Something is Rotten

[Checkerboard Strangler]

What is "Conservative" anymore? Does anybody really know? Oh, I know we can run off a litany of Culture War topics, but those have contradicted themselves so convolutedly of late that I really don't know what they mean anymore, and I'm not sure they do either.

We have plenty of real actual conservatives. Some even walk among us here on DP.
These people aren't in power or in control of anything of consequence in the current version of the Republican Party, but that doesn't mean they ceased to exist.

The elections of 2010, 2014 and 2016 marginalized them, but they're still around.
The power brokers in their own party now villainize them, but they're still around.

 

[Rogue Valley]

This is [apparently] what occurs when Congress refuses to act as a check on a dystopian Executive branch.

 

[joko104]

Its all just smoke and mirrors. The West Wing is filled with Democrats and former Obama staffers. The NYT story is the NYT literally creating a story for people to then just consider factual, when it is in fact NOTHING.

We are to unquestionably believe the publication of the mega billionaire Mexican #1 stockholder, when he has one of his editors print that "an unnamed Democrat staffer in the Executive branch of government declared he is speaking for everyone at the White House, when he wrote... assuring all that Democrats and Obama staffers are largely still in control of the White House."

That is NOTHING.

 

[joko104]

Dating back to Nixon, every president - except Obama of course - has been under criminal investigation as the way the insiders control the presidency and maintain their power.

 

[Mr Person]

Exactly. They are forming an unelected shadow government and then telling us all to be calm because they got this. Meanwhile they are just pushing their own agenda as they manipulate the idiot in chief. They need to stand down, let the sunshine expose the idiot in chief and either **** or get off the pot. This is all fake heroism they are perpetrating and they should probably go to jail for it.

But to be honest... this is what republicans tend to elect. A figurehead puppet. This to trump... Cheney to Bush... Hell reagan was known as a hands off sleepy prez riding the facade of his charisma.

All true, but on the other hand, wouldn't you want someone to override/circumvent some harebrained notion like invading Russia if he'd spluttered it out in a moment of his typically incoherent rage? Apparently something like that, albeit lesser in scale, already happened: military ignoring a soon-forgotten statement that we should assassinate Assad and his government w/ lots of bombing.

A unique problem for a uniquely bad situation...

 

[joko104]

Well then you don't understand how much the NYT's has on the line here. This is not the National Enquirer headlining "Hillary boinks aliens in interstellar orgy".

If they got this wrong, this is an existential threat to the paper. The decision to print the op-ed was not made unilaterally from any Editor's desk. It had to at least go to the Publisher and he likely had to go to his Board. This is not some screwy little after dinner talking point.

The NYT has nothing on the line. The NYT is a globalist corporate propaganda and PR advertising campaign for the corporate interests, nothing else.

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

In 2010 or so Mitch McConnell is on video saying the GOP's #1 thing on their agenda was to make Obama a 1 term Prez.. At the time millions of Americans were losing their jobs and homes, but all Mitch and the GOP cared about was making Obama lose in 2012. Party before country. It was right about then I walked away from the Republican Party. I realize then the GOP only cared about Party and their rich donors, no one else. They didn't give a crap about the Middle or Working classes in this country.

Anyway as we can tell now, nothing changed in the GOP.. They still put party 1st, and their whole agenda is to help the rich and Corps. Even with a Prez in the WH that is obviously dangerous and maybe even mentally ill, with the GOP it's Party before country. Instead of MAGA they should change it to: PBC..

 

[poweRob]

All true, but on the other hand, wouldn't you want someone to override/circumvent some harebrained notion like invading Russia if he'd spluttered it out in a moment of his typically incoherent rage? Apparently something like that, albeit lesser in scale, already happened: military ignoring a soon-forgotten statement that we should assassinate Assad and his government w/ lots of bombing.

A unique problem for a uniquely bad situation...

That would be up to the Generals to decide whether or not to follow that order or decide that it is unlawful. And that would become public knowledge rather than perhaps done behind the scenes to "protect us." I'd rather trumps moves be telegraphed rather than buried ultimately. That is what was voted for... we suffer the consequences and repair ourselves in that manner as well.

 

[Cardinal]

All true, but on the other hand, wouldn't you want someone to override/circumvent some harebrained notion like invading Russia if he'd spluttered it out in a moment of his typically incoherent rage? Apparently something like that, albeit lesser in scale, already happened: military ignoring a soon-forgotten statement that we should assassinate Assad and his government w/ lots of bombing.

