It's Saturday night and I feel like a
little music. How about you? Let's see what I have up my sleeve...
Have you ever felt you made a mistake
that led to some unintended consequences?
How about a story from long ago?
Or a reminder of what is really
important?
Sage advice for someone?
Maybe we should have more faith?
104 comments:
Appears to be some confusion on my web page about just what is supposed to be the first video.
I'm guessing the intended target is the music vid and not one about Greta the little Swedish girl?
Yup, the first video is Mumford & Sons "Little Lion Man".
I see what happened; I had a browser cache that didn't clear. Greta vid was from last thread.
I've been thinkng about a comment you made last thread:
"I think you are right, there is nothing that will move them."
i.e. the dedicated Trumpkins
Yeah, pretty much how it is.
And now, how it ends…
But first a little history…
Nixon still had majority support in the Republican Party when he resigned from office, but, the trend lines were clear; it wasn't gonna hold. Public support was fading fast and Watergate was going to tarnish the rest of the Republican Party if they continued to support him, so, they weren't gonna.
Nixon resigned to spare himself the embarrassment. And to spare the Republicans in Congress the hard votes. Nixon still had some allegiance to the Republican Party (indeed he even mounted an only marginally successful campaign to restore his historical standing with the party after several years).
Trump, on the other hand, is shameless. And he doesn't give a rat's ass about the rest of the Republican Party after he's lost power--to hell with the lot of them. So, Trump will not resign.
Unlike Nixon, Trump's got FoxNews to keep his legions of dedicated Trumpkins aroused.
The Republican Party leadership no longer 'leads' the Republican voters. That's actually done by FoxNews and Radio-Right-Wing. (Actually FoxNews has lost control of them too, but they've still got the bullhorn, and they still use it to keep the rabble together, and highly roused, and thus keep the ratings up and the advertising cash flowing in.)So, now the Republican Party has lost its voice to an advertising enterprise whose main agenda is to keep the troops whipped to a frenzy (which keeps them tuning in, which keeps the advertising money flowing in), winning elections in the foreseeable future is not necessarily the main agenda there.
So, that's how it ends.
Trump gets impeached in the House, but the Republican Senate has to hang in there with him, even though their own long-term interests call for them to dump him. But, they don't get to long term if they don't survive the short term, so they'll stand by Trump to the end, and hope to be among those Republicans who do manage to survive the Trump experience.
There's nothing else they can do.
It's gonna fall to the American voter to get rid of Trump, and to hope Trump doesn't try to raise an armed insurrection after he loses in November of 2020 (there is the outside possibility Trump will try to burn the Reichstag, but we'll have to cross that bridge when and if we come to it.)
Close with music, just to keep the theme alive. More after the music.
Love the Kenny Rogers clip. Such a classic.
But in rerality the "gambler" usually doesn't break even, he loses.
:)
Couple of recommendations for yall:
Zak Brown Band:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4ujS1er1r0
and Kid Rock:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu3rsha1ZtI'
More modern than Lynnette's choices but great songs.
"…in rerality the "gambler" usually doesn't break even, he loses."
Depends on the game, and on the gambler. The House relies on the gambler not being good enough to overcome The House advantages. (Witness how they come down hard on 'card counters' at the blackjack tables.)
Yeah, but I did say "usually"´, as in most gamblers are gonna end up broke. There's always gonna be them few exeptions to the rule. Especially in Poker, which is to a good degree a skill game also. There are pro Poker players who make a nice living outta it for sure.
But Roulette, for instance, is a choice that's ALWAYS gonna favour the house and ALWAYS gonna bankrupt the gambler in the long run lest cheating is involved.
Close with music, just to keep the theme alive.
Uncanny, I actually thought about putting that song in the post, but I thought I would wait. There may come a time when it may work better.
A beautiful rendition.
More modern than Lynnette's choices but great songs.
Both very good songs. But I must protest your aging my choices. The first and last are actually quite current. But I like to mix in a few older and way older choices as they still have something to say. And some people may not have heard them.
I did think about putting this one in the post too. But I think I remembered using it once before and didn't want to bore people with duplication if I could help it.
♫♪…The truth is marching on…♫♪
Meantime, the Republicans are trying to put together a defense. Their first and current defense is that there was ‛no quid pro quo’, which is bullshit, and is also irrelevant to the offense charged. (Trump might as well insist there were no green Martians carrying the messages back and forth, so far as that actually matters.)
The Republican Senators' fall-back position is going to be that he did wrong, but it's okay because it's not the sort of thing that's a big enough deal to warrant impeaching a President.
Two problems with this fall-back-argument-yet-to-come. First problem is Trump's gonna take the position that he did nothing wrong, that it's perfectly okay for Trump to ask a hostile foreign power to investigate his political opponents, so long as he pretends he's interested in "fighting corruption", which nobody believes, and nobody gonna believe, and most Republican office holders won't be able to say that one out loud with a straight face. (The exceptional Republicans will be all over the airwaves these next few days--maybe even a few weeks before they give up on that one.
So, them saying, "he did wrong, but it can be overlooked" will run straight into Trump saying Trump did nothing wrong. This is a problem for them; not so much for Trump, who doesn't care; ditto for the dedicated Trumpkins.
