Today we observed a day of mourning for
former President George H.W. Bush. A man who garnered the respect of
many who were fortunate enough to have known him. In this day of
bitter political rivalry, and the self absorption of so many, it was
almost a relief to reflect on the life of someone who came from a
gentler generation, someone who believed in something greater than himself.
We will miss your light.
(This is one speech where W. shined. His father would have been proud.)
61 comments:
I think history will treat G.H.W. Bush better than the voters did in 1992.
Seems to be a problem developing in the newly divided Congress over the Wall. The original conflict was over Trump's demand for a minimum of $5 billion for funding, as against the Democrats' insistence that they'd not put up one red cent. That's been kinda subsumed in the Republicans' continue failure to actually fund the wall when they had the majorities in both House and Senate because it was so hard to effectively blame the Democrats for the Republicans' actions (failures to act act actually). But, with the Democrats having a majority in the House taking their seats soon, that problem is about to solve itself, more or less. And that's exposed a more enduring problem.
They can't agree on what constitutes a ‛wall’. The Republicans and a couple of the Democrats are eager to call the $1.6 billion dollars already newly allocated for border security since Trump's inaugeration as money spent on the Wall. But energetic NeverTrump types, especially among the Democrats are equally eager to assure their voters that there's been no money at all appropriated for the Wall, nor will there be any such appropriations in the future.
It appears that they're rapidly finding reason to disagree over what qualifies as a ‛wall’ (as in the Wall). And that's getting complicated by Trump's current insistence that they fund the Wall now, immediately, before the Democrats show up to take a majority in the House and block spending on the Wall. And then that's complicating the Republicans' efforts to put off the funding fight 'til after the Democrats show up so it can be blamed on them. And still nobody can agree on what qualifies as the Wall.
Layers upon layers…
Got a fella here arguing that the challenges of global warming will end in either the end of the nation/state as the dominant form of social organization or the destruction of human civilization. Pick the first choice to have one result. Make any other choice to have both. That's the argument anyway.
I think history will treat G.H.W. Bush better than the voters did in 1992.
I think so as well. History has a way of softening some memories, at least for some. Perhaps it has something to do with how they live their lives in general. In retrospect, while I wouldn't consider President Bush's presidency to have been that unique, it wasn't as rife with controversy as some that came before or have come since. That he managed to acquire so many people who respected him speaks for him as a person.
Pink Floyd...classic. lol!
Humans can “do what they want” only insofar as they remain marginal enough not to seriously perturb the parameters of life on earth.
This is what so many people don't see, that we have just become too large a factor in Earth's existence to be shrugged off anymore. Our activities are having an effect and will continue to do so.
That at some point in time the nation state may not survive as an organizing factor in human civilization may prove to be true as that very civilization breaks down under the weight of shrinking food supplies caused by extremes in weather such as drought or flooding. People will always gravitate to the areas that provide sustenance. As Marcus pointed out that could lead to the stronger invading territories controlled by the weaker. Earth may very well become more of a Mad Max type of world.
I suspect it is already too late for us to be able to reverse this process. Only because we are showing ourselves as incapable of working together to even try. Unless there is a natural event to reverse some of the warming we are indeed in "dire straights".
According to FoxNews the predatory Chinese have tried to strike back at Trump for his incipient tradewar and have utterly failed to harm him; Trump the Triumphant.
Yeah, right.
And, after a week of intense effort, the nation finally managed to get dead President George Herbert Walker Bush buried. It took a full six days, but the effort finally paid off; he's finally buried (still dead too). And on the seventh day we can now rest.
Trumptweets: Trump seems to have had a bad day, and it's showing no sign of levelin' off just right away.
And, after a week of intense effort,...
Yes, they did drag it out. It was a very good show of how well thought of this past president was by so many people. I have to wonder if someone took note of that. If body language(crossed arms) is any indication, there certainly was a moment during the ceremony in Washington where someone was taking note of what George W. was saying about his father, which was in stark contrast to someone's behavior as president. However, I really don't hold out much hope that someone is even thinking about how his own funeral might look.
Trump seems to have had a bad day, and it's showing no sign of levelin' off just right away.
Lot's of stuff going on with the Mueller investigation at the moment. Stuff that will be made public. I can see where Trump might be trying to get ahead of that. If the public has wised up it won't work.