A unique problem for a uniquely bad situation...

Letting the President know he's being controlled isn't smart. That's helped nobody.

 

[jnug]

The NYT has nothing on the line. The NYT is a globalist corporate propaganda and PR advertising campaign for the corporate interests, nothing else.

Well glad we settled that!
What is the WAPO? Love to hear your take on WAPO.

 

[JustHanging]

The first President to have racists hover around him or invite them in?

Trump is the first president to openly court racists to join their base, at least in my life time.

Did you conveniently forget about Barack Hussein Obama?

How could I? Trump was the leader of the racist Birther Movement that attacked Obama for no other reason than the colour of his skin. You don't see that kind of blatant racism everyday, outside of the KKK, Neo Nazis, and other White Supremacists.

A lot of people joined Trump's base when they saw they too could be part of this racist movement attacking a black man.


Of course, racism is usually associated with poor education, and poor intellect, so what's happening now in the White House, hearing that Trump has the cognitive and emotional level of a 10 year old, is not a surprise. And when someone is at level intellectually, other people are going to be able to trick him quite easily. Everything confirmed by Trump's tweets, Woodward's book, and now the op-ed.

 

[jnug]

Melania finds her way out of her cloths closet to announce "Op-ed author is not protecting the country"....as if she would know what the heck is happening on that side of the WH.

Pretty bad when they have to cart out Melania for this.

 

[Gina]

Gina, yours is a thought provoking post. You've managed to explain why I'm so uncomfortable over this anonymous NY Time opinion piece.
Despite how one feels about the Trump presidency, it's unsettling to learn that our Democratically elected president is being undermined by some deep state elite, elites, who think they are better suited to do his job. Time to come together as Americans, ... and stand up and say, 'this ain't right.'

I agree with everything but the characterization of the writer of the Op Ed and whoever he considers "we" in his piece, the deep state. A "senior Trump adviser", is someone who came into the government, since Trump took office. That's not the "deep state".

As Kobie said:

This doesn't really meet the definition of "deep state." These are HIS people, not the establishment and Obama holdovers.

No, it does not.

I disagree. They're simply "advising" him and Presidents have had advisors since the dawn of the nation. There's nothing wrong with it, and Trump is fully capable of firing anyone who he feels is not advising him to his/her best ability.

No President (even one who's been in politics all his life) is knowledgeable on every topic that arises, which is why advisors are vital and ever present.

While there are many things to be concerned about in this presidency -- this is not one of them.

They are not "simply 'advising'" the president. In the words of the author of the Op Ed: I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.

Thwarting, his choice of words, is not advising and cannot it be dismissed as such.

My guess is because he/she wants to reassure the public in light of all the negative media attention over Trump.

Kind of provides a semblance of stability.

I raise my hand. If this is true, I am not reassured. Taking the piece at face value, they are thwarting a sitting president in order to protect the country from his "worst impulses". That's one heck of a statement, for many reasons.

He's not mentally incompetent. He's just an asshole who won't stay off twitter. These unelected twits are doing no favors to anyone. What's rotten is the state of politics in America, the hate towards Kavanaugh embodies that, he's a solid jurist yet to read some of the comments on here and around the web, you'd think him being seated on the SCOTUS will usher in a theocratic unchecked regime that will lock away anyone not Conservative, Christian, White and heterosexual.

The mental illness isn't with Trump or his administration, it's with those who've lost their ****ing minds that he beat Hillary. Yeah he's an ass, he's a braggart... but damn people.

I didn't say he's mentally ill. The OP suggested there was reason to consider the 25th amendment. Again, if that assertion is true, the author is speaking from some sort of experience. It's his assertion, not mine. I'm just commenting towards the Op Ed.

Yep. That this guy or these guys seem to be pushing the notion that they are valiant knights protecting us makes it even worse IMO. If there are truly such huge problems in the WH, get off your ass, stand on principle and expose it. Resign if you must. Everything about this wreaks of incredible unconstitutionality. We can not call ourselves a democracy or representative democracy at all at this point if this is how our government is run.

That was Rick Wilson's (Republican) take on it too. There was nothing commendable about this and whoever is behind the writing of this Op Ed, is just setting themselves up to say later, "I spoke up" in order to protect their careers after Trump. He wasn't buying it at all.

 

[Gina]

Trouble is, if you feel compelled to operate a two track presidency, then it DOES rise to the level of a 25A action, because that sort of preventive measures is the very definition of a 25A insufficiency finding.