The second problem with their fall-back position is that it'll fly with the dedicated Trumpkins, but only with the dedicated Trumpkins, and that's not enough voters to carry the day. This is gonna be a problem for them in November of 2020, if the Democrats can keep their focus.
Trump will want them to fight him over what Biden did, and what Clinton did, and now he'll be going after the CIA and the NSA, and soon he'll want to add the FBI to the mix. All to change the focus.
They just gotta keep their focus on what Trump just did. Shouldn't be that hard. Pelosi should be able to pull this one off.
Just for what it's worth, the right-wing militia movement is taking Trump's call for Civil War should he lose the election seriously Lawfare They're prepping for the day in November 2020 when Trump calls on them to come out armed to reverse his loss at the ballot box. (The question is whether or not he'll actually go that far; I don't think even he knows yet whether or not he'll do that.)
Looks like there may, may, be some corruption in the Ukraine involving Guilliani, Rick Perry, and friends (and campaign contributors) to Donald Trump. WashingtonPost
Given that our Attorney General is a lickspittle for Trump, this will likely have to await a new administration for any in-depth examination.
I notice that Trump is pulling out of northern Syria and leaving the Kurds to the tender mercies of the Turks under Recep Erdoğan. Too bad; they deserved better. But, it's not like this is a surprise.
Weeellll, apparently there is something that Republicans can agree with you on, Lee. They have actually stood up and opposed Trump on moving Troops out of the way in Syria for Turkey.
May wonders never cease.
Huh! And those wonders just keep coming.
A federal judge on Monday dismissed President Donald Trump's effort to prevent his tax returns from being turned over to a New York grand jury.
The ruling raises the likelihood that Trump's tax returns will be provided in response to the subpoena, although any material obtained through a grand jury subpoena is covered by grand jury secrecy rules, meaning it would likely become public only if it were used as evidence at a trial.
"They have actually stood up and opposed Trump on moving
Troops out of the way in Syria for Turkey."
From what I gather, he didn't tell them until after the drawdown had already begun this morning (Syrian time). I think this means he expected the outburst and intends to ignore it.
Beginning to look like Trump's starting to have a little problem with his confidence level here:
"A senior administration official on an organized call with
reporters appeared to contradict President Donald Trump
about Syria policy late Monday, refuting interpretations of his
statements from earlier in the day that prompted broad
outrage from supporters and opponents alike.
The U.S. is not removing its forces from Syria in the face of a
Turkish incursion, said the official, speaking on the condition of
anonymity. Rather, the president ordered roughly 50 special
operations troops in northern Syria to relocate to a different
part of the country after he learned that Turkey has planned an
offensive against U.S.-backed Kurdish forces in Syria. The
official said that offensive had not yet begun."
U.S.NewsandWorldReport
I can't tell if this is a bit of ledgerdomain designed to confuse the issue long enough for Trump to figure out it he's got the balls to go ahead with this after all, of if it's just supposed to confuse his critics so's they quit raggin' on him long enough for him to generate a follow on outrage to take their attention away from this one.
I forgot to mention at the time: The bolding on the word appeared in the quote just above ↑↑ was mine.
Trump has ordered Ambassador Gordon D. Sondland (name should be familiar to you by now) not to appear for his congressional interviews scheduled for this morning. NewYorkTimes
Fight's on.
Fight's on.
Yup. It will go all the way to the Supreme Court and then we will see how the current stacked court will behave. Will they put country and justice first? Or will they change the course of our democracy to something we don't recognize?
Turkey has announced the beginning of their campaign to clear out northern Syria (the Kurdish areas are targeted). Their troops are moving already.
I've seen some speculation to the effect that they weren't ready to move, that Erdoğan was as surprised as everybody else by Trump's capitulation to his demands, and that the Turkish military just wasn't ready to move yet. They moved anyway, worried that Trump might surrender to congressional pressure and reverse himself yet again, and they wanted to preëmpt that possibility.
That may be ‛motivated reasoning’ on the part of people who hope the Turks are somehow restrained from slaughtering the Kurdish troops with whom we've been collaborating in northern Syria ('til now). We shall have to wait to see how it works out, but, it's begun.
I saw that Turkey had moved already. My speculation was less generous to Trump. I was thinking that he had waited to announce our withdrawal until right before the Turks moved in an effort to forestall any action by the Congress, in particular the Republicans. Kind of giving Graham and McConnell the shaft.
No better enemy, no worse friend, than Trump.
A new Politico/Morning Consult poll has majority favoring the impeachment and removal from office of President Trump. It's 50/43, seven percentage points, outside the margin of error by a wide step.
Preliminary scan of the data seems to show that the dedicated Trumpkins are still dedicated to Trump (but, that's why we call them such). He seems to be losing independents, and, of course, the Democratic leaning voters are as solidly against him as the Trumpkins are dedicated.
50% to 43% isn't enough though. At that ratio the Republican Senate is still gonna have his back (at the very least until all chance of getting primaried from the right is behind them and they have to start thinking about the general election.) If the dedicated Trumpkins fall to a rate of 33-35% we may have a different situation develop, but so far there's no sign that Trump's Trumpkins will ever fade away below his core of support at around 38% or so, even if the economy goes sour before the 2020 elections (which could drop his favorability back to his core supporters--roughly 38% or so of the voting population).
