This past week Donald Trump made the decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Accord, an agreement reached by the majority of nations on the planet to attempt to fight climate change. His reaction to the many voices that rose in objection was a statement that read: "I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris". For some reason Donald Trump apparently believes that the future of this planet is not of concern to the people of Pittsburgh.
I realize that the Paris Accord may not have been a perfect agreement, but it was a start to at least attempt to address an issue that will affect everyone, and I do mean everyone, on this planet. That our president in his infinite wisdom doesn't seem to understand that is of great disappointment.
This video is an illustration of various scenarios of what the future may hold. I am greatly relieved that I will not be around to see it. But I feel very sad for those who will and complete disgust at those alive today who have deliberately contributed to it.
107 comments:
"For some reason Donald Trump apparently believes that the
future of this planet is not of concern to the people of Pittsburgh."
Pittsburgh went 80% for Hillary Clinton. They're not at all pleased in Pittsburgh to have Shorthands claiming that he represents them. They deem it an insult.
I kind of thought that might be the case.
Meanwhile in France the newly elected President and various French officials are having a little fun at Donald Trump's expense.
France is taunting the US on the Paris Agreement -- again.
This time, French officials remade a White House video by editing captions that explain why the Paris climate accord was a "bad deal" for the US.
The video, posted on Twitter by the French Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs, is France's latest challenge of President Donald Trump's decision to pull the United States out of the United Nations-brokered deal, which seeks to limit global temperature rises by 2100 to 2 degrees Celsius above levels recorded before industrialization.
I have a new respect for France. Although I am a little disappointed in the wording of that article, specifically the "taunting the US" part. While Trump may be president his opinion on this issue does not necessarily represent the people of the US. The last poll showed that 68% of Americans supported the Paris Accord. It is only Trump's base that is with him. I suspect that eventually they are the only ones who will be on many issues.
68% should be 62%
A smaller number, but still a majority.
The rally in support of Trump's pull-out from the Paris Accords didn't make much of a mark. I've seen estimates of the crowd size at around 50, other estimates claimed around 100. Trump did not attend.
I haven't seen estimates of the anti-Trump rally scheduled for the same day (it had been scheduled before Trump's decision on the Paris Accords was announced and was basically anti-Trump on all counts). But, I have seen pictures of a portion of the march; way more than 50 in just the shot I saw. And it had been moved to the Mall on account of it was too big for Market Square, where it was first set (and where the smaller pro-Trump rally wound up being held).
For you uninformed morons, this is the current status:
#1 China burns 4 times more coal than the US does(today).
#2 China emmits 2 times more CO2 than the US does(today).
#3 China accrding to the Paris deal needs to do nothing before 2030.
#4 The US, and the "west", needs to pay 100.000.000.000 to China and other "developing countries" in penalties for "carbon emissions" until 2030.
Trump said no to that.
Why is that bad?
So, if in 2030, America is de-industrialised and only producing apps and "thoughts", and if China is even more than today the workshop of everything that matters in the real world - you OK with that?
Ya'll libruls think ya'll gonna have a grand ol' time then?
"The president's supporters are madder and more dedicated to
him than ever…"
USNews
But, there are fewer of them.
"#3 China accrding to the Paris deal needs to do nothing before 2030."
That's not true. China hasn't committed to reducing its emissions before 2030, but they are still an underdeveloped economy, and they have undertaken bend the curve and eventually to reverse their current course which would have them greatly increasing their carbon outputs to perhaps American per capita levels (about 5 times their current per capita output). They will get to the reversing part by 2030--which is not that far down the road. I expect to live to see it. Remember, they currently outproduce us in pollutants only because they have 5 times as many people, not because they contribute to the problem in anything like the percentages that we do as individual people.
And the part about the ‘penalties’ is utter nonsense believed only by those suckers who suck up their info from FoxNews ‘opinion’ programs masquerading as real news programs. (Or, worse yet, Breitbart and Drudge and RedState and the like.) It is bullshit off the git; no penalties included in the Paris Accords--none--never was--your supposed ‘news’ sources made it up and you sucked it down as if it were true, which it is not.
"So, if in 2030…"
You might want to propose sane hypotheticals instead of the bilgewater you've supplied above.
4½ times as many people (I guess that one child policy has had an effect).
And, in an effort to bolster his Muslim ‘ban’ on the eve of Supreme Court review of same, Shorthands has tweeted out tonight that it is indeed a ‘travel ban’ even as his lawyers have been arguing to the courts that it's no such thing. TrumpTweets
He's just so helpful.
But in the same liberal economy every chinaman is due a refrigirator and a car and gadgets just like every ameican does. And the INEVITABLE impact on the environmet is best passed onto EU or US middleclass taxpayesrs.
You can't even get today right. Not bloody likely you can figure what's inevitable.
I do note that China is moving right along with renewable energy, on path already to catch and pass us up, and Trump's abandonment of the Paris Accords isn't much likely to help us keep up with them when it comes to the technologies of the future. (Renewable energy already employs more people in America than coal, and it's moving right along, but Trump's pro-carbon policies are definitely gonna make it harder.)
...Trump's abandonment of the Paris Accords isn't much likely to help us keep up with them when it comes to the technologies of the future.
While many states have vowed to try to continue on with the alternative energy sector of the economy, as have many businesses, the participation of the federal government via regulations is an invaluable tool in encouraging cleaner sources.
Coal is simply not a source of energy that is healthy for our environment. It's use has contributed to the problems we have today.