Simply put, the man is so off the rails that we had to:

A) Operate a two track presidency

B) Initiate 25A removal from office

There is no situation where (A) is the recommended, or legal option.
In fact, exercising Option A is the very definition of a constitutional crisis, a "Crisis of Fidelity", meaning the Constitution has prescribed the recommended action but those in power are refusing to follow the recommended action.

That's what I see and if this is true, these people are not just thwarting a sitting president, they are protecting someone they believe is not fit for the office. There is a legal option for that, as you point out.

All true, but on the other hand, wouldn't you want someone to override/circumvent some harebrained notion like invading Russia if he'd spluttered it out in a moment of his typically incoherent rage? Apparently something like that, albeit lesser in scale, already happened: military ignoring a soon-forgotten statement that we should assassinate Assad and his government w/ lots of bombing.

A unique problem for a uniquely bad situation...

Yes, I like someone close by to circumvent a potential global disaster, like Mattis is said to have done, and at the same time, these "adults in the room" should behave like adults. They shouldn't be enabling, at best, or exploiting, at worst, a president they considered bad enough to possibly invoke the 25th amendment. They should stop their two-track presidency and go talk to the hill.

 

[JackA]

That's what I see and if this is true, these people are not just thwarting a sitting president, they are protecting someone they believe is not fit for the office. There is a legal option for that, as you point out.




Yes, I like someone close by to circumvent a potential global disaster, like Mattis is said to have done, and at the same time, these "adults in the room" should behave like adults. They shouldn't be enabling, at best, or exploiting, at worst, a president they considered bad enough to possibly invoke the 25th amendment. They should stop their two-track presidency and go talk to the hill.

This assumes that "going to the hill" is likely to have had any effect. The op-ed writer presumably concluded it would be a waste of time as so many other criticisms and revelations of the President's misconduct or mis-nonconduct in office have gone nowhere. Instead he risked the world coming down on his head and did what he thought might help. My reading of it.

 

[Renae]

I didn't say he's mentally ill. The OP suggested there was reason to consider the 25th amendment. Again, if that assertion is true, the author is speaking from some sort of experience. It's his assertion, not mine. I'm just commenting towards the Op Ed.

Fair enough. I think the big problem is the political animals that spend their world inside the Bubble have expectations of "How the Game is Played" and Trump doesn't play that way. I applaud that he doesn't, but some of the ways he acts I would prefer he didn't.

 

[trixare4kids]

I agree with everything but the characterization of the writer of the Op Ed and whoever he considers "we" in his piece, the deep state. A "senior Trump adviser", is someone who came into the government, since Trump took office. That's not the "deep state".

As Kobie said:



No, it does not.


They are not "simply 'advising'" the president. In the words of the author of the Op Ed: I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.

Thwarting, his choice of words, is not advising and cannot it be dismissed as such.



I raise my hand. If this is true, I am not reassured. Taking the piece at face value, they are thwarting a sitting president in order to protect the country from his "worst impulses". That's one heck of a statement, for many reasons.



I didn't say he's mentally ill. The OP suggested there was reason to consider the 25th amendment. Again, if that assertion is true, the author is speaking from some sort of experience. It's his assertion, not mine. I'm just commenting towards the Op Ed.



That was Rick Wilson's (Republican) take on it too. There was nothing commendable about this and whoever is behind the writing of this Op Ed, is just setting themselves up to say later, "I spoke up" in order to protect their careers after Trump. He wasn't buying it at all.

Thank you for your response.
I will leave you with this. There's no secret that I completely agree with Paul Ryan and not Nancy Pelosi.

"House Speaker Paul Ryan says whoever wrote an anonymous New York Times opinion column claiming officials in President Donald Trump’s administration are preventing Trump from carrying out his worst instincts is “living in dishonesty” and shouldn’t work for him."

https://apnews.com/3990cdc1e2a14e8f...-Ryan-says-op-ed-writer-'living-in-dishonesty'

"House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi says it represented “mayhem” in the White House."

https://apnews.com/42a6c7a2fd734bfcba1245a4cbff06e6/Pelosi,-Ryan-weigh-in-on-NYTimes-Op-Ed

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

There is no such thing under the Constitution as a two-track presidency and these people are not heroes. They are covering up for an executive who may be mentally incompetent and exploiting that incompetence for their own ends. They should be reaching out to senators and representatives to voice their "concern" and explain why they feel they need to thwart and deceive him. Or they should stop covering up for him if they don't think it rises to 25th Amendment bad. They should not continue to operate a "two-track presidency".