I note that Nate Silver's 538 blog has started reporting on attitudes towards the impeachment of Trump. It shows that the Politico/Morning Consult poll I remarked on above isn't a fluke. Current average of polls as calculated by Nate Silver's 538 organization comes out 49.2/43.3 in favor of. This includes those who merely favor investigation as of now, but he documents a sudden shift in favor of actual impeachment, and so now he's keeping records for us.
The methodology is explained here
Looks like the American press is picking up on a story that was running on al-Monitor yesterday; i.e. that Trump knew in advance that the Turks were intending to whack the Kurds, no ‛maybe’ about it; Trump knew just as well as everybody else that his agreement with Erdoğan was for the slaughter of the Kurds. “President Trump and President Erdogan have reached an understanding over precisely what this operation is.” That was the quote from yesterday. It's starting to get picked up in the American press finally. Google
Exactly. The only thing Trump will ever be known for, historically speaking, is as a sell out. He has sold out America to Russia, the Kurds to Turkey and the world to climate change. I'm not surprised that the polls supporting his impeachment and removal are growing.
Will Syria be Trump's Waterloo?
"News from Syria is sickening," Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the third-ranking Republican in the House, tweeted Wednesday, echoing lawmakers across the spectrum. "Turkish troops preparing to invade Syria from the north, Russian-backed forces from the south, ISIS fighters attacking Raqqa. Impossible to understand why @realDonaldTrump is leaving America's allies to be slaughtered and enabling the return of ISIS."
Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio noted that "at request of this administration the Kurds served as the primary ground fighters against ISIS in Syria so U.S. troops wouldn't have to." Then, he charged, the administration "cut deal with Erdogan allowing him to wipe them out. Damage to our reputation & national interest will be extraordinary & long lasting."
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland on Wednesday announced a framework to place immediate sanctions on senior Turkish government officials, ban all US military business and military transactions with Turkey, and immediately activate 2017 sanctions on the country until Ankara stops its operations against the Kurds.
'Huge concerns' thousands of ISIS prisoners may escape as Turkey invades Syria
'Huge concerns' thousands of ISIS prisoners may escape as Turkey invades Syria
"This unlawful and unwarranted attack against an American friend and partner threatens the lives and livelihoods of millions of civilians, many of whom have already fled from their homes elsewhere in Syria to find safety in this region," Graham and Van Hollen said in a statement.
"This invasion will ensure the resurgence of ISIS in Syria, embolden America's enemies including Al Qaeda, Iran, and Russia, and launch yet another endless conflict in what had been, until today, one of the most safe and stable areas of Syria and a region experimenting with the best model of local governance currently available in that war-torn country."
I have been seeing various letters to the editor in my paper about how to handle Trump's visit here today in Minnesota. Some say ignore him, as all he wants is publicity, others say to show up and be counted as opposing him.
I am thinking that perhaps the perfect protest would be to line his route and the venue with people holding "Barrack Obama was, and is, the better man" signs.
Obama seems to be Trump's achilles heel.
Well, the thing to remember in all of this is that beating Trump's favorability rating back to his core of dedicated Trumpkins (~38% or so) will almost certainly not result in Trump's removal from office by the Senate.
I'm hoping that it does result in the removal of Mitch McConnell from his position as majority leader of the Senate. That means the replacement of the current Senate majority with a majority of Democrats. In other words, I'm hoping to see the Republicans sacrifice their hold on the Senate in the 2020 elections as the cost of their failure to remove Trump from office on the coming Articles of Impeachment, along with the voters' repudiation of Trump himself.
The resulting blood-letting among the sycophants will, I think, finally turn them away from Trump. It should be remembered that Nixon still had the favor of a majority of Republicans until he cost them in the post-Watergate Presidential elections along with them being unable to pick up seats in what would otherwise have been a very Republican-friendly Senate electoral map. And the Republicans likewise turned on Dubya when his errors cost them their hold on the Senate in the 2008 elections, along with the election of Obama. They've known since Reagan that their hold on the Senate, the least democratic of our elective institutions, is key to their survival as a party. If looks like their support for Trump cost them the Senate this time, that's when they'll turn away from Trump and from what he represents. Unless that happens, they'll just try flirting with fascism again, with somebody a little slicker next time.
But, if we can turn the Senate along with Trump we can perhaps finally dislodge the coalition of the publicly pious with the autocratic leanings of the very rich that Ronald Reagan was successful in forging back in the late 70s / early 80's. Maybe put a stop to that crap for several cycles at least. (They'll come back eventually; they always come back. The price of freedom is vigilance.)
"WASHINGTON — Two Soviet-born donors to a pro-Trump
fundraising committee who helped Rudy Giuliani’s efforts to
investigate Democrat Joe Biden were arrested late Wednesday
on criminal charges of violating campaign finance rules…"
WallStreetJournal
I saw the same thing here.
Your link wants me to sign in, and I don't have anything set up with the WSJ.
But I liked this quote:
The Russian is not named but identified in court documents as a businessman. At one point, Kukushkin is quoted in the indictment discussing ways to hide the funder's "Russian roots" because of the "current political paranoia about it."