I see that Comey has given into the request to have his testimony behind closed doors. So it will be he said/he said when recounting what happened there.
Kelly appears to be on his way out the door.
Trump has picked another Fox regular apparently as UN Ambassador. I didn't know that being a part of Fox looked good on someone's resume when being appointed to a rather important position like that, but probably not of concern to Trump.
"I see that Comey has given into the request to have
his testimony behind closed doors."
The court ruled against him.
However, he did extract a concession during the court case. The testimony will be transcribed within 24 hours and it will be released to the public (or Comey can release it himself).
Post Script:
That was Comey's price for not appealing the District Court decision and dragging it out until the Democrats were in control. Transcript released within 24 hours of his testimony.
Drop off in new jobs last month. 155,000--down from 237,000 the month before. Even so, wages are still apparently rising--if slowly (those stats tend to congeal into hard numbers later in the analyses)
But, we are coming up on Christmas shopping--new jobs should be up, not falling off.
Trump just can't help himself. He simply had to take a return shot at Rex Tillerson. Trumptweets
Gotta do some reading ‛between the lines’, but today's court filings from Mueller's office appear to suggest both Trump's collusion with the Russians during the 2016 campaign and after taking office as President.
If that's so we're talking about potentially charging the President of the United States with being a covert Russian agent, espionage, in other words.
The testimony will be transcribed within 24 hours and it will be released to the public (or Comey can release it himself).
At least that's something.
But, we are coming up on Christmas shopping--new jobs should be up, not falling off.
I still see a lot of "now hiring" signs out there. But most of those jobs I think are lower end without benefits type.
It think the market is more rattled by the trade war with China and the possible coming downturn in the economy as a result.
If that's so we're talking about potentially charging the President of the United States with being a covert Russian agent, espionage, in other words.
So far they haven't quite went that far on CNN, they seem to be tip toeing around what Trump has done.
I haven't had a chance to read any of the reports on what the Mueller investigation has made public. I've only seen the bits and pieces on the news. Although it's been obvious for some time that Trump had some rather questionable financial dealings with Russia with regard to his business. What Cohen is connecting up is really the collusion, or as the Russians put it "political synergy", part that puts Trump farther along the lines to treason. I would have suggested the treason with regard to Trump's sharing some intelligence with Russia way back when in the Oval office anyway.
You want to be careful in your use of the word ‛treason’. The dedicated Trumpkins have decided that the only treason recognizable is that which is described as a capital crime in the Constitution and which consists of giving aid and comfort to an enemy in time of war.
They like to pretend that's the only definition of treason available in the United States. (Kinda like saying that only 1ˢᵗ degree murder--capital offense--only that can be prosecuted--all lesser forms have to be considered legal.)
It appears that Trump is having something of a ‛collusion’ fixation this morning. Trumptweets.
Perhaps it isn't even about something like treason, but whether or not Trump becomes more of a liability than not for the GOP.
The question at the back of many people's minds.
"…but whether or not Trump becomes more of a liability
than not for the GOP."
I think they've already crossed that bridge and burned it behind them. Now it's a question of how bad it'll get before the remnant Republican legislators decide that they can't save their own seats by playing to ‛the base’, now pretty much all dedicated Trumpkins.
As long as the majority of Republican legislators can keep their own seats in Congress they'll stick with Trump and the Trumpkins. And, the majority of them have to win their primaries first--then the majority of those that win their primaries are headed for congressional seats in what will be the minority caucus, but they'll still be headed for congressional seats, which they'd not be getting if they'd lost their primary to a dedicated Trumpkin challenger.
What's left of the old GOP now belongs to Trump and the Trumpkins (who'll outlast Trump).
It's also looking to become a minority, regional party for the foreseeable future.
(My developing theory on the benefits of impeachment revolves around the idea of hurrying this development along--figuring ain't tinker's chance in hell that the Republican Senate will actually impeach Trump, no matter the evidence Mueller turns up, but we could maybe help move them along to a permanent minority status.)
I'm noticing that Trump's efforts to change the subject this weekend haven't born fruit.
