NY Times editorial bombshell

[LSSBB]

Irrespective of whether I agree with the sentiment or not, I really like the analogy. The imagery is fantastic.

Good work.

Yes, may be misapplied: it neglects the fact in this case that the bull got himself into the shop by being appealing to a sufficient quantity of shopowners, and picked the cowboys he wanted in there with him.

 

[dudalb]

Linda Lovelace?

Just kidding. Actually, we do know his identity. It's Mark Felt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Felt

Otherwise I agree 100%.

I am surprised that anybody interested in the history of recent American politics would not know that Mark Felt was revealed as Deep Throat quite a few years ago.

 

[d4m10n]

Does anyone else have a specific example of someone (supposedly) violating their oath of office by failing to follow an executive order from POTUS?

 

[BobTheCoward]

Does anyone else have a specific example of someone (supposedly) violating their oath of office by failing to follow an executive order from POTUS?

No, because it doesn't seem to come up.

 

[BobTheCoward]

I am surprised that anybody interested in the history of recent American politics would not know that Mark Felt was revealed as Deep Throat quite a few years ago.

Also, he didn't really accomplish anything, but that is a longer conversation.

 

[LSSBB]

No, because it doesn't seem to come up.

May have happened under Reagan at some point with Iran-contra. Or they really were following his direct orders...

 

[d4m10n]

May have happened under Reagan at some point with Iran-contra. Or they really were following his direct orders...

I meant wrt to the so-called "resistance" these days.

 

[Minoosh]

This is why the "dozens and dozens" of people who are undermining Trump should have either invoked the 25th Amendment or resigned and made public why they were resigning before we got to this point, rather than realising that the 25th Amendment should be invoked early on in his presidency but deciding to remain and undermine him because they thought that was the best way to facilitate their own personal/party agendas.

Country over party. Country over self. That's the idea, right?

The problem is that both an impeachment attempt and a 25th amendment push would currently fail, and would have at any time in Trump's presidency.

ETA: Timing matters.

 

[kellyb]

The problem is that both an impeachment attempt and a 25th amendment push would currently fail, and would have at any time in Trump's presidency.

We don't know that. That's a guess.

 

[C_Felix]

Has the author of the OP/ED been given a "Deep Throat" style fancy moniker yet?

If not, I'm sure we can come up with an entertaining one.

 

[Mycroft]

No, it could not. This is delusional paranoia.

I sure hope you're right, but I don't share your confidence.

If the state was killing political opponents for mere political opposition, that could qualify.

Fair enough, but I'd add that trying to pressure the DOJ to launch politically motivated investigations into his (former) opposition goes pretty far in that direction. Do you think he would hesitate to literally lock up Obama or HRC if he could?

 

[tyr_13]

Has the author of the OP/ED been given a "Deep Throat" style fancy moniker yet?

If not, I'm sure we can come up with an entertaining one.

Yes, Lodestar.

 

[varwoche]

If the state was killing political opponents for mere political opposition, that could qualify.

This is an amusing qualification. Like, what if the state was killing opponents in order to rob them?

 

[Minoosh]

We don't know that. That's a guess.

I think it's highly probable, based on everything we do know about this Congress and Cabinet.

Say a bunch of officials resign, saying the president is incapable of performing his duties. Is it possible that spelling out exactly how they know might in itself be damaging to national security?

If Trump is currently, literally having a series of psychotic breaks, is there any downside to making this information public?

I know you think the coyness serves just one purpose, to safeguard the Republican agenda, and I agree it serves that purpose very well. But producing strong evidence that Trump is literally insane might also be considered a threat to the country.

There are things administration members know that they can't tell us, even anonymously.

ETA: I do think it's a consideration that they have more information than we do. Not an excuse; just a consideration.

 

[Minoosh]

This is an amusing qualification. Like, what if the state was killing opponents in order to rob them?

Armed resistance is a non-starter for me anyway. If the military is for Trump, IMO bands of left-wing militias aren't going to win using asymmetric guerilla warfare techniques. If the military is against Trump, by that point we won't need a war because finally there will be enough solid opposition to remove him from office using political means (voting, impeachment & conviction, 25th amendment).

 

[C_Felix]

Yes, Lodestar.

Ya know what? I think I knew that.

 

[Minoosh]

May have happened under Reagan at some point with Iran-contra. Or they really were following his direct orders...

Watching an episode of "The Americans" I was struck to see one of Reagan's addresses re: Iran-contra. In this clip, Reagan avuncularly acknowledging responsibility for trading arms for hostages . I'm not sure if it's from the same address, because I watched only the 4 minute version. I don't know if he is talking about Nicaragua at the same time.

Even if he was lying his butt off - which I have no way of knowing - he at least acknowledges that he bears the full responsibility for things that happened on his watch. Trump will do that when pigs fly (and I don't mean on airplanes). Reagan was able to project a certain humility, believably. What that really means is that he was a better actor than Trump, but I suspect he was also a better man.

 

[kellyb]

If Trump is currently, literally having a series of psychotic breaks, is there any downside to making this information public?

Not much of a downside compared to having him in office.

But producing strong evidence that Trump is literally insane might also be considered a threat to the country.

How so?

 

[Minoosh]

... or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office

Sounds like the framers provided a lot of leeway for getting a thoroughly rotten presidential apple out.

That "inability" may not provide as much leeway as you think it does, if the "powers and duties" are only those enumerated in the constitution.

Apparently it's settled history that Woodrow Wilson was damn near comatose for the last year of his presidency. Even so, "he" sent this to Congress on Dec. 2, 1919, fulfilling a constitutional duty. It's unclear if he wrote any of it, but his office did fulfill its duty. There aren't very many duties. Present a budget, report to Congress. Being a strong leader, wanting what's best for the country, having a sound moral compass - none of those are spelled out as necessary presidential attributes.

 

[kellyb]

That "inability" may not provide as much leeway as you think it does, if the "powers and duties" are only those enumerated in the constitution.

One of them is "command the armed forces".

He wanted to invade Venezuela.