Geez, ya think?
"Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you."
I'm hoping that it does result in the removal of Mitch McConnell from his position as majority leader of the Senate.
That would be one of those "unceasing wonders'.
Or, maybe a miracle will happen and Moscow Mitch will start talking to Nancy Pelosi.
"Your link wants me to sign in…"
I didn't have to sign in, perhaps because I followed a link off of Google after I first saw the notation on an MSN feed. Maybe if you Googled the headline and then followed the Google link in it'd let you by the firewall.
It strikes me that headlines about how Trump donors were working with Guiliani to bring in more Russian money to Republican campaigns in general (and Trump's campaign in particular) at the same time they were helping Guiliani to fire up an overseas investigation into Joe Biden on an issue that's already been broadly discredited domestically, that's gonna make it harder for Trump to keep tweeting about this subject--current headlines that the corruption is jumpin' up on the Trump side gotta make his rants on the subject more difficult to sell, even to the dedicated Trumpkins.
(I gotta remember to take a break and listen to the opening of Hannity's radio show here in 40 minutes or so. I'm guessing that Hannity will have an urgent alternative subject that simply must be discussed at length today.)
Perhaps this link via Google will get you past the Wall Street Journal firewall.
Well, I wasn't able to stay close enough to a radio to follow the whole three hours, but I did manage to catch the opening and closing of the Sean Hannity Show on Radio-Right-Wing and bits and pieces of the three hours in between.
He seemed to be engrossed in the subject of Matt Lauer and the allegations that he'd raped somebody and NBC had been instrumental in covering that up for years. He opened and closed with that subject and was on it during the times I was able to listen in, in between the opening and closing segments.
Hannity did promise to have things to say about Biden's Ukraine problem in his hour long on FoxNews tonight.
Fiona Hill (a name with which you may not be familiar) is an ex-employee of the Trump Administration, and apparently no fan of Trump. In addition…
"WASHINGTON — Fiona Hill, who was until recently President
Donald Trump’s top aide on Russia and Europe, plans to tell
Congress that Rudy Giuliani and E.U. ambassador Gordon
Sondland circumvented the National Security Council and the
normal White House process to pursue a shadow policy on
Ukraine, a person familiar with her expected testimony told
NBC News.
"Hill’s appearance next week before Congress has stoked fear
among people close to the president, said a former senior
White House official, given her central role overseeing Russia
and Ukraine policy throughout most of the Trump
administration.
"Her plans to testify also pose a key test for whether
congressional committees pursuing an impeachment inquiry
can obtain testimony from other former officials who have left
the administration, given the possibility that the White House
may try to assert executive privilege to stop them from
testifying.
"Hill plans to say that Giuliani and Sondland side-stepped the
proper process for accessing Trump on Ukraine issues, the
person familiar with her expected testimony said, including
circumventing John Bolton, who was Trump’s national security
adviser until September."
NBCNews
All the impeachment hoopla notwithstanding, Trump actually has better job approval numbers than did Obama at an equivalent point in Obama's first term. RCP graphs
Might wanna keep that in mind while contemplating Trump's probable future.
The Trump administration is sending 2,000 extra troops, plus aircraft and missiles and such as, to the defense of Saudi Arabia. Politico
I like the Kurds more than I like the Saudi, so I'm not much in favor of Trump's demonstrated Middle Eastern priorities.
Perhaps this link via Google will get you past the Wall Street Journal firewall.
Nope, I had to actually go and Google it myself to get around that. Oh well, it is what it is.
...current headlines that the corruption is jumpin' up on the Trump side gotta make his rants on the subject more difficult to sell, even to the dedicated Trumpkins.
I might have hoped the same thing before I saw the rally here in Minnesota. Or before I read a recent letter to the editor of my city's paper. What I am seeing in the behavior of many of Trump's supporters is almost like the behavior of people who followed Jim Jones. They seem totally enthralled with Trump's act. It's like they have checked there minds at the door. Jobs on the iron range, sure, but at what cost? They don't look beyond the moment or a single issue.
They don't see the man for the charlatan he is.
I think the dam has broken.
Part of the testimony of our former Ambassador to Ukraine
In a 10-page statement obtained by The New York Times and The Washington Post, Yovanovitch defended her tenure and decried the "concerted campaign" to recall her from Ukraine, which she said is tied directly to President Donald Trump. Yovanovitch also rebuked the two associates of Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani who were arrested this week on campaign finance charges that were tied to an effort to get her removed.
Fiona Hill will be in good company.
My question now is, why are the women standing up and being counted while the men knuckle under to Trump's pressure?
I like the Kurds more than I like the Saudi, so I'm not much in favor of Trump's demonstrated Middle Eastern priorities.
I totally agree.
"I had to actually go and Google it myself to get around that."
That would seem to indicate that one needs the cookie from Google, as well as the link.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"…the behavior of many of Trump's supporters is almost like
the behavior of people who followed Jim Jones."
Or David Koresh… I had noticed that Trump was right back at the Hunter Biden issue in his road show last night. Proves he's got 'em dazzled even more solidly than I knew (and I knew it was seriously solid).
