advertisement


Trump Part 17

Status
Not open for further replies.
He genuinely gave this speech:
“Look, having nuclear — my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart — you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world — it’s true! — but when you’re a conservative Republican they try — oh, do they do a number — that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune — you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged — but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me — it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are — nuclear is so powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right, who would have thought? — but when you look at what’s going on with the four prisoners — now it used to be three, now it’s four — but when it was three and even now, I would have said it’s all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don’t, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years — but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us, this is horrible.”
 
@vuk

It's easy to get a bit unserious about a neologism like 'norm-shredding,' but calling this instance of concern 'nazi-like' is to veer into serious error. Norm-shredding in fact refers to the extremely serious problem of the habitual, pathological flouting of unwritten cultural expectations. Trump of course flouts written ones (laws) just as pervasively, but highlighting the shredding of unwritten norms make the hopeless depths of his depravity apparent.

Criticism of the nationalist content of some possible transgressed norms is sort of wide of the point. First of all, nationalism does not equal Nazi, and second of all the real point is Trump shreds any and all norms so the specific example is not vital. But I don't think one has to be a Nazi to view the possible disloyalty of the Chief of State to the good of the country with grave concern.

Such concern has gone unvoiced in my case because we do not know the actual conduct that gave rise to the whistleblower's accusations. But I join with Matthew in feeling that it's very significant that the charges passed the IG's vetting. The response of the executive in failing to pass them to the Congressional authorities is deadly serious norm-shredding, in this case the norm that clear law must be obeyed.

That norm, of course, is the foundation of Congressional power, and it's wrong-headed to.say 'why doesn't Congress do more' without realizing how emasculated Congress becomes when cabinet officers follow the President's orders to shred it. The physical power of Congress to compel obedience to the law is microscopic.

Regardless of the content of the whistleblower's complaint, the U.S. is on the brink of the wreck of constitutional government. The Congressional leaders are doubtless aware that such wreck is one possible outcome of pressing this confrontation--but not pressing it also damages their authority greatly. There is no clear and safe path at this juncture.
 
Last edited:
And yet a poll of Republicans revealed they are more likely to believe anything Trump says than anything said by a member of their own family.
 
Whistleblower complaint about President Trump involves Ukraine, according to two people familiar with the matter
Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...e33f0a-daf6-11e9-bfb1-849887369476_story.html

The speculation is that Trump withheld $250m of military aid to the Ukraine in return for an investigation into Joe Biden and his son's activities in Ukraine to use as campaign dirt in the 2020 election.

Giuliani admits to asking Ukraine about Joe Biden after denying it 30 seconds earlier
Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...t-joe-biden-after-denying-it-seconds-earlier/
 
DonQuixote99 said:
That norm, of course, is the foundation of Congressional power, and it's wrong-headed to.say 'why doesn't Congress do more' without realizing how emasculated Congress becomes when cabinet officers follow the President's orders to shred it. The physical power of Congress to compel obedience to the law is microscopic.

Regardless of the content of the whistleblower's complaint, the U.S. is on the brink of the wreck of constitutional government. The Congressional leaders are doubtless aware that such wreck is one possible outcome of pressing this confrontation--but not pressing it also damages their authority greatly. There is no clear and safe path at this juncture.
Click to expand...

don.

to clarify, i was throwing out rhetorical questions (the bolded bit was one of them) as suggestions to the mainstream media in their reporting. what you've written is the kind of intelligent analysis that would have been far more welcome and useful than what happened in the BBC america interview with the washington post reporter -- there is no online video of it, so you have to take my word (my parents can corroborate, if necessary).

i am curious, however, at what point is it OK to begin to wonder if the entire system is fundamentally flawed and needs a 'revolutionary" makeover? coincidentally, the latest issue of harper's (which came in the mail yesterday) seems to be tackling something along those lines (i hope, have not read the feature story yet):

0001.png
 
@matthewr

not to absolve trump of his ongoing unethical and criminal behaviour, but it sure would be nice if we (by that i mean the pretty-face media) could focus on things like his tax cuts for millionaires rather than actions that are ultimately good for the world. here is your pal kyle on the matter:

 
vuk said:
to clarify, i was throwing out rhetorical questions (the bolded bit was one of them) as suggestions to the mainstream media in their reporting.
Click to expand...