He's ragging on the stock market (and following the CW that it's China that's the problem--I tend to disagree and remind folks that the Masters of the Universe learned a few years ago to say their favored tax/regulatory/economic programs were the going to be the key to massive American investments which never happened. This would get played up on FoxNews and repeated by the Republican Party. They learned to blame any bad economic news on political moves they hoped to counter. They're blaming China policy because they want a different China policy, not because that's actually at the heart of the stock market's troubles.)
He's denouncing the ‛conflicted’ investigators (as if he himself isn't entirely ‛conflicted’ in the matter).
He's whacking at his one time friend Emmanuel Macron.
None of it is working; the Mueller investigation is still top of the news.
OK, so:
"Former FBI Director James Comey admitted that the Bureau did not verify allegations in the Steele dossier before it was cited as grounds for snooping on a former Trump adviser in 2016."
https://nypost.com/2018/12/08/comey-claimed-ignorance-about-warrant-at-house-hearing/
So, the piss-gate dossier (where Trump was alleged to have had russian hookers urinate on him in a bed Obama had previously slepy in just for lulz) was false AND the feds didn't even try to verify wether it was false before they got the prequel to the Mueller investigation going.
Is that even legal?
They get a dossier claiming something, have no proof, do nt try to get any proof, but just launch an investigation including wiretaps based on the original claim. Seems shady as fuck.
Then again, they prolly thougt Hillary was gonna win anyway and she'd just sweep it all under the carpet...
"…AND the feds didn't even try to verify wether it was false before…"
Perhaps it has escaped your notice (as it has so obviously escaped the notice of the dedicated Trumpkins)… An investigation is how ya go about verifying the information. That's what the investigation is supposed to do--verify the information, disprove the information, or turn up nothin' definitive, as the case may be.
But that's why you have the investigation. After you've verified the information (assuming), you don't need to investigate any more. At that point you file charges.
Nope, not really.
It's kinda like a search warrant. If the reason for the search warrant itself was fradulent, then the whole case falls apart regardless of the search's findings.
I've seen enough of US crime shows, both fictive and real, to know that.
If the feds were fed (by the Clintons, lets be real here) a fake tale about Trump being pissed on which could constitute a weakness towards blackmail, and then that claim is not in it self looked into, then the following wire taps are ILLEGAL.
Rather the ones (Hillary and minions) who leaked piss-gate should be looked into here.
"If the reason for the search warrant itself was fradulent,
then the whole case falls apart regardless of the search's
findings."
That is not true. If the search warrant was ‛fraudulent’ then evidence obtained by use of the search warrant is inadmissible at trial (this is called the ‛exclusionary rule’), but that case is still valid and goes on if they've got other evidence to use. Unless the prosecutor can show that they would have most certainly discovered the evidence turned up by the search warrant anyway by some other means or some other investigative trail that they were already following which would have led them to that same evidence anyway. Then the evidence is usable again. In either case, the ‛whole case’ does not fall apart. (Having been the target of a couple of search warrants, I can assure you I know what I'm talking about here.)
By the way, the ‛exclusionary rule’ is not known to apply to impeachment proceedings.
"…(Hillary and minions)…should be looked into here."
The Justice Department has been headed up by Republicans appointed by Trump nigh onto two years now. I think we can be confident that they have extensively ‛looked into’ any and all remotely credible cases against Hillary and the minions.
Nick Ayers, currently Chief of Staff to Veep Mike Pence, and Trump's first choice for Chief of Staff to Trump, supposed to replace General John Kelly (Ret.) before the 1ˢᵗ of the year--Ayers has declined the honor. NewYorkTimes
I noticed today that it's been weeks since Trump took umbrage at NFL players kneeling during the national anthem. He's quietly backed away from that one--they were defying him without penalty, and that wasn't a good look for him.
(The NFL got the TV networks who cover the games to run commercials during the national anthem instead of filming any kneeling players.)
So, the NFL players are still kneeling, and nobody's raising a ruckus about it anymore.
And the Republicans ain't gonna fund the Great Wall of Trump.
And smart young ‛rising stars’ among Republican political operatives won't take a the high profile job of Chief of Staff in the Trump White House.
I see a pattern developing.
$30 million in illegal campaign contributions to the 2016 Trump campaign by the NRA. MotherJones/TheTrace They didn't even try to hide it.
I see a pattern developing.
Kind of like rats leaving the sinking ship?