The cult characteristics of the dedicated Trumpkins has been noted by some writers before. It's perhaps worth noting that while most cults collapse, some morph into actual religions. Seventh Day Adventists, Scientologists, Reaganism, Nazism, etc.
I'm putting my money on Trump's collapse rather than elevation to religious status.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"My question now is, why are the women standing up and
being counted while the men knuckle under to Trump's
pressure?"
Perhaps I should point out that the ‛whistleblower’ is very likely a male; Joseph McGuire, acting Director of National Intelligence has already testified, and Gordon Sondland is already scheduled to testify next week in spite of Trump's standing orders to the contrary.
The Trump administration has announced a ‛mini-deal’ with the Chinese over trade issues. Trump will forgo the next scheduled round of tariff hikes, supposed to go into effect in four days, but now not, not for awhile anyway.
The Chinese are supposed to make a yuge purchase of American farm products. Supposed to purchase American farm products…. Yeah, I remember that one; they didn't do that once before, and yet Trump's countin' on it happenin' this time. No doubt the dedicated Trumpkins will buy it once again as well.
That would seem to indicate that one needs the cookie from Google, as well as the link.
Ahhha, caught without cookies. Okay, I'll remember that for the future.
Perhaps I should point out that the ‛whistleblower’ is very likely a male; Joseph McGuire, acting Director of National Intelligence has already testified, and Gordon Sondland is already scheduled to testify next week in spite of Trump's standing orders to the contrary.
I wouldn't know about the whistleblower but I stand corrected on the others. And, of course, there was James Comey, who really shouldn't be forgotten, as he really was the canary in the coal mine.
I am also reminded of those who are not in government, but who are quietly trying to stand up for what is right. The most recent appears to be Shep Smith from Fox News who has just resigned.
There are moments where I do see signs of my America.
The Chinese are supposed to make a yuge purchase of American farm products. Supposed to purchase American farm products….
Yes, well, we'll see. My take on that is that Trump finally noticed that farmers are becoming more vocal in their criticism of his policies and he is trying to head off that stampede at the pass.
"And, of course, there was James Comey,…"
I wasn't thinking of including him as he wasn't involved in the Ukrainian fix. But, I did forget to include Kurt Volker, who was the "Special Envoy" to Ukraine until he resigned and then testified goin' on two weeks ago now. Got this whole new thing off the ground, as it were. WaPo
Oh, I wasn't necessarily referring only to the people who spoke out about Ukraine. I was thinking of those who have stood up to try to tell the American people what Trump's behavior has been like. That's where I got Comey from.
"I wasn't necessarily referring only to the people who spoke
out about Ukraine."
I kinda figured that out.
Nevertheless, I did forget Kurt Volker, who sorta got this whole thing off the ground (after the whistleblower, of course). Volker testified favorably to the administration where he could, but where the evidence clearly contradicted the administration position, he brought forward the evidence and no apologies for it. And, he quit his job in the administration to be free to do it.
That fella got indicted, name of Lev Parnas, worked for Rudy Guiliani, the Ukrainian one that Trump doesn't know… Apparently Trump hasn't known in photographs for a lot longer than anybody already knew. Politico has Trump and Parnas posing for party pictures as early as 2014.
WashingtonPost: It looks like Ambassador Sondland is going to profess innocence in the Ukrainian scandal. He's takin' a "don't know nothin', just forwarding messages for the boss, boss [Trump] made all the decisions…" Not particularly convincing, but also not helpful for Trump.
It looks like Trump has ordered the withdrawal of all US troops from Northern Syria.
Some people are questioning what Trump has gotten in this deal? It certainly looks like a payoff for something.
And the Kurds are now trying to cut a deal with Assad, and his backer, Russia. Something they had made clear they would do if the US withdrew.
Hmmm...it sounds like William Taylor thought Trump was holding up the aid to Ukraine for his own political purposes.
"It certainly looks like a payoff for something."
Have to be something big to warrant such a payoff. (Unless, of course, Trump's not the great negotiator he claims to be, which is, in my opinion, the most likely situation; likely Trump swapped our credibility, and the Kurds' viability, for no more than a smile from Erdoğan, whom he admires.)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"…sounds like William Taylor thought Trump was holding up
the aid to Ukraine for his own political purposes."
And yet Taylor has not yet been subpoenaed to testify in the impeachment inquiry.
Adam Schiff has suggested that it may not be necessary for the initial "whistleblower" to testify. The cat's out of the bag, which was the whistleblower's role. The facts can be established by direct witnesses and the appropriate inferences from the evidence, just as in any other investigative proceeding (except that the Republicans' seem devoid of any ability to draw logical inferences where Trump is concerned). And Trump has been threatening retaliation against the whistleblower. May be that their testimony is no longer necessary, and bypassing that step would protect the whistleblower(s) from the threatened retaliation from Trump and his dedicated Trumpkins.
Seems to be a new argument developing in support of Trump to the effect that there could not have been a quid pro quo in the Ukrainian affair because ‛quid pro quo’ is ancient Latin and Trump doesn't even speak ancient Latin. (Nor do any of the other principals involved.)
So there!
lol!
That sounds about right. He doesn't really speak English very well either.
