The Trump Presidency 13: The (James) Baker's Dozen

[The Great Zaganza]

The Oath of Office isn't a promise, either, if you think about it...

 

[Belz...]

- Raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell all the truth?
- I do! (Mwa ha ha! Suckers, I didn't say promise!)
- Do you promise to tell all the truth?
- I do! (Mwa ha ha! Suckers, _I_ didn't say promise!)

 

[WilliamSeger]

https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...y-democrats-will-never-see-trumps-tax-returns


Mick Mulvaney says Democrats will never get to see Trump's tax returns,




First of all, Trump said he would release his tax returns, in exchange for Clinton's mail or the end of the audit, whatever comes first. Getting elected is not the same as getting pardoned.

Second, it is fascinating that this is the hill Trump wants to die on - Dems have a much weaker legt to stand on with regards to Collusion after Barr's sabotage.
But we have Congressional Testimony that Trump committed tax fraud - refusing to release them to Congress is Obstruction.

Mulvaney will try to run out the clock in the courts, but this is basically an admission that, like the Mueller report, the tax returns contain politically damaging stuff. And apparently it's bad enough that Mulvaney, like Barr, has calculated that the political damage of engaging in a cover-up is less.

 

[phiwum]

Would that be me or Ginger?

I did not mean you. Sorry for the ambiguity.

 

[Stacyhs]

The question is 'why?'

Because people are easily diverted to defend what they actually said rather than to focus on the thrust of their point. When someone tells us that we're wrong, we react defensively rather than evaluate what they mean and see whether it's a point to defend.

This is greatly exacerbated when the attacker doesn't make clear what he's criticizing. "Trump never promised such-and-such," by itself, is not clear that the correspondent means "Trump said but did not promise such-and-such." A correspondent may say the former, so that his attack seems stronger than it is and he can always fall back on the latter if needed. It's an effective way to appear to rebut a claim when it is actually quibbling over a minor point rather than addressing the issue at hand: Trump said he'd do X and he didn't.

You miss my point. I question why people respond to such obvious bait from people who are well known for certain behavior. You know the old saying, "Feed a fever, starve a troll."

 

[Aridas]

I'm not counting that as a good thing so far.

That's fair. I am, but that's obviously a matter of opinion. The Overton Window's been dragged way, way too far to the right, though, and the Democratic Socialists are dragging it back to a more rational range, which very much helps when it comes to debunking far-right attempts to claim that centrist pushes are far left pushes.

This would be good if I believed it were true.

Indeed, it's a bit too soon for the author to celebrate there.

Trump destroyed the careers of people I didn't really hate before Trump, for the most part. (Sessions is an exception. I certainly didn't hate Manafort before Trump, but I would've had I known who he was.)

I wasn't a huge fan of Bannon, myself. With that said, I don't actually take pleasure in destroyed careers, but do think that some career choices quite merit significant backlash.

Ha! (4) is less plausible than (2).

I posted the full text of that point later on, as you may or may not have noticed. It would be great if the killing was directly showing its effects now, though, rather than simply showing that the end is in sight.

In what sense? If the author means Bush looks worse due to Trump, the opposite is true. If he means that Trump is undoing what Bush did, I don't really see it.

Well, to quote part of that section -

Recall that Jeb! was the clear favorite to continue the Bush disaster—and now he’s a humiliated loser. When Jeb was still a “thing”, the arrogant Bushes were already talking about his stupid son, George P. Bush, being the next generation to saddle us with. Oh, how they’ve fallen. After Trump’s many insults led to Jeb’s defeat, his twerp of a son sold him out and publicly backed Trump. The Trumps repaid George P. by humiliating him: they pulled out of a fundraiser for his race for Texas Land Commissioner at the last minute and forced him to grovel over his dad’s behavior, which he gladly did. (Not quite on the same level of submissive humiliation suffered by Ted Cruz or Lindsay Graham, but still delicious.)