Bob Corker spoke up. Did it make any difference? Do you think if Dan Coats or even Sarah Sanders goes to Congress and tells them that Trump is incompetent, that they'll do anything about it? The 25th amendment only kicks in if Trump is insane not if he's a moron. Unfortunately, our forefathers never considered the possibility that we might elect an unstable moron.

Let's look at the options:

Action: Speak out
Result: Trump says you're a liar. Congress won't investigate or do anything. You get fired. Career over.

Actoin: Stay and thwart the president
Result: You stop Trump from doing a few reckless dangerous things that could harm the country.


I would love for these people to come out as a group and tell their stories of Trump's instability and incompetence. But the reality of the Trump cult is that they will be branded as "establishment" and dismissed.

 

[jnug]

Bob Corker spoke up. Did it make any difference? Do you think if Dan Coats or even Sarah Sanders goes to Congress and tells them that Trump is incompetent, that they'll do anything about it? The 25th amendment only kicks in if Trump is insane not if he's a moron. Unfortunately, our forefathers never considered the possibility that we might elect an unstable moron.

Let's look at the options:

Action: Speak out
Result: Trump says you're a liar. Congress won't investigate or do anything. You get fired. Career over.

Actoin: Stay and thwart the president
Result: You stop Trump from doing a few reckless dangerous things that could harm the country.


I would love for these people to come out as a group and tell their stories of Trump's instability and incompetence. But the reality of the Trump cult is that they will be branded as "establishment" and dismissed.

There are two tracks that should be adopted by hearings on the Hill. One is the existence of a two track presidency. Regardless of what the President is or is not, how competent or incompetent he might be a two track presidency is a travesty and a mutation that under no circumstances can be tolerated.

The other track that hearings should follow is the rampant abuses of power by Trump while in office. Those are not to be conduced by the same committees at the same time.

There is even a third track, that being an actual House investigation into Russian Election Interference instead of the sham hearings run by the GOP.

None of these will be embarked on unless the Dems at least take back the House and in fact like it or not, this likely opens up the Senate at least to the possibility of the Dems flipping that body as well.

 

[MrMike]

Trump is the first president to openly court racists to join their base, at least in my life time.


How could I? Trump was the leader of the racist Birther Movement that attacked Obama for no other reason than the colour of his skin. You don't see that kind of blatant racism everyday, outside of the KKK, Neo Nazis, and other White Supremacists.

A lot of people joined Trump's base when they saw they too could be part of this racist movement attacking a black man.


Of course, racism is usually associated with poor education, and poor intellect, so what's happening now in the White House, hearing that Trump has the cognitive and emotional level of a 10 year old, is not a surprise. And when someone is at level intellectually, other people are going to be able to trick him quite easily. Everything confirmed by Trump's tweets, Woodward's book, and now the op-ed.

I’m sure the racist Reverend Jerimiah Wright and the BLM racists who hung with Barack probably concur.

 

[PLizzy]

Dan "the warning lights are blinking red again" Coats?


That's a solid guess.

I'm with Gina's OP.

It's called "shyt or get off the pot". The President should be supported & respected, or he should be removed. Not this half-way crap.

Who knows? Maybe they learned from Trump? They're floating stuff out there, to see if they can build consensus?

I take back my prediction it was Coats.

I'm going to bet on Rod Rosenstein.

He has a legitimate beef with Trump after dealing with his public abuse, plus he deals with Trump irrational and illegal power grab requests constantly.

 

[Amelia]

I take back my prediction it was Coats.

I'm going to bet on Rod Rosenstein.

He has a legitimate beef with Trump after dealing with his public abuse, plus he deals with Trump irrational and illegal power grab requests constantly.

That would be unfortunate.

 

[jnug]

I take back my prediction it was Coats.

I'm going to bet on Rod Rosenstein.

He has a legitimate beef with Trump after dealing with his public abuse, plus he deals with Trump irrational and illegal power grab requests constantly.

I do think its a Dep. Sec or Asst Dep Sec instead of a cabinet head. They are all political appointments as well and those are high profile jobs. Don't think its Rosenstein though. He is enjoying his job too much.

 

[Slingshot Bob]

So the deep state is composed of Trump's hand picked employees?

Never saw that coming!

So are you holding Trump responsible for picking these people, or does he get a pass? And if he does get a pass, why?

You evidently think the entire Government turns over with every election? Plus you forgot the democrat traitors known as RINOs.

 

[PLizzy]

That would be unfortunate.

Why, kitty?