Trumptweets: Trump's telling us that the mini-deal with the Chinese means that they will immediately begin making yuge purchases of American farm products, and that those yuge purchases have already begun.
Reckon that'll either pan out or it won't. We oughta know soon.
There was a piece in my paper over the weekend which looked at one of the counties that had flipped to Trump after voting for Obama previously. It was a farming area. The people they interviewed were kind of all over the board. But those who were still for Trump believe he will win again. It's kind of amazing that so many people still stick with the guy when he is so very bad for our country and farmers in general. One of the people just said that she has always voted Republican and she seemed to think that was reason enough to still continue to do so.
Things aren't looking too good in Syria. The Turks are grabbing more territory than, supposedly, Trump thought they would. And the Kurds have cut a deal with Assad and Russia like they said they would, and I can't really blame them.
So we have a scenario emerging that has Syrian government forces, their Russian backers and the Kurds facing off against the Turks. Does anyone not see a problem developing here? A problem besides where ISIS prisoners all escape and go back to attacking Europe and America?
"It's kind of amazing that so many people still stick with the guy…"
The tribal instinct is strong, and they have FoxNews to reinforce their allegiance every day.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"Does anyone not see a problem developing here?"
I see the Iranians keeping a low profile, for now. That'll not last long once the battle lines are firmly set. They'll come out higher profile before too long. The Russians provide the air cover, but Assad owes his life to Tehran now; has for awhile now.
I notice that Trump is now claiming that the Kurds are releasing their jihadi prisoners on purpose.
(First of all, there's no evidence that's true.) So, he's now arguing that he single-handedly turned our Kurdish allies into our enemies, into enablers of the jihadi whom they've hated for years. I get the impression he's not thought that one through. And, to top it all off, he's just said that the 1,000 troops he's withdrawing from Syria won't be coming home after all, they'll stay somewhere in the near neighborhood in case they're needed to contain a resurgent Islamic State. So, we betrayed the Kurds for what then? For a smile from Erdoğan?
"It's kind of amazing that so many people still stick with the guy…"
A short analysis of the dedicated Trumpkins of rural Iowa, which appears in this morning's NewYorkTimes might help explain it.
538 shows majority support (average of polls) for impeaching Donald Trump. (This is simply "impeach", no distinctions made for "investigate" or "impeach and remove" Trump)
His dedicated Trumpkins are hangin' in there in support of him, but he's losing the independents.
Seriously, what happened to my cookies? I had to Google that NYT article to be able to read it. I don't remember blocking them.
Well, if that article is correct there really isn't anything that will sway the die hard Trump supporters. The Chosen One? God forbid!
I see the Iranians keeping a low profile, for now.
And if things go south even further I see WWIII.
"I had to Google that NYT article to be able to read it."
I went to it straight off of the NYT front page. I did have a residual NYT cookie on file in the browser.
"The Chosen One?"
I don't call them dedicated Trumpkins on a whim. I know some of these people; I live amongst them.
It seems curious to me that we didn't have the usual outbreak of House Republicans running for the cameras and microphones late yesterday to trumpet to the world that Fiona Hill exonerated Trump of all misdeeds. Hill testified for almost nine hours yesterday (behind closed doors), and yet we don't yet have usual chorus of cries from the Republicans that she gilded all of Trump's lilies.
As perhaps could have been predicted there is grumbling in the ranks of US troops. There are, not whispers, but shouts of 'betrayal".
I would say that there are quite a few military personnel who serve with honor and integrity. They are not happy with Trump's actions in Syria. They are seeing friends in the Kurdish community hung out to dry, as well as all of their hard work come for not as ISIS prisoners escape.
So, I wonder who will they vote for in 2020?
Hill testified for almost nine hours yesterday (behind closed doors), and yet we don't yet have usual chorus of cries from the Republicans that she gilded all of Trump's lilies.
So I sense fear?
I don't call them dedicated Trumpkins on a whim. I know some of these people; I live amongst them.
I've run into some. The absolute closed mindedness is amazing.
"There are, not whispers, but shouts of 'betrayal'."
I find it hard to accept that this policy was merely the result of Trump's staggering incompetence. Logically, that's perhaps the most reasonable conclusion. But, it's nevertheless hard for me to accept. I suppose that's mostly because the level of incompetence indicated is so staggering.
"So I sense fear?"
Caution perhaps would be a better description. They will follow their base, for they are the "leaders". The base will follow Trump.
However, caution is called for because the testimony is coming fast and uncontrolled. They started to rally 'round the argument that Sondland had said, "The President has been crystal clear no quid pro quo's [sic] of any kind" and that Sondland saying so should be dispositive. Then it turned out that the President had not only been "crystal clear"; he had in fact specified that Sondland use that exact language. Sort of punched a hole in their defense that even the Trumpkins could see.
They're determined to not get embarrassed in that manner again soon. So, they're gonna try to wait until the evidence is in and then try to concoct a defense that won't embarrass them going forward.
It's important to remember that neither they, nor the dedicated Trumpkins consider the truth to be a matter of importance, nor do they really give shit if anybody believes what they're saying (themselves included). They just want something they can say with a straight face. (And, lacking that, their fall-back position is to at least have something they can scream with red-faced hostility. The first is preferred; either will do.)