It’s true that Trump makes George W. look better, but everyone is forgetting just how horrible the Bushes were. Their legacy is the reason someone like Trump was able to come to power in the first place, and America suffered greatly under their tutelage. Iraq’s oil fields were divvied up by oil firms long before any invasion, and the hundreds of thousands of deaths from the Iraq War were a direct result of this war crime. The GOP long defended the Bush/Cheney war, but now that the GOP is a subsidiary of the Trump Corporation, that ended. Trump called it what it was, and few people—certainly no one in the rightwing media—defends the Bushes anymore. They are finished.

This is discussing GOP propaganda and current day, so that very well might change again, of course.

Mixed blessing. He shattered complacency by making things so much worse than before. That's like saying the good thing about accidentally shooting my hunting partner is that from now on, I'll treat a gun with more care.

Of course. Everything on this list should likely be considered in much the same light, though. All of this is backlash, which means that things got really bad first.

(7) isn't all that good to me. Far better would be that both sides return to civility and compromise. Given that the Republicans won't, I'm ambivalent about the Democrats following their lead. There's some practical benefits in the short term.

Yet, it's exactly BECAUSE the Republicans won't that it has become necessary. More than ample opportunity was given to the Republicans and the way has been kept open for a return to civility and compromise. At this point, the only viable remaining path to get the Republicans to return to civility and compromise is to show them that the Democrats can and will outfight them when they decide to take these tactics.

If'n he goes down, the GOP will suffer. Let's wait and see. It's not obvious that Trump will be forced out or lose in 2020.

2020 actually barely figures into the guy's argument there. To quote it a bit,

Ronna Romney dissolved the RNC into Trump’s campaign wing, which is a bit problematic to candidates trying to distance themselves from Trump’s sinking ship. Two decades from now, I predict we’ll be discussing what happened to the once powerful GOP. Their base will be mostly gone, and an angry crop of new voters and activists will make sure that fascism will never again get so close to overturning democracy as they have the past two years.

There will be a reckoning within the GOP after Trump, and it won’t be pretty. It will be a fracture, or a dissolution, but the fragile coalition won’t hold. Whatever emerges will have all of the relevance of the modern Whig party. When that happens, then maybe---just maybe--- this whole Trump experiment will have proved to not be such a bad thing after all.

Overly optimistic, I think, yes. One can hope, though.

It wasn't a threat. It was a hypothetical example to illustrate how insulting your list was.

Anyways, for the fun of it, here's a bit of an account of how this list came to be, to quote the author.

So you know what? I’m game. I asked him to go first: admit one nice thing Obama did. I even provided a helpful list for him to choose from. (I’m still waiting for mine.) In turn, I’d say something that I love about Trump. He ignored my list and gave me this: Obama gifted the conservatives “focus”. The GOP was completely united against him. Now they have to govern, and he—without admitting it—essentially implied that his party has been flailing without a foil to blame things on.

OK...so that’s how we’re playing this? That was a pretty lame cop out, but still. I can play that too.

I told him, like always, I’ll go bigger. I came up with a list of eight things that I can honestly say I absolutely love about Donald J Trump. I put some time into it, so I decided to share my list with you good people.

I was then amused and decided to share his list with you good people.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

...
Anyways, for the fun of it, here's a bit of an account of how this list came to be, to quote the author.

I was then amused and decided to share his list with you good people.

That makes the list no less insulting. And it doesn't change the fact the list was no more than gratuitous insults.

How is that list moving the discussion forward?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Trump Retweeted

Mike Pence
‏Verified account
@mike_pence
The last 2 years, under @RealDonaldTrump, have been 2 years of action – it’s been 2 years of results – & it’s been 2 years of promises made and promises kept! #MAGA

@RealDonaldTrump is doing his job to SECURE OUR BORDER! @CBP is doing their job. It’s time for Congress to do its job and CLOSE THE LOOPHOLES in our immigration laws & end the CRISIS on our southern border!

 

[Stacyhs]

Trump is going to need surgery to remove Pence from his ass when he leaves office.

 

[Aridas]

That makes the list no less insulting. And it doesn't change the fact the list was no more than gratuitous insults.

It actually wasn't. That you take it as insulting is actually somewhat telling.

How is that list moving the discussion forward?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Trump Tweets

Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen will be leaving her position, and I would like to thank her for her service....