This doesn't strike me as honest either, vuk. These are the opening paragraphs of the post:

vuk said:
matthewr
DonQuixote99
Marky-Mark

i really should stop posting late at night, but failing to do so this evening would have seriously interfered with sleep, mainly because i expect a lot better from the 3 of you -- in your own unique ways, of course.

i watched the BBC america news a few hours ago and they had on the washington post journalist who broke the trump-talking-with-foreign-leader story. it was all smiles, self-congratulation and almost no supporting facts. unidentified source says/claims trump said something to some foreign leader: dear readers and viewers, please fill in the blanks with your own extreme prejudices.
Click to expand...

You were patting us on the head, from what I'm guessing was a highchair, in one form or another, and telling us we were a disappointment. That, and failure to post these thoughts would've ruined your sleep last night.

Unless I've unknowingly dropped acid or had a stroke, that's how the post reads. But I still don't understand how anyone failed your expectations given the posts were nothing more than a quick acknowledgment-link to the news story and brief comments to that acknowledgment.
 
Marky-Mark said:
You were patting us on the head, from what I'm guessing was a highchair, in one form or another, and telling us we were a disappointment.
Click to expand...

it's remarkable to be challenged with impertinence like this after i took the trouble to condescend.
 
@Marky-Mark

one of the interesting cultural differences you can observe in places like montreal is how, at the english universities, profs put up comic cutouts like that on their office doors (and usually have coffee mugs with jokes on them). meanwhile at neighbouring french institutions, you don't seen any of it.
 
vuk said:
@Marky-Mark

one of the interesting cultural differences you can observe in places like montreal is how, at the english universities, profs put up comic cutouts like that on their office doors (and usually have coffee mugs with jokes on them). meanwhile at neighbouring french institutions, you don't seen any of it.
Click to expand...
Different cultures, different norms.

I read the forum on Harper's, btw. Would be interesting if that group had more time and means to work towards a consensus. Some provocative points raised. It is one thing to imagine a better order of things, but quite another to come up with a good way to get it.
 
Wall Street Journal said:
President Trump in a July phone call repeatedly pressured the president of Ukraine to investigate Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden ’s son, urging Volodymyr Zelensky about eight times to work with Rudy Giuliani, his personal lawyer, on a probe, according to people familiar with the matter.

“He told him that he should work with [Mr. Giuliani] on Biden, and that people in Washington wanted to know” whether allegations were true or not, one of the people said. Mr. Trump didn’t mention a provision of foreign aid to Ukraine on the call, said this person, who didn’t believe Mr. Trump offered the Ukrainian president any quid-pro-quo for his cooperation on any investigation.
Click to expand...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-defends-conversation-with-ukraine-leader-11568993176
 
Washington Post said:
President Trump and his minions went to great lengths in 2016 to coordinate with a foreign power’s interference in our election on his behalf. Then Trump engaged in extensive corruption and lawlessness to try to prevent it from coming to light.

While Trump did suffer serious political damage in the process, he basically got away with all of it, thanks to Justice Department regulations that protect a president from indictment, and to extensive help from a handpicked attorney general who subscribes to a theory of presidential power that in effect places presidents above the law.

So why wouldn’t Trump try something very similar a second time around?
Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...al-deepens-trump-gives-america-middle-finger/
 
Not sure how anyone can blame Trump for this latest scandal. After all, if he could only count on his own FBI to take down his political opponents, then he wouldn’t be forced to extort a foreign leader to get it done. It’s common sense, and anyone in his position would do the same, right?
 
I'd be willing to support a Biden vs Trump race in 2020 as long as it was guaranteed that the first question in the debate is about the dangers of a senile president.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top