued, non stop. She strikes me as someone who is on board just to see Roe overturned. She was very effusive in her praise of Trump. Perhaps the inventor of the phrase "brilliant communicator."


I'm guessing his staff tries to keep the Cosby verdict from him so that he doesn't say something wildly inappropriate.

Morganna, I think m/1 means John Kelly; in which case, he's a giant disappointment.


Morganna said:


ml1 said:

Morganna said:
Which advisor? Stephen Miller? Shaun Hannity? Rudy Giuliani?
We are way out there in Swampland.
 Wasn't it supposed to be Kelly's job to the be the "adult in the room"?
She seems like a believer. Before they stopped using her as a guest on MSNBC, I used to lose it whenever she argued, non stop. She strikes me as someone who is on board just to see Roe overturned. She was very effusive in her praise of Trump. Perhaps the inventor of the phrase "brilliant communicator."

 I meant John Kelly ;-)


DJT: "Cosby is a fine man. He worked for me. How can we believe these women when they were all unconscious?"


GL2 said:
DJT, International Embarrassment


Trump arrived late for his speech — Ecuador’s president took his time slot instead — and began by first bragging about his administration’s accomplishments, declaring that “In less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country.” 
Laughter rose up from the crowd at the claim. 
“It's true,” said Trump, adding: “Didn't expect that reaction, but that's okay.”
politico

 Last time everyone laughed at Trump, he decided to run for president. Guess this means we should get ready for UN Secretary General Trump. You won't believe how much winning will be going on at the UN.


PVW said:


GL2 said:
DJT, International Embarrassment


Trump arrived late for his speech — Ecuador’s president took his time slot instead — and began by first bragging about his administration’s accomplishments, declaring that “In less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country.” 
Laughter rose up from the crowd at the claim. 
“It's true,” said Trump, adding: “Didn't expect that reaction, but that's okay.”
politico
 Last time everyone laughed at Trump, he decided to run for president. Guess this means we should get ready for UN Secretary General Trump. You won't believe how much winning will be going on at the UN.

Trump, the president of Crazy Town, gives a rally speech at the UN and diplomats burst into laughter.  How could it be?  


PVW has given us something more to worry about - Sec. Gen. Trump. Yikes. smile 


Did she really say this!

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley on Wednesday claimed President Donald Trump’s speech at the United Nations General Assembly a day earlier drew laughs because world leaders “loved his honesty” and “respect” him.


GL2 said:
Did she really say this!
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley on Wednesday claimed President Donald Trump’s speech at the United Nations General Assembly a day earlier drew laughs because world leaders “loved his honesty” and “respect” him.

Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia


GL2 said:
DJT: "Cosby is a fine man. He worked for me. How can we believe these women when they were all unconscious?"

 Don't white wash Trump. (Pun intended)


Oh,  that Kelly! Sorry guys. Well he lost me when he went full attack against Rep. Frederica Wilson and called her "an empty barrel." So much for his putting women on a pedestal speech.



Morganna said:
Oh,  that Kelly! Sorry guys. Well he lost me when he went full attack against Rep. Frederica Wilson and called her "an empty barrel." So much for his putting women on a pedestal speech.


 Gender is just half of the equation. Maybe not even half.


That's true LOST.

As for the moment, it is disturbing to watch Trump chatting away in his press conference. He seems relaxed, almost happy. Like he is enjoying himself. He seems eerily confident. Not even angry.

Why? It's freaking me out.

I'm here angst ridden and he's having a terrific time!

How is this guy wired?


An Insidious and Contagious American Presidency

Insidious is the man. Insidious is his pollution of the F.B.I., whose former director, James Comey, he fired after Comey refused to show “loyalty.” Loyalty in this instance meant willingness to shelve, at Trump’s demand, an investigation into dealings between his first national security adviser, Michael Flynn, and Russia.

Now the F.B.I. — given a week to investigate what happened 36 years ago between Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford — concludes an investigation on which the lives of our children and grandchildren may hinge in less than a week. It does so as Trump, speaking behind the seal of the president of the United States, unloads his bile on Dr. Blasey.

Contagious is the man. Contagious is Trump’s view that judges should be agents of those who appoint them rather than the independent guarantors of America’s constitutional democracy. Trump wants loyalty from Kavanaugh, too, and the angry, emotional testimony that the judge provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee carried this subliminal message: “I am one of yours.” It was right out of the Trump playbook.

The Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of the rule of law. It was conceived as a critical part of the political system, not as just another venue for ordinary, ugly, polarized politics. Kavanaugh’s confirmation would be the capstone to a shift in that direction. Courts were meant to be America’s great levelers, not their great dividers and inciters.


continues at...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/05/opinion/trump-kavanaugh-confirmation-justice.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=3&pgtype=sectionfront


the disease preceded Trump. And it will persist after he's gone. 