"…the participation of the federal government via regulations is an
invaluable tool in encouraging cleaner sources."
Or, in discouraging those sources, in favor of the continued or even increased usage of dirty energy sources, which is Trump's clearly stated intent.
Tonight's death toll in London is already up to six. The driver on the London Bridge turns out to have been a middle-aged Muslim, 56 I think was the age given. (Dead now.)
For you uninformed morons, this is the current status:
Fact checking Trump on the Paris Accord
In announcing that the U.S. would withdraw from the Paris Agreement, a global accord aimed at addressing climate change, President Trump made more than a few false and misleading claims:
But in the same liberal economy every chinaman is due a refrigirator and a car and gadgets just like every ameican does.
Is it odd that others in the world would like to have a lifestyle like that of the West? And the rise of a Chinese middle class that would import commodities from the West has been encouraged in an effort to create jobs here at home. But for that many people to use the amount of resources that we do per capita will only worsen the situation the planet is in. Resources are finite. It is a devils bargain.
Tonight's death toll in London is already up to six. The driver on the London Bridge turns out to have been a middle-aged Muslim, 56 I think was the age given. (Dead now.)
The age is kind of unusual. Usually we don't see an attacker that old.
And Trump is using this latest attack to tout his travel ban, as if that would really prevent this from happening. We haven't even heard if the people who carried out this attack were immigrants.
And, in an effort to bolster his Muslim ‘ban’ on the eve of Supreme Court review of same, Shorthands has tweeted out tonight that it is indeed a ‘travel ban’ even as his lawyers have been arguing to the courts that it's no such thing. TrumpTweets
He's just so helpful.
The one consolation is that at least he is an incompetent dictator wanna be.
I have mentioned Trump's incompetence before as one of the reasons to not impeach him and let Pence have the job. Pence is probably not up to the job either, if his tenure as governor is any example, but he's probably got more going on in that department than Trump, and therefore would be a bigger danger.
By the way, Marcus…. Did you get any bonding done with Hungarian neo-nazi types on your vacation? Learn the secret handshakes and secret signs and all that?
I remembered it wrong. The driver was 52 years old. This is the second 52 year old terrorist to get behind the wheel of a car in Britain this year. I don't know if that's a coincidence or if there's a reason for older terrorists in Britain.
Victim count up to seven dead.
They were interviewing Nikki Haley the US Ambassador to the UN this morning on one of the news programs. She was defending Trump's withdrawal from the Paris Accord and saying that it was only because it was a "bad deal" for the US and that Trump does believe the climate is changing and that the US can do still do its part to combat that even without being in the Paris Accord. Haley said that Trump is one of the most staunchest supporters (my phrasing) of clean air and water. She made his action sound very logical. However, at this point, if I had been the interviewer, I would have asked her how Trump could be such a supporter of clean air and water (and that isn't really the issue here anyway) when he is gutting the EPA?
The one thing I tend to agree with, though, is the question of whether or not the Paris Accord really is reachable by the countries who signed on. In Minnesota we have some stringent goals with regard to controlling CO2, but we have yet to actually achieve them. And then there is always the possibility that the Accord really will not help because it doesn't go far enough to curb emissions, that we may actually have already gone past a point where we won't be able to affect climate change is debatable.
But all of that aside, Trump's action will actually make it more difficult for the US to compete in the job markets of the future, because he is emphasizing the past rather than the future. He is ceding our leadership role to someone else.
Victim count up to seven dead.
While there have been greater death tolls in other attacks I think that being as this took place in London it may have a greater impact than we may see at this time. As a result the British PM has already said they need to crack down on Islamic extremism more so than they have been. The UK as a whole may see more stringent security and tighter immigration rules. Although I think given the Brexit vote that last was already in the cards. This despite the fact that most, if not all, of the attackers in the past have been home grown. I haven't seen any info yet on that with this recent attack.
"… that we may actually have already gone past a point…"
The ‘tipping point’ theory there. Most climatologists seem to think we're not past that point just yet. But, it's not a hard science, not yet, too much we don't know in precision detail, although we've got the outlines and the mechanisms figured out and know enough to know we're in trouble.
"…there have been greater death tolls in other attacks…"
Shorthands made the point in this morning's twitterstorm that they did not have guns, although that's not the point he was going for I don't think.
So what do we make of this?
Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt have broken diplomatic relations with Qatar over what they say is the country's support of terrorism.
With time, the answers will be revealed
“Mr. President, your presidency is in a world of trouble, for you operate in the shadow of treason."
— John Dean
"So what do we make of this?"
I'd say it was a falling out over which set of terrorists they should be supporting in Syria, and to a lesser extent, in Yemen.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
I think we can expect a broad assault through FoxNews and Radio-Right-Wing on the credibility of James Comey starting probably today. I say this because it appears that Shorthands has decided against attempting to block Comey's testimony this week by an assertion of ‘executive privilege’. His legal counsel has undoubtedly explained to him by now that it's not likely that such an assertion will stand up when challenged in the courts, and, if he tries to pull that one, it will be challenged in the courts. (Ironically, one of the reasons it'll almost certainly fail in the courts is his own twitter outbursts on the subjects in question, which have publicized his break with Comey on the subject and made it clear that the issue is not a matter of protecting the confidentiality of Comey's advice to him, but rather, a matter of keeping confidential what he told Comey.) This is hardly the stuff of executive privilege in the first place, and besides, he's already helped make the parameters of their disagreement public, thus blowing any claim to confidentiality on the subject.