"It's important to remember that neither they, nor the
dedicated Trumpkins consider the truth to be a matter of
importance, nor do they really give shit if anybody believes
what they're saying (themselves included). They just want
something they can say with a straight face. (And, lacking
that, their fall-back position is to at least have something they
can scream with red-faced hostility. The first is preferred;
either will do.)"
I looked at that a second time and it occurred to me that I'd stumbled across the reason Petes was a fan of Trump.
I find it hard to accept that this policy was merely the result of Trump's staggering incompetence.
Who benefits from our withdrawal from Syria? That is who Trump has helped with this move. Incompetent? Depends on who you ask.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
(variously attributed over the years--including to Napoleon Bonaparte)
I've had time to rethink things overnight, and I'm gonna have to back away from the theory that Trump's decision to betray the Kurds could have been the result of stupidity instead of perfidy. That's just not a reasonable assumption in the face of the known facts. (He may have taken aback by the vehemence of the Republican Senators' reactions, but he clearly knew what Erdoğan had in mind for the Kurds.) I'm gonna havta concede this question to Lynnette. (Whether Trump thought he was currying favor primarily with Erdoğan or with Putin is still not clear to me; I lean towards the notion that he was primarily intending to currying favor with Erdoğan, but that's nowhere near a clear-cut proposition.)
Morning headlines tell me that Buttigieg and Klobuchar both had a good night at the debates. Biden avoided a wipeout once again, but didn't distinguish himself either, again (that's four relatively poor debate performances in a row). He's fading it seems, not all at once, but by degrees. His third quarter fundraising was lackluster as well. Warren took some dings but she's still standing at the center as the most serious competition to a fading Biden. Sanders looked vigorous enough, calming concerns about his recent heart attack (for now).
I find myself in agreement with Nancy Pelosi's decision to not hold a special "qualifying" vote for the impeachment inquiry already under way. They don't need to do one. There's no benefit to it except to try to shut Trump up, and that won't happen; nothin's gonna shut Trump up. He'll just move along to his next complaint and complain just as loudly as ever.
And, I notice that the Republicans' vehement denunciations of Trump over his betrayal of the Kurds has faded to a whisper already. They figured out over the weekend that they can't cross Trump, not even on that.
(Whether Trump thought he was currying favor primarily with Erdoğan or with Putin is still not clear to me; I lean towards the notion that he was primarily intending to currying favor with Erdoğan, but that's nowhere near a clear-cut proposition.)
I'm not sure either. With us gone it is an advantage for both. But in the case of Russia, or even Assad, it isn't a plus to have all of those ISIS fighters running around free. Erdogen, on the other hand, doesn't seem to mind them so much. It's a loss for Iraq if ISIS gathers more strength there. They are already having problems stabilizing their internal divisions.
Trump is out in force crowing about his move in Syria being "brilliant".
You know, I've thought his followers delusional, but I am wondering if it isn't Trump? Or perhaps acting crazy is just a cover for a more deliberate move to sell out his country.
I find myself in agreement with Nancy Pelosi's decision to not hold a special "qualifying" vote for the impeachment inquiry already under way. They don't need to do one.
I don't think there is a need either. The Republicans are just pushing that button because they want on record the Democrats in Republican districts who vote for an impeachment inquiry.
Congressman Emmer in our sixth district conducted a town hall when he was here. There were some hard questions, even in that very red district. But he was sticking to Republican spin deflecting the question of whether or not it is right for a president to ask for help to get dirt on a political opponent. I have to believe they sent out a memo to all Republican representatives so they could get their answers right.
"I have to believe they sent out a memo to all Republican
representatives so they could get their answers right."
They did indeed. And, they also sent them to Democrats (they asked for them back after they realized they'd been working off of the wrong mailing list, but they didn't get them back). Google
"The Republicans are just pushing that button because they
want on record the Democrats in Republican districts who
vote for an impeachment inquiry."
No, that's not all they want. They want to turn the impeachment inquiry back on itself and ‛investigate the investigators’ once again. Throw some sand in the gears. They want an independent subpoena power so that they can start a Republican inquiry designed to support Trump's claim that the Ukrainians were working with Joe Biden to throw the 2016 election to Hillary Clinton (unsucessful of course).
The dedicated Trumpkins will pretend to believe it.
(And if they can't make that particular story pass the "with a straight face" test, they'll dream up another one.)
"You know, I've thought his followers delusional…"
I don't think that's right. I think they know what he is. They don't want to admit it, but they know. Thing is, it doesn't bother them; they don't care, not enough to rein him back in anyway. (They don't want to admit that either.) You will recall the many writers who've noticed that the dedicated Trumpkins don't like to talk about their support for him to those ‛not of the faith’. (I've noticed this too; I noticed it early.) They don't want to talk about how he's goring the country except to other dedicated Trumpkins. They know it makes them look bad. Again, they don't care, not enough to rein him in anyway. We're talking about folks with some deep seated anger about the country moving on whilst they want to go back to a "Leave it to Beaver" world that only ever existed in their imaginations in the first place.
They're really pissed off that their imaginary world can't be made real. Ronald Reagan promised them it could be made real, and they've been demanding the Republicans produce on that promise every since, and it's finally occurred to them that nobody's gonna make it real for them ever--not even Trump, and they're really, really pissed, deep down pissed.