Trump isn't a disease, from outside the body.

It's a malignancy produced by the body.


Trump isn't "contagious".

He's a catalyst.  He facilitates reactions from those inclined to those actions.

When Trump is gone, the potential for those actions will remain in the conservative GOP, even if they are dormant until the next time.


What is the remedy for a malignancy?


LOST said:
What is the remedy for a malignancy?

 Must be excised! (Just kidding, Secret Service)

 


ml1 said:
the disease preceded Trump. And it will persist after he's gone. 

 How about "contagion?"

Or how about "resurfacing and old virus" like shingles works with chicken pox? Trump is a fluid-filled blister on the body politic!

 

Trying to find some humor before today's vote and Trump's inevitable boasting about his fcuking achievement.


Thanks for trying, GL2.  Personally, i'm completely bummed today, much more so than i would have expected.

Best humor from before the confirmation - Andy Borowitz:  "This is him sober."

But even that's not lightening things today.  Five justices connected to Federalist Society, oy.


It appears to me that "but for" the "Nuclear Option" being invoked by Harry Reid in the Senate in 2013 (with regard to appointments of federal judges other than the US Supreme Court), BK would never have been appointed to the SCOTUS. Reid set a precedent that many have come to regret. See link below to interview with Chuck Schumer regarding his regrets on Reid invoking nuclear option.

"But for" Reid invoking the Nuclear Option, it is likely that less partisan appointments would have been made by DJT (because absent the current rule of a simple majority  required for SCOTUS nominee approval, the prior rule would control: which required a super-majority).  The prior rule (namely, 60 votes for presidential nominations) forces bipartisanship upon the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate as a whole.  


Link to Hill internet article regarding Schumer's regrets on Reid invoking Nuclear Option.

 See https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/312540-schumer-regrets-dems-triggering-nuclear-option


Link to CBS site has a good explanation of how the prior rule was changed.

See https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nuclear-option-why-trumps-supreme-court-pick-needs-only-51-votes-in-the-senate/


So both sides forgot that which Party has the majority can change every two years.

But this change in the Rules is a symptom of the division in the country.


LOST said:
So both sides forgot that which Party has the majority can change every two years.
But this change in the Rules is a symptom of the division in the country.

 Agreed. IMHO, this "Nuclear Option" change will further exacerbate  partisanship and extremism (from both sides).


GL2 said:


LOST said:
What is the remedy for a malignancy?
 Must be excised! (Just kidding, Secret Service)
 

 While I admit to being furious, the side of me ruled by pragmatism over passion, believes we have to court the individuals that we know. We have to read the posts on FB that instinctually enrage us, but counter with rational arguments. There are some we may never change but when I read some of these generalizations about Democrats, I try to reach that person and ask, "Is this who you think I am?" If I know them, I appeal to their realization that their posts are attacking me personally. If they are strangers, I take a chance on diplomacy.

This morning I read angry posts blaming people by gender or race for the support of Trump or the GOP. I could have said nothing or said something nasty, but I chose to appeal to the person with the idea that if we want to change things we should not risk alienating any member of any group.

Too Pollyanna?


You have much more self-discipline than I at this point in my life and in these times.


GL2 said:
You have much more self-discipline than I at this point in my life and in these times.

 When I lose it I write long vicious diatribes, then I save them to my draft file with a plan to embellish. By the time I reread them, I've calmed down a bit. If I wait long enough I decide it's a waste of my time.



Morganna said:


GL2 said:

LOST said:
What is the remedy for a malignancy?
 Must be excised! (Just kidding, Secret Service)
 
 While I admit to being furious, the side of me ruled by pragmatism over passion, believes we have to court the individuals that we know. We have to read the posts on FB that instinctually enrage us, but counter with rational arguments. There are some we may never change but when I read some of these generalizations about Democrats, I try to reach that person and ask, "Is this who you think I am?" If I know them, I appeal to their realization that their posts are attacking me personally. If they are strangers, I take a chance on diplomacy.
This morning I read angry posts blaming people by gender or race for the support of Trump or the GOP. I could have said nothing or said something nasty, but I chose to appeal to the person with the idea that if we want to change things we should not risk alienating any member of any group.
Too Pollyanna?

 Thanks for your honesty.


PS I similarly sometimes type up draft postings which I save for later review and reflection (which frequently means that I delete these draft postings upon review and reflection).


In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.

Sponsored Business

Find Business

Advertise here!