So, the thing to do now is to alert the dedicated Trumpkins that the official position is to denounce Comey's credibility. They have three days before Comey testifies on Thursday. I expect they will use these three days to the fullest extent they can.
TrumpTweets: Shorthands is having himself a public meltdown this morning. I think he may have just made it impossible for even his own Justice Gorsuch to vote in his favor. (Probably still get Clarence Thomas, but I wouldn't bet on him getting another vote.)
Lee: "By the way, Marcus…. Did you get any bonding done with Hungarian neo-nazi types on your vacation? Learn the secret handshakes and secret signs and all that?"
No, I bonded with a few pints of beer, that was about it. Other than that I just checked the place out. Nice enough but I prefer Prague.
Lynnette: "So what do we make of this?
Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt have broken diplomatic relations with Qatar over what they say is the country's support of terrorism."
What "we" make of it I can't say but what I make of it is it has nothing to do with terrorism per se, as IS and AQ are supported just as much from Saudi and their gang of followers as from Qatar. It's just that Qatar is a bit too cozy with the Muslim Brotherhood and not enemies enough with Iran and Hezbollah for the rest of the merry band of terror-enabling tribal chieftains to stomach.
Shorthands is having himself a public meltdown this morning. I think he may have just made it impossible for even his own Justice Gorsuch to vote in his favor.
Obviously those lawyers who were supposed to be vetting him haven't been able to catch him yet. Slippery devil.
It's just that Qatar is a bit too cozy with the Muslim Brotherhood and not enemies enough with Iran and Hezbollah for the rest of the merry band of terror-enabling tribal chieftains to stomach.
I was wondering if Iran didn't play a role in that decision.
Yes, even those who adamantly support Trump are concerned with his lose fingers.
George Conway, the husband of White House counselor Kellyanne Conway and one-time top contender of a key Justice Department job, took to Twitter Monday to criticize President Donald Trump for his morning travel ban tweets.
Of course it did Lynnette. The whole internal game in the ME is the jockying for power between Saudi and Iran. Qatar got too close to Iran in the minds of the Saudi and Saudi brought its minions along on a blockade.
Qatar will probably fold.
Og course they're arabs and cannot be seen to fold, especially not for their home audience, so it will be made to look like something else. An "agreement". But Qatar will fold on this.
Shorthands is pushing the newest attacks in Britain as evidence of the need for his ‘travel ban’. However, none of the recent attacks in Britain are known to have been perpetrated by recent arrivals from any of the Six Muslim Nations (originally Seven Muslim Nations before Iraq was taken off the list after the Iraqi protested they're in the middle of attacking Da‘esh in Mosul and Shorthands' travel ban was making it domestically difficult to be seen publicly coöperating with the U.S.A., even against Da‘esh). These attacks are known to be associated with Muslims, although not with recent immigrants. And yet Shorthands is connecting them publicly with his travel ban.
This would seem to prove up that the connection he sees is religious. And that, of course, runs afoul of the Constitution.
His dedicated Trumpkins have assumed, still assume, that the target is religious. That's what he promised; that's what they expect. However, in front of the courts he's had to make the case that it was not religious discrimination that propelled him. (The dedicated Trumpkins understand the need for the official denial of the actual intent, and thoroughly approve of this abuse of the Constitution as well as approving of the use of legal lies to carry out the Constitutional violations.) But, his public connection of the ends and the means in this most recent twitter storm will probably be raised in the Supreme Court, and they're gonna have a hard time pretending not to see it. I really don't expect them to try (other than maybe Clarence Thomas).
Well, the assault on James Comey's credibility that I predicted yesterday morning did not start yesterday; not noticably anyway. Perhaps the White House staff was too busy trying to figure out where to go with Shorthands' twitter outburst (a ‘twitterburst’ maybe we should call that? whatever…), maybe too busy with the fallout from the outburst ‘bout his Muslim Travel Ban to implement the opening attack on Comey. Perhaps I gave them too much credit and they'd not thought to preemptively attack Comey's credibility. (I'm guessing it's more likely the former than the latter.)
Whatever it was, they clearly did not begin a full-scale assault on Comey's credibility yesterday. Perhaps they'll get around to it today.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Meantime, the BBC thinks the Saudi/Qatari feud is less about Iran than about the Qatari saying out loud what everybody knows they believe but which the Saudi don't wanna hear said out loud. (Which is not to say that Qatari tolerance of Iranian influences throughout the Arab Middle East doesn't piss off the Saudi, but it's hardly a new position for the Emir of Qatar.)
And, that early report I saw claiming that the driver of the rented van in this most recent London terrorist attack was in his 50s--that was apparently wrong. The Brits have now named all three of the dead terrorists and they range from 22 years old to 30 years old.
TrumpTweets: Shorthands has decided to weigh in on the fuss among the Arab states this morning. He's taking his shots at Qatar. Apparently nobody's told him yet that we have our largest regional military base there and they can make us move it.
Another day's gone by and as of yet no preemptive assault on James Comey coming out of the Trump administration. (Sean Hannity has promised an hour on it tonight, but that's hardly the full-scale assault I predicted.) I guess maybe there's not gonna be a preemptive attack.
This is not normal behavior for Shorthands. But, he is an impulsive and unpredictable fella; that just goes along with it.
Ahh the plot thickens. It seems there is some suspicion that the recent split between Qatar and the other Gulf states may have been caused by a fake news story...planted by Russian hackers. I will have to see if I can hunt up what the fake news story entailed...
This is not normal behavior for Shorthands. But, he is an impulsive and unpredictable fella; that just goes along with it.