So they're on-board with fuckin' the rest of us over if they can.
NewYorkTimes: Boris Johnson says he's got a "great" Brexit deal now; all is well. (Terms of the supposed deal are yet to be disclosed).
And, Mike Pense has announced a Turkish/American "cease-fire" of 5 days length, to enable the Kurds to withdraw their forces, before the Turkish advance into Rojava begins again. (In other words, Pence has supposedly negotiated the Kurdish surrender on their behalf. Like the new Brexit deal, we'll have to wait and see if that actually works out.)
(Gotta wonder if Pence will undertake negotiations to end the protests in Hong Kong next? Give the protesters a couple of days to cut it out before the slaughter begins?)
Not to get out ahead of the story (which is part of the reason no Republican Congressmen or Senators want to comment on the matter), but, I'm guessing that the new White House position is going to be that it's all Rudy Guiliani's fault. I.e. Guiliani was the one who insisted on including an investigation of the Biden's in the mix for aid to Ukraine. Gonna claim that was a rogue move by Guiliani, not sanctioned by Trump personally (like Trump Jr. agreeing to meet with Russians to get dirt on Hillary last time).
Huh! It looks like the White House, in the form of chief of staff Mulvaney, is saying that sure there was a quid pro quo, so what's the big deal? We do it all the time. And it was about the 2016 election. (Never mind that the main target of the investigation might be Trump's principle rival in 2020).
So they're on-board with fuckin' the rest of us over if they can.
Except they will also be dragged under the bus eventually when Trump's lack of action on climate change comes home to roost. I don't care how wealthy one is it will still affect them. One way or another.
And, Mike Pense has announced a Turkish/American "cease-fire" of 5 days length,..
And for that we are apparently going to lift whatever sanctions we had put in place against Turkey. Yeah, Turkey is right, they got everything they wanted.
Trump has announced that the G-7 summit is going to be held at a Trump resort. Isn't that special?
"…the G-7 summit is going to be held at a Trump resort."
I suspect that's Trump taking a very public victory lap mostly for the fun of it (and millions of dollars in free advertising and supposedly ‛at cost’ charges which will be nowhere near ‛at cost’-- nor will they be audited). Trump thinks he's gotten away with colluding with the Russians in the 2016 election, and he's been watching the Republican Senate for defections over his latest outrages (none appear likely), and he now thinks he's invulnerable. This is a "in-your-face" demonstration of his invulnerability. (And, with luck, might even dilute outrage over selling out the Kurds by distracting people with a lesser, but more recent, outrage.)
"It looks like the White House, in the form of chief of staff
Mulvaney, is saying that sure there was a quid pro quo…"
It appears that Trump didn't want to admit that just yet, so now that statement is "no longer operative", to quote the Nixon White House from a prior time of Presidential stress.
"I don't care how wealthy one is it will still affect them."
They expect to be immune to the consequences; they expect to be dead. There's a reason Trump's support is concentrated among older voters.
Trump thinks he's gotten away with colluding with the Russians in the 2016 election, and he's been watching the Republican Senate for defections over his latest outrages (none appear likely), and he now thinks he's invulnerable.
Moody's has Trump winning by a landslide in 2020 because they don't think the economy will tank quickly enough to hurt him.
Someone I talked to recently who watched a replay of that rally in Minneapolis fears he will win as well. She just couldn't understand how people there could actually go along with his bullying and crass behavior.
A couple who was interviewed who live in a Trump leaning county said that if he wins again they are contemplating moving to Belize.
It appears that Trump didn't want to admit that just yet,...
Yeah, Mulvaney was backtracking pretty quickly after making that statement. For most reasonable people the damage was already done.
They expect to be immune to the consequences; they expect to be dead. There's a reason Trump's support is concentrated among older voters.
Good point. Leave everybody else holding the bag, even their own children and grandchildren.
But I don't know, everything seems to be moving rather quickly now with regard to climate change. I actually thought I'd be dead too, but now I'm starting to wonder...
"Moody's has Trump winning by a landslide in 2020…"
Yeah, I saw that. I'm not worried. Moody's had Hillary winning by a landslide in 2016. (For those who've forgotten, they were wrong.)
Real Clear Politics is now keeping a tally of the current approval/disapproval rates for impeaching Trump. Support for the current inquiry into impeachment for Trump is running 50.8% in favor to 43.3% opposed. RCP tally 1
Support for impeachment and removal from office is running 49.0% in favor to 45.1% opposed. RCP tally 2
Ain't a lot of undecided people out there. And removing him from office is the clear leader in the opinion polls they've averaged.
So, I ain't putting a lot of faith in Moody's predicted reëlection for Trump.
It looks like Minnesota is pretty evenly divided between supporting and opposing impeaching and removing Trump from office. Although apparently most believe he lies and abuses the power of his office.
Great job Donald Trump getting rid of terrorist leader al-Baghdadi. Bravo!
When Osama bin Laden was killed in Pakistan Donald J. Trump tweeted the following:
"Stop congratulating Obama for killing bin Laden.
The Navy Seals killed bin Laden."
Slate
Post a Comment