I'd say his ‛clout’ is being diminished.
Theresa May has canceled tomorrow's scheduled vote in Parliament on the ‛Brexit’ deal her government had negotiated with the EU, for the reason that it was going to be defeated by an embarrassing margin. Vox
Her government could collapse over this, and it's beginning to look likely that Britain will exit the EU without any trade agreement with Europe to take its place.
Lee: "Having been the target of a couple of search warrants, I can assure you I know what I'm talking about here."
You know you can't just mention that casually and not expect to give us some detail. I for one got curious. Tell more.
HuffingtonPost contributor makes an argument for the impeachment of Trump.
It's not the most compelling argument I've seen, but it outlines the possible benefits of an impeachment. And, he looks at it rationally. The case has yet to be made to the American people, and that needs to be done first.
And an impeachment would have the benefit of putting Republican Senators in the spotlight for the 2020 elections. Do they back Trump?
I'd say his ‛clout’ is being diminished.
He also got some more push back from Pelosi and Schumer in that rather public meeting. I suppose it would have been too much to ask if they had called him a liar to his face, but at least it was something.
Her government could collapse over this, and it's beginning to look likely that Britain will exit the EU without any trade agreement with Europe to take its place.
Yes and that isn't at all good. *sigh* I was hoping they could pull it out.
The case has yet to be made to the American people, and that needs to be done first.
I think that will be up to Mueller to make clear that there is real and concerning evidence of Trump's wrongdoing. Of course, the economy tanking because of his poor economic policies may also help, depending how bad it gets.
"I think that will be up to Mueller to make clear that
there is real and concerning evidence of Trump's wrongdoing."
I'm thinking we need to look to public hearings in the House to do that. Give the voters a long, hard look at the evidence the Republicans have been trying to hide behind closed-door hearings and gag orders from the committee chairmen.
When ya got a guy named "Pecker" in charge of making sure your sleaziest sex files never show up in public ya gotta know you're in trouble startin' out. WashingtonPost
Cohen has said he is willing to testify before the House in public. I think that Trump's house of cards is starting to fall apart.
Even the National Enquirer is scrambling to distance themselves from him.
Turns out Mexico is already paying for the Great Wall of Trump. Trump has issued a twitter proclamation declaring it to be so. Trumptweets Glad we got that settled. Now Trump can quit demanding that Americans pay for his wall. Yes?
Or, maybe not…
The noose seems to be tightening around Trump. Now there are sources who say Trump was at the hush money meeting. This despite his claim he knew nothing about the payments.
I have to say it would be poetic justice if it were the women in Trump's life who end up his downfall. Bwhahahaha!
Donald Trump attended an August 2015 meeting that federal prosecutors believe was central to a criminal scheme to violate campaign finance laws to help Trump win the presidency, according to a source familiar with the matter.
According to court filings, Trump was joined by Michael Cohen, who was his attorney at the time, and David Pecker, the chairman of American Media Inc., parent company of the National Enquirer.
During the meeting, the group discussed a plan to shield Trump from potentially damaging stories. Prosecutors say this amounted to illegal donations to Trump's campaign.
"The noose seems to be tightening around Trump."
As per Justice Department guidelines, Mueller held back during the 60 days preceding the elections.
He's got a couple of months of catchin' up to do. Seems to be doing it at right rapid clip.
And Cohen seems to be fed up enough with Trump's antics to make clear he's not going to be his patsy anymore. He has finally stated the obvious, that Trump is aware of what happens within his organization and has in fact signed off on the, in Cohen's word's "dirty deeds". He has flat out called Trump a liar.
Maybe chickens do come home to roost. Next year may prove a pivotal one for Trump's presidency.
"Next year may prove a pivotal one for Trump's presidency."
That would seem to be a reasonable prediction. I'm guessing Trump's popularity falls rapidly back to the 35%-38% range--back to the core dedicated Tumpkin level and safely out of the reach of a conviction upon impeachment, unless the economy tanks, in which case we could see Trump drop into the 33%-35% level at which point a successful conviction could be in the cards.
(I'm figuring the 35-38% levels by mid to late summer.)