Apparently the guy on the hot seat isn't Comey, but Sessions.
"Ahh the plot thickens. It seems there is some suspicion…[etc.]…
may have been caused by a fake news story...planted by Russian
hackers."
Yeah, and this after Trump tweeted this morning taking credit for himself for the rift between the Saudi and Qatar. In my neck of the woods this is described as having ‘shit and fell back in it'. No way ya can blame anybody but yourself for one of those, although Shorthands will surely try.
It looks like the fake news story had to do with some remarks the Emir of Qatar supposedly make regarding Iran and Israel.
The emir was quoted as saying: “Iran represents a regional and Islamic power that cannot be ignored and it is unwise to face up against it,” the ticker read at one point. “It is a big power in the stabilisation of the region.”
In his speech in Riyadh this week, Trump singled Iran out for criticism, saying it was fuelling terrorism.
In addition, the state news agency’s Twitter account contained a story in Arabic apparently from the country’s foreign minister, Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani, about Qatar withdrawing its ambassadors from several nearby countries including Egypt, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.
Lee: Yeah, and this after Trump tweeted this morning taking credit for himself for the rift between the Saudi and Qatar.
Yes, well, the Orange One will always find a way to step in it if he can. It's soooo embarrassing. I dream of the day where we have a boring, but capable, type of president.
"Apparently the guy on the hot seat isn't Comey, but Sessions."
Wuss bully. Comey can fight back and appears he's gonna do just that. Shorthands is scared of him. Doesn't know what to do; he's frozen for now. (Sessions got no way to fight back; Sessions got no allies anymore.)
I see your BBC article, Lee, talked a little about the remarks supposedly made the the Emir. I should have read that first.
Comey can fight back and appears he's gonna do just that. Shorthands is scared of him. Doesn't know what to do; he's frozen for now.
Speculation on CNN is that Trump is going to live Tweet during Comey's testimony.
I think they're letting themselves get carried away by what they're hopin’ for. (Damn fool Shorthands tweeted that the media wanted him to quit using Twitter; like hell they want that; that's a stream of headlines every week, almost every day.)
(Jared and Ivanka got any sense at all they'll have already hid his twitter-phone and then they'll have a trove of some shiny objects on hand to wave at him come Thursday.)
The title tells the story here: The Arab World Has Never Recovered From the Loss of 1967 By Hisham Melhem
Subtitled "Fifty years after the Six-Day War, the intellectualism that once lit up the Middle East has been all but extinguished by corrupt regimes and perverse religiosity."
It's medium long, but if ya got time to kill and the inclination…. No groundbreaking theories here, but solid argument. If ya got a little time to kill….
I'm wondering if the Iranian's re-election of the so-called ‘moderate’, Hassan Rouhani, had anything to do with Da‘esh deciding finally to hit at Iran? I.e. Would they have hit Iran if the Iranians had chosen the comparatively hard-core clerical candidate, Ebrahim Raisi? Or would they have considered that a waste of resources?
I'll have to read the article tonight. But somehow, even without reading it, I have a feeling I will agree with his assessment.
I don't know, I think Daesh has been trying to hit Iran for some time and it's possible that everything just worked out that they succeeded this time.
It could be that any possible stability, which one would hope a more moderate voice in Iran would promote, is simply not in Daesh's interest. They seem to flourish in chaos.
There should be an "or" between those two thoughts about Daesh and Iran.
"There should be an ‘or’ between those two thoughts about Daesh
and Iran."
Yeah, I figured that out.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Meantime, back at the ranch… After five (5) successive ‘front runners’ for the empty post of FBI director, have withdrawn, in a line, one-after-another, Shorthands has finally found somebody who'll accept the nomination. I don't know this new guy, name of Wray. Papers say he was Chris Christie's defense attorney during the bridge closing scandal, but that's all I've really heard about him.
Ya'll may recall my prior conclusion that Shorthands is probably safe from impeachment unless and until his favorability ratings run down around 33%--35% or there‘bouts, and stay there for awhile.
Well, Real Clear Politics is now conveniently averaging the top polls on his favorability ratings for us, so we can keep track of how that's workin’ out for him (and for us). Trump Average Favorability Ratings He's currently at 39.4%, some 15 points underwater. June has been a bad for him, so far, in general; today seems to tie his all-time low favorability rating. And they haven't had time to digest Comey's testimony from today, which ain't gonna make the Trumpkins any happier, and might even peel a few more of them away. I'm expecting him to dip a couple more points in the next few days. Probably only a couple of points though, probably not into actual danger territory below 35%.
Still, gettin’ close to dicey territory for him here already.
Excuse me for interrupting the Shorthands whinge fest, but Masoud Barzani just announced a Kurdish independence referendum for September 25th. Polling to include Kirkuk. Gonna ruffle a few feathers in Baghdad.
This poll is saying Trump is at 34% approval rating.
Gonna ruffle a few feathers in Baghdad.
I'll say. And what of Turkey?
Turkey looks beyond Raqqa campaign
I see that they have started the attack on Raqqa. Somehow I am thinking the end of Daesh would not be the end of the problems besetting that region.
"This poll is saying Trump is at 34% approval rating."
I saw that one earlier. That's what caused me to go looking for somebody might be averaging the top polls by now. (Shorthands was lookin’ pretty bad in today's Gallup poll too.) I figure it'll give me a better grasp on what's real if I go for the averages of the credible polls rather than bounce around ‘tween the various polls, all with various numbers. You wanna pick one poll you like, don't let me talk you out of it. But, I like my theory.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"I'll say. And what of Turkey?"