....I am pleased to announce that Kevin McAleenan, the current U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner, will become Acting Secretary for @DHSgov. I have confidence that Kevin will do a great job!

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It actually wasn't. That you take it as insulting is actually somewhat telling....

Wasn't insulting?

Face it Aridas, we live in different worlds.

 

[Stacyhs]

Trump Tweets

Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen will be leaving her position, and I would like to thank her for her service....


....I am pleased to announce that Kevin McAleenan, the current U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner, will become Acting Secretary for @DHSgov. I have confidence that Kevin will do a great job!

Well now, aren't we just all shocked by this turn of events?

 

[Aridas]

Wasn't insulting?

Face it Aridas, we live in different worlds.

Perhaps so. With that said, though, accepting unpleasant truths and going from there is not the same as making insults. Not by a long shot. Nor, for that matter, have you given me any reason to believe that you were paying any attention to what was actually being said, just that you were outraged by... something that you assumed, incorrectly, in the only specific criticism you made.

 

[Aridas]

Well now, aren't we just all shocked by this turn of events?

Goody. Is this the slap on the wrist that Nielson is getting for blatantly and repeatedly lying to Congress? Or is Trump just not satisfied with how much brown-nosing she's done?

 

[Stacyhs]

Goody. Is this the slap on the wrist that Nielson is getting for blatantly and repeatedly lying to Congress? Or is Trump just not satisfied with how much brown-nosing she's done?

Apparently, she resigned. After the way Trump humiliated her last week, she may have just had enough. But with this WH, who knows what the truth is?

 

[slyjoe]

Apparently, she resigned. After the way Trump humiliated her last week, she may have just had enough. But with this WH, who knows what the truth is?

Nope.

Senior administration officials told CNN that Nielsen had a 5 p.m., meeting at the White House with Trump where she was planning to discuss with him the immigration and border issues and a path forward. She had no intention of resigning, according to one of the sources, but rather was going there with an agenda.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/07/poli...:+rss/cnn_topstories+(RSS:+CNN+-+Top+Stories)

ETA: Knowing this administration, which seems more likely - resigned or forced to resign?

 

[Stacyhs]

Nope.



https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/07/poli...:+rss/cnn_topstories+(RSS:+CNN+-+Top+Stories)

ETA: Knowing this administration, which seems more likely - resigned or forced to resign?

What anybody from this WH says I take with a YUGE grain of salt. Resigned due to having had enough of Trump's insanity or being forced to resign is a toss up.

 

[The Big Dog]

Yes, I shouldn't have spoken in absolutes.

TBD's strategy works some time. Find a trivial and disputable claim in someone's post and focus on that. Now, rather than discussing the heart of the matter (Trump said he would release his taxes and has not done so), part of this thread has devolved into a discussion of the meaning of the word "promise".

Quibbling was an apt description of TBD's silly rejoinder, but give credit where it's due. It was somewhat effective quibbling. On a board like this, someone is apt to take the bait.

Words mean things. He never promised to show them, full stop.

Over sell, under deliver, get called on it and blame the messenger.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Goody. Is this the slap on the wrist that Nielson is getting for blatantly and repeatedly lying to Congress? Or is Trump just not satisfied with how much brown-nosing she's done?

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen resigns as Trump rage continues

Nielsen was the most aggressive DHS secretary in history. It wasn’t enough for Trump.

Nielsen’s resignation was preceded on Thursday night by the abrupt withdrawal of the nomination of acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement director Ron Vitiello to formally lead the agency, with Trump telling reporters Friday morning that he wanted to go in a “tougher direction.”

The article continues...

with nearly 100,000 migrants apprehended by Border Patrol agents along the US/Mexico border in March, Trump is yet again ruminating angrily and obsessively over immigration, riffing in speeches about telling migrants “we’re full” and “go back.”

Nielsen couldn’t make that happen, because no one could, because it’s impossible.

But this is untrue, plenty more could be done to stop migrants entering the country. For example, Trump could declare a national emergency, impose Martial Law and have then all shot on sight. A DHS secretary who can't organize that is simply not tough enough for the job.