After Chris Christie turned down the offer of Chief of Staff in Trump's White House, Trump has now fallen back on designating OMB (Office of Management and Budget) Director Mick Mulvaney as ‛acting’ Chief of Staff; this to help him get past public notice of the somewhat embarrassing situation where nobody even remotely credible actually wants the job. Given the Democrats are coming into the House, and a probable government shutdown if Trump doesn't back down on the Great Wall (and Trump has made some moves towards backing down and claiming it as a ‛win’ anyway), there are enough things on the plate that his failure to attract a credible Chief of Staff will likely not get too much notice.
A federal district court judge in Texas has declared ObamaCare to be unconstitutional. He did not, however, issue any orders of mandamus or injunction, which means that it's not real clear what effect his decision was supposed to have--what change it's supposed to establish.
Are the insurance policies issued under the ObamaCare law all invalid now? Are the state insurance exchanges set up by some states (mostly ‛blue’ states) suddenly supposed to be shut down? What's supposed to happen now?
The judge didn't say.
So, it's kinda… "Okay, now what? What does that mean as a practical matter?" Nobody knows.
"A modest proposal: Democrats should make clear that
it's not unethical or un-American to want a clear,
enforceable border -- and that not every migrant who
wants to come to America can do so."
David Ignatius in the Washington Post
And it's not necessary to embrace or even to accept Trump's racist ‛nativism’ in order to acknowledge these simple truths.
...a successful conviction could be in the cards.
Funny you should mention that. There was a question posed this morning on CNN on whether or not Trump could have already been indicted, but it is sealed.
We could probably not get so lucky. But there are an unusual amount of sealed indictments laying around on the DC docket lately.
Coffey said he did not know if the stack of secret charging papers had any ties to Mueller. But if they did, he said, they would have enabled the special counsel’s team to keep cases moving ahead of the midterms.
“If indeed Mueller had prepared cases for prosecution but did not want the announcement to impact on pending elections then a sealed indictment might have been the preferred method,” Coffey said.
And there was good reason, Miller said, for Mueller to lock in charges before the midterms.
A federal district court judge in Texas has declared ObamaCare to be unconstitutional.
Other states, including California, are appealing this ruling. One has to wonder what happens if it goes all the way to the Supreme Court, with it's conservative bent locked in.
"…whether or not Trump could have already been indicted…"
There is also a massive, secret grand jury fuss going on. Whatever it is, Mueller doesn't want even rumors of it getting out in public just yet; they've sealed off the entire 5ᵗʰ floor of the federal courthouse where the grand jury's convened to keep reporters from trying to gather clues by prowling the halls. NationalLawJournal
I am suddenly reminded that the Russian spy girl decided to flip just before this happened.
"One has to wonder what happens if it goes all the way to
the Supreme Court, with it's conservative bent locked in."
The Republicans will, to put it bluntly, shit a brick if the Supreme Court upholds that decision.
There are a lot of Republicans in federal office who are already horrified at the Texas decision and it's not even being implemented at this time. (There are a lot of Republicans in federal office who were horrified to find Trump in the White House, and a lot of them haven't gotten over it yet.) However, as with the Presidency of Donald Trump, they're gonna pretend they're on-board with this decision. They got to; they got no other choice, except to find another profession, and they sure don't wanna do that.
I am suddenly reminded that the Russian spy girl decided to flip just before this happened.
Interesting thought. Perhaps there is a good reason that people in the National Enquirer have come clean and Cohen has finally fessed up and called Trump a liar. They don't want to be dragged down into the muck of possibly very serious allegations against him.
Of course, it could be Don Jr. or Kushner that is under the gun. They are close enough to Trump to have Mueller not want any leaks before prime time.
They got to; they got no other choice, except to find another profession, and they sure don't wanna do that.
Perhaps another party?
"Perhaps another party?"
IF the Republicans had lost the Senate this round, with the map so very favorable to them, I think we'd be looking at that movement already. As it is, I'm thinking that'll be staved off until after the 2020 elections (they'll probably lose the Senate there, as well as probably lose the Presidency).
The dedicated Trumpkins will blame that on the ‛Establishment’ being insufficiently supine to Trump. The Establishment Republicans will blame Trump and the Trumpkins.
It'll get ugly quick.
White Americans are collecively guilty of murder, BC that 7 yo girl died of dehydration after her father dragged her throug a desert. Have you no shame?!?!
Post a Comment