There is that, but the Turks seem to be otherwise occupied just now. And, of course, the proposed referendum has no legal consequences--no legal status, a point Petes neglected to mention. It's mostly for show, and it's intended to rattle Baghdad and Ankara. It will come as no surprise to them that feathers get ruffled.
Why Comey's memos were leaked
Fired FBI Director James Comey asked Columbia law professor Daniel C. Richman to leak the content of memos documenting his interactions with President Donald Trump, he testified Thursday.
I have been speculating as to why Comey was leaking the memos, as it was obvious that he had to have been, and my conclusions came out a little differently. But then I read a lot of spy thrillers. But I could understand if he was a hard man to find.
It looks like Comey's testimony is the hottest ticket in town. I will have to hunt up a video of all of it when I get the chance. If one exists, that is.
It's mostly for show, and it's intended to rattle Baghdad and Ankara. It will come as no surprise to them that feathers get ruffled.
It is a move on the Middle East chessboard.
"It is a move on the Middle East chessboard."
The Iraqi Kurds have become fairly proficient at making moves just shy of what'll get ‘em attacked by one of the stronger powers arrayed against them.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
James Comey's testimony today seems to leave the ‘obstruction of justice’ charge still resting on entirely circumstantial evidence. They've got enough to charge anybody but Trump, but, this is Trump. (The Republicans are delighted; they were afraid it was going to be much worse.)
And, I'm waiting to see what actually happens in today's British elections, which are probably more important than Comey's testimony before the Committee.
Bottom line, we can't trust Trump
Some of Trump's supporters are trying to defend his loose style, including the way that he spoke to Comey as "Trump being Trump." New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie dismissed the remarks as "normal New York" talk -- just like the statements on the "Access Hollywood" tapes were dismissed by supporters as merely "locker room talk" -- while he and others have defended Trump as an outsider trying to learn the ways of Washington.
Comey offered a much more hard-hitting assessment. He just said that the President lies and, based on his written testimony, that he is someone who is willing to intimidate, to threaten and to be extraordinarily aggressive with people he does not like.
While some Republicans are trying to spin his behavior as acceptable, it is not. Even if there was no intention to obstruct justice and there was no collusion with the Russians during the election, there is ample evidence of extremely problematic behavior that can slip into the abuse of power and dangerous policy decisions.
"Bottom line, we can't trust Trump."
That would not be my bottom line. But, I already didn't trust Trump, the decision to not trust him tomorrow is no change.
Right now it's still an entirely circumstantial case, which means the dedicated Trumpkins are free to spin it as they please. (And spin it they do.)
It took two years to crack the Watergate case on Nixon. They pursued Bill Clinton for nearly seven years before they managed to get any impeachment charges filed against him.
Bottom line is we ain't nowhere near close to the bottom line.
Trump may not have been an active target yet when he fired Comey (that matter was still being investigated). He almost certainly is a target now, which one can tell from the fact that some very important people from the intelligence and law enforcement branches, now being dragged in to testify in Congress, are ‛refusing to confirm or deny’ whether Trump is now a target, at least, refusing to do that in public, and strongly hinting at their hope to be called back for closed hearings where they can legally divulge classified info to the Congressional investigators.
The dedicated Trumpkins cannot notice this, of course. That cannot be noticed. That's a rule in Trumpland.
By the way, the Right-wingers are pulling together an argument to sell to the dedicated Trumpkins that the President can't obstruct justice. This goes along with the idea that the President can't have a conflict of interest on account of they've passed laws exempting the Office of the President from the conflict of interest laws that apply to everybody else. (And somewhat akin to the doctrine that the President can't be pursued for disclosing classified information.)
By their arguments it's okay that Trump tried to get Comey to drop the investigation of General Flynn. He's the President; he's immune to facing criminal charges for that is going to be their argument. (They're wrong on that though--it may well be that President cannot be indicted while he's President (I think that's fairly debatable, but I seem to be holding a decidedly minority opinion on that one)--but that doesn't mean he's immune to the charges. They can wait and charge him after he's out of office.)
Election in Great Britain is lookin’ dicey for Theresa May. She may lose her majority tonight. Probably still have the largest clique in Parliament, but may lose the outright majority.
I'm told the Conservatives ran a really bad campaign this time.
(By the way… Ivanka and Jared figured out how to keep Shorthands away from his twitterphone. They convened a posse of sorts--including his personal lawyers--and they surrounded him and kept him there until the hearing was over. Whether he'll stay surrounded in the next few days while he cools off is a whole ‘nother question, but it worked for two hours.)
I had heard he was in "meetings".
It looks like they are revising their predictions in Britain, giving the conservatives a working majority. They may have pulled it out.
Sheesh, they interviewed a group of people in Ohio asking them what they thought of Comey's testimony, did they believe he or Trump lied. They picked Comey as being less truthful. Everyone seemed to think that Trump came out ahead. Honestly, are these people totally brainwashed, or what?
The ‘meetings’ consisted of Trump and all the little trumps who could make it to the White House on short notice, including Ivanka and Jared, plus White House staff and his personal lawyers clustered around a television, watching closely to see that he didn't get his twitterphone out and start making stupids on the twitterphone while they were there.
Gonna go see if I can hunt up a video of Comey's testimony. I couldn't take off work like other people did. Although at two hours long I'll have to watch it in pieces.
"Honestly, are these people totally brainwashed, or what?"
Yep. Also a lot of ‘or what’ mixed in there. The important point isn't how they cling to him ever tighter as it becomes increasingly obviously less sane to do so. They've given up on making a good case; they'll willingly settle for making a stupid case so long as it keeps them in power long enough to burn the damn thing down.
So, the important point isn't ‘brainwashed or what’. The important point is how many get peeled away. He's in dicey territory already. Doesn't much matter how much ‘brainwashed or what’ the dedicated Trumpkins can cling to if they drop to like 33%--35% general population. At around those numbers the Republican Party will abandon him, but not before.
I didn't watch it. I can read a two-hour transcript in considerably less than two hours.
I am just over half way through. Yes, I could probably read the transcript quicker also. But there are things about a video that I like, such as facial expressions and verbal nuances in statements.
So far I am impressed with Comey. He seems to be a man of integrity who was, and is, genuinely concerned with the events that have transpired, not out of any political partisanship, but because of the possible threat to our country with regard to Russia's actions.
There was an interesting early question regarding the nature of the investigation. The question was whether or not this investigation could possibly morph into a criminal one. Comey replied that any investigation could do so depending on what came out when rocks were turned over.
But, of course, I don't like Donald Trump and that will color my views of this. However, one of the things Comey mentioned was that as an investigator one has to judge the veracity of a witness by various means. This was in response to a question about who should the American public believe, him or Trump, since it is really his word against the president's. One of the criteria is demeanor. Comey was cool under fire and presented what appeared to be an honest account. At least so far.
"Comey was cool under fire and presented what appeared to be an
honest account. At least so far."
And yet, the dedicated Trumpkins believe, or are willing to pretend to believe, that Trump's the one telling the truth.
There's no point in getting distressed over that. They've been accepting lies from their leadership for so many years that it's become second nature to them. Trump figured out that the Republican ‘base’ had gone over the edge and was not only willing, but also eager to be lied to. They would rather have the lies than the truth, a majority of ‘em. Trump figured that out first. That's what made him special. That's what made ‘em dedicated Trumpkins; he was willing to give ‘em what they wanted and the rest of the Republican pack just wasn't willing to go there, yet.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Quick check of the headlines suggests that Theresa May didn't manage to get her majority after all.
"…and the rest of the Republican pack just wasn't willing to go there, yet."
And, by that I meant that the rest of the Republican pack still thought that the lies had to be believable. Trump figured out that wasn't true. They don't have to be believable, not for the dedicated Trumpkins. That's a totally unnecessary hurdle.
[Lynnette]: "Yes, I could probably read the transcript quicker also. But there are things about a video that I like, such as facial expressions and verbal nuances in statements."
Agreed. I watched it all live, and it was all about presentation. Comey came across very well. Trump's personal lawyer came out to spin it immediately afterward but he sounded pretty lame. Tried to smear Comey which I don't think will go down very well with any reasonable person who heard Comey.
Bit of a bombshell in the UK election -- another election horribly misjudged by people who should have known better. The Tories (Conservatives) aimed to increase their majority under the pretense of needing a strong mandate for upcoming Brexit negotiations. Instead they've blown a 20 point lead and turned it into a 2 point lead, completely losing their majority and leaving a hung parliament. They are still the biggest party and can scrape by with support from the Northern Irish unionists, but Theresa May will be a laughing stock.
The problem is that Brexit talks start on Monday week, so Britain can't very well announce that it doesn't even have a prime minister. So whereas at any other time I would predict that the PM would be gone within the day, it may just be that nobody within the Tories or any of the opposition parties wants to stop Theresa May being the one to drink from the poisoned chalice of Brexit.
BBC "World News" is telling me this morning that Ms. May is going to form a coalition government with the DUP, the ‘Northern Irish unionists’, mentioned above.
This will probably complicate the British exit from the E.U., probably to the disadvantage of the Brits in general.
TrumpTweets: Shorthands, The Incredible Dancing Bear, is on the loose.
By the way, there's some indication that the Senate Republicans are going to try to keep the tax increases (majority of them) that were enacted under ObamaCare in order to pay what will be increased federal costs for their version of repealing ObamaCare. (I know it sounds ridiculous but these are politicians we're talking about here, and Republican politicians at that--Republicans have long had a math problem, may come from the sideways squinting at numbers required to keep pretending that cutting taxes on the rich somehow raises tax revenues for the government.)
Anyway, if they go through with it we can expect some hell raising from the House Republicans.
@ Lynnette,
I didn't actually look at that Quinnipiac poll that had Trump at 34%, just noted the headline on it and then went looking for an average of polls. But I did run across this in the New York Times.
"A Quinnipiac survey this week that showed Mr. Trump’s job
approval ratings slipping to just 34 percent also indicated that 81
percent of Republicans still approved of the president’s
performance."
(emphasis added)
Huh! Trump is actually going to take questions at a news conference. Hmmm...
And yet, the dedicated Trumpkins believe, or are willing to pretend to believe, that Trump's the one telling the truth.
There's a sucker born every minute.
81 percent of Republicans still approved of the president’s
performance."
I wonder if the number of people who identify themselves as Republicans is still the same as it was at this time last year.
Comey came across very well.
Yes, he comes across as an intelligent man who probably was very good at his job, judging by his care in answering questions. I am sure the FBI will miss him.
I just wish the average American voter, who is disenchanted with the Washington establishment, would give more credit to the many talented, dedicated, and at heart, honest people there really are in various governmental organizations. For it is those people who are the backbone of our stability.
But to jump across the ocean, I was amazed really that May called this election. Did she not learn anything from what happened in Italy? It is not wise to assume. Now she's in the soup. Although you may be right, she is now a good scapegoat for whatever happens with Brexit.
Lee: "I'm wondering if the Iranian's re-election of the so-called ‘moderate’, Hassan Rouhani, had anything to do with Da‘esh deciding finally to hit at Iran? I.e. Would they have hit Iran if the Iranians had chosen the comparatively hard-core clerical candidate, Ebrahim Raisi? Or would they have considered that a waste of resources?"
I've come to think that Daesh will strike where they can and when they can, without much pre-planning of the actual timing. It might as well be that this last spat of attacks coincides with Ramadan where it's apparently even more holy for a suicide bomber to blow kids and himself up. I don't think they play like "OK if the election goes this way we attack, otherwise no". I think if the can attack they do.
On another note: those who feel convinced other people are brainwashed may very well themselves be brainwashed.
Here's 'nother 'vid for ya'll:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaCMXyN3qJ0
It's true. We're in black/white, in/out, this/that territory. Time to choose.
Wanna be with the headchoppers and their insane rainbow hangers on? Or with the people?
Also, as we're briefly touched on Swedish parties in the past. The Sweden Democrats (fascists as Lee C labeled them) now poll the second largest party - which means they ARE the largest party here. Since polls are so wrong.
Also quriously, they now poll at 15% of immigrants - meaning you or both your parents being born in another country.
Why you think that is? Why would the most "racist" option gather the most votes after the Social Democrats (the ones handing out wellfare checks)?
"Why you think that is?"
Arabs don't like each other.
Watched clips from Shorthands' Rose Garden appearance today. I conclude that he has no tapes of the meetings with Comey, at least, none he'll admit to just yet, if ever.
On another note: those who feel convinced other people are brainwashed may very well themselves be brainwashed.
Facts do not lie, Marcus, people do. And if you have lied in the past odds are you will lie again.
I finished watching Comey's testimony and now I understand the confusion people felt when they listened to McCain. He seemed to think the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election should include Clinton, which was odd since she was the apparent target of the Russian campaign, and was seeing some kind of double standard in how the FBI was treating the two candidates. Or he seemed to think the earlier FBI investigation of Clinton's emails was somehow connected. Strange.
But I think we do need to take seriously Comey's warning about future Russian interference in our election process, especially if we would like to see the end of the Trump presidency.
I conclude that he has no tapes of the meetings with Comey, at least, none he'll admit to just yet, if ever.
Trump likes to bluff. So that tweet Trump wrote warning Comey not to leak anything because there might be tapes should actually be a corroboration of Comey's account of what transpired. Trump was trying to head off what we are seeing now.
"He seemed to think [he]… was seeing some kind of double
standard in how the FBI was treating the two candidates."
There was a double standard at play. Comey treated the Clinton campaign to an unprecedented attack from the FBI. The publication of the fact that he'd found ‘new’ e-mails to investigate and the biased (and factually incorrect) description he publicly gave for those e-mails cost her the election. Meanwhile he refused to even acknowledge the investigation into the Trump campaign's contacts with the Russians.
I've always wondered why the double standard. The obvious ‘pressure from his subordinates’, while undoubtedly true, never seemed quite sufficient explanation to me.
Now it turns out he was also angry about what he thought was pressure from then Attorney General Lynch to describe the Clinton investigation (which he should not have been describing at all in public in the first place) as a ‘matter’ instead of as an ‘investigation’. Plus, he seemed to be offended by that runway meeting between Bill Clinton and AG Lynch.
"Trump likes to bluff."
Yep, and everybody know it. He ain't gonna be getting any of those awesome great tremendous deal he told his dedicated Trumpkins were coming. He bluffs, then he folds, then he lies.
Comey treated the Clinton campaign to an unprecedented attack from the FBI. The publication of the fact that he'd found ‘new’ e-mails to investigate and the biased (and factually incorrect) description he publicly gave for those e-mails cost her the election.
This part I agree with. I could never understand why he did that.
Meanwhile he refused to even acknowledge the investigation into the Trump campaign's contacts with the Russians.
I agree with this too, but I can see where there might be circumstances where he would not want to disclose any kind of investigation that would connect Trump to the Russians. There may have been things going on behind the scenes relative to collecting evidence and the timing may have been unwise to disclose an investigation.
If we ever get through this mess I suspect there will eventually be clarity on Comey's behavior. That includes why Comey decided to ask one of his friends to inform the media about the memo.
"Trump likes to bluff."
Yep, and everybody know it.
Weeellll, maybe. I am still hearing about people who seem to think Trump will provide those jobs he touted during the campaign. Meanwhile he is making decisions, regarding immigration, that may destroy some jobs that currently exist.
But to get back to the tape thing. That may prove rather problematic for Trump. If there are tapes and they support Comey's story then they will prove Trump a liar. That is assuming they are turned over in their original form. If there are no tapes then it will prove that Trump prevaricates, bullies and as we said, bluffs. Behavior that is true in other aspects of his presidency.
"Weeellll, maybe. I am still hearing about people who seem to think
Trump will provide those jobs he touted during the campaign."
I was actually thinking about a more restricted set of people, foreign leaders, corporate executives, terrorist chieftains. They're not gonna buckle under for Trumps' antics; they've already seen him duck and cover when he had to face the President of Mexico, for instance. (Just one instance; there are many more examples I could reach for.) And then, when he was safely back in the warm embrace of FoxNews and Radio-Right-Wing he was right back to insisting that the Mexicans would pay for his Great Wall. But, in front of the President of Mexico--nothing said. We're talkin’ Mexico for gawds sake--anybody think the President of China's gonna tremble before him?
On the subject of the dedicated Trumpkins who ‘seem to think Trump will provide those jobs’… Of course there are some who will believe it because they want to believe it. But, there's a whole ‘nother contingent who pretend to believe it because that's a sign of loyalty and of being a ‘Real American’. It's a required recitation, necessary to mark themselves as a member of the clique. They don't necessarily believe it; actual belief is not the point. (Which is why the many proofs that Trump is liar of an order of magnitude higher than just about anybody else in politics has made absolutely no converts from amongst those people. Truth is not the point--therefore actual belief is irrelevant.) Saying they believe it is the point.
" If there are tapes and they support Comey's story then they will
prove Trump a liar."
Team Trump is preparing for that. They're getting ready with the argument that it's okay for him to try to subvert the investigation because he's President.
[Lynnette]: "I was amazed really that May called this election. Did she not learn anything from what happened in Italy?"
A 22 point lead in the polls was too tempting to pass up. Especially since otherwise the Tories would have had to face a general election in 2020, right in the middle of the fallout from Brexit. She saw a combination of opportunity and a chance to avert danger. And, to paraphrase Scooby Doo, it might have worked if it wasn't for those pesky kids. Some of the youth who hadn't bothered to vote in the Brexit referendum but bitched about it anyway seem to have gotten off their asses to vote for Labour. Plus May's core oldie vote were dismayed by her proposed changes to pension guarantees and elder care.
To all of that, add the fact that this was May's first time campaigning on her own behalf and she turned out to be a boring robot who mouthed the same slogans to assemblies of her own supporters, while Corbyn got out on the streets and was quite charismatic. And finally, the electorate themselves were fed up with elections, confused about Brexit and incensed about a host of issues from wage stagnation to housing costs to Scottish independence.
"Saying they believe it is the point."
I thought of an example for this: Trump has claimed that Comey's testimony amounted to a ‘total and complete vindication’. Nobody in their right mind can believe that.
But, FoxNews loyally took up the chant, and made it a headline, complete with talking heads who're willing to debase themselves for Trump. It'll be a theme on ‘Fox and Friends’ for days to come, and the dedicated Trumpkins will tell you Comey's testimony vindicated Trump. (They will not know from what charge he was vindicated--neither Trump nor FoxNews has worked it out any further than the tag line, but this is not about making sense; this about adopting the tag line.) Saying that Trump has been vindicated proves that they are ‘Real Americans’. It doesn't matter whether they believe it or not. It matters only that they say it, and they can piss you off by saying it thus prove that you are not a ‘Real American’.
Totally other topic…
New theory on why the expansion of the universe seems to be speeding up. (A theory that doesn't need to imagine a ‘cosmic constant’ of unknown origin and type.) TheAtlantic
By this theory we (Milky Way galaxy and nearbys) are near the middle of a low density area of the universe. Higher density areas (talking mass here) surround us. So, the objects in the low density "void" are being pulled by gravity towards the high density, high gravity edges, speeding up as they get closer to the edges and higher gravity areas.
Makes sense to me. More sense than imagining up a ‘cosmic constant’.
But, then again, the theory of phlogiston made sense too, until newer data proved it didn't.
A lot of quantum mechanics theory has been spent on figuring out why the universe's expansion is speeding up. May not need quantum mechanics to explain it. Maybe it's just gravity.
And now, back to the Trump/Russia ‘matter’:
Attorney General Jeff Sessions is going to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday, or so says a letter he's sent to the appropriations committees (House and Senate) where he was scheduled to testify on appropriations matters on Tuesday.
I'm not sure the Senate Intelligence Committee knows he's coming to see them--well, I guess they know now. But I'm not sure they're ready to accommodate him, maybe they are, maybe not. This is an unanticipated move here. I didn't see this one coming.
I forgot to include the link. ABCNews.
I was actually thinking about a more restricted set of people, foreign leaders, corporate executives, terrorist chieftains. They're not gonna buckle under for Trumps' antics; they've already seen him duck and cover when he had to face the President of Mexico, for instance.
Ahh, yes, those people. I believe you are right, they have Trump's measure. A dangerous thing, that.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions is going to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday,...
Hmmm...he will be a witness. We will see...
A 22 point lead in the polls was too tempting to pass up.
Yes, well, we all know about polls.
Some of the youth who hadn't bothered to vote in the Brexit referendum but bitched about it anyway seem to have gotten off their asses to vote for Labour.
They learned a hard lesson about democracy. If you don't participate it may pass you by. I also suspect there are those who voted for Brexit who may wish they had their vote back, just like some Trump voters. So this was the next best thing to clawback they could find.
Now here's an interesting tweet:
GeorgeStephanopoulos ✔ @GStephanopoulos
I'll sit down with @PreetBharara for his first TV interview since being fired by Pres. Trump, Sunday on @ThisWeekABC.
https://twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/873224661454159872 …
1:34 PM - 9 Jun 2017
That might be an intereating interview to watch also.
Morning reads suggest Theresa May is in as much trouble with her own Conservative Party as she is with the Parliament in general. They agreed to the snap elections, but they're taking the results out on her. Probably that's partly because she turned out to be such a poor campaigner, they figure it absolves them of the responsibility for going along with her plan in the first place.
Post a Comment