Oh, there is lots to blog about.
There is former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort being found guilty of eight felonies.
There is {former} Trump lawyer Michael Cohen pleading guilty to eight felonies.
There is Example #56,793 of the casual racism of Donald Trump.
There is the question of whether or not the First Lady is trolling her husband.
It makes some sense that Mrs. Trump would be trolling him. She is probably rather hurt by the revelations of all of the affairs that Trump was having while she was pregnant and then birthing their son. Trolling him in public would indeed be a sweet bit of payback.
As to Trump's racism, there is little to talk about. The only people who don't believe that Trump is a racist old crank are Trump, himself, and the lesser intelligent members of the American Nazi movement. Which is why even if Omarosa Manigault-Newman has a recording of Trump saying the N-word, it' really not going to move the needle on the "Trump is a Racist" meter.
Sorry, But Santa Is Way Ahead Of You
1 hour ago
13 comments:
But why did Hillary get away with so much?
It's close to impossible to hold our government responsible for what it does when that is the response by a third of the population when the subject of the current disasters and scandals are raised.
"Whataboutism" warning...
‘Wouldn’t you love to see the Republican leadership get a backbone and say, “Get that son-of-a-bitch outta here. You’re fired! FIRED!”’
Call it karma, irony, or whatever; but using trump’s own words against him is kinda fun.
Dale
"Wouldn’t you love to see the Republican leadership get a backbone"
Yes, dearly. It's been a complaint for years. Republican leadership doesn't know how to use political capital. Democrats take power, they do something to change the landscape - usually permanently. The backlash sees them out of power. Republicans take power, they sit on it until it goes away. The disappointment of their base sees them out of power.
Harry, since you brought it up:
That Hillary got away with what she did, in the manner she did, means it was already impossible to hold some high level politician(s) accountable. If nothing else, Trump represents an improvement in that regard: Mueller, we can trust, has not yet written a memo exonerating him. Progress!
If you find it troublesome for a "third of the population" to derail your conversation about how you want to hold politicians accountable by mentioning a politician who was emphatically not held accountable, then I suggest adjusting your approach and firing back with some version of "let's prosecute her, too." If the person you were speaking to was trying to argue that because Hillary got away with it, everyone else should as well, then they now have to own that. And it's an ugly position: it's accepting corruption as a permanent fixture in our government. You can hammer that until your opposition backs off, or until he has no supporters in your audience. If they are genuinely upset about Hillary skating, then you can now get them on the same page: no slack for corrupt officials, ever. Unless you are looking to defend Hillary while attacking Trump, her mention should not stymie you.
Personally, I'm interested to see how this turns out. Cohen's now freed from concern over losing his law license (it's doomed, now), so Mueller's probably about to get a lot of off-record insider information. Maybe we'll see a conclusion soon. Did Trump, personally, do anything criminal? If yes, prosecute. If not, being a boor, even a casually racist one, is not an impeachable offense.
Lanny Davis went on the teevee machine and said that Cohen has some information that he would be happy to share with the special counsel.
-Doug in Oakland
If only Republicans in Congress knew how to impeach a President for crimes associated with an affair...
Bradley: I've never been a fan of the Clintons. Back in 2016, I worried that another Clinton Administration would mean endless hearings, just like the old Admins, and further electoral devastation for the Dems.
But Hillary Clinton is not a legitimate response when confronted about the actions of this Administration. At times, it's almost like conservatives don't realize that they won in 2016.
And you just defended their "Squirrel!" approach. Any criticism of the people in office can apparently be ignored in favor of criticism of someone who is not in office. We shouldn't hold the people in office accountable, because the losing candidate in the last election was bad.
I guess that logic makes a whole lot of sense to you. To me, it seems like a way to remain in denial.
What did Hillary "do"?
Nan, not Bill enough? I’m sorry, but that was a layup. On that note, the blatant hypocrisy of the Republicans who screamed for William Jefferson Clinton’s impeachment and who now acquiesce to Donald John Trump’s madhouse of lies, is stunning. I see two ways forward, we either recover what was lost and Donnie gets a place in the history of the U.S. beside Hoover, Taylor, Coolidge and such or we are on the descent into the hell of an authoritarian regime at the hands of the Republican (gerrymandered) majority.
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/53/be/ab/53beab9c7a3fe3053db330998d0d0122.jpg
Nan, but truth isn’t truth!
To me Hillary in this conversation is yelling "look squirrel", she doesn't matter.
She is not in office, so she is not an issue or factor. Did she actually get away with it, she didn't win!
The guy in the office is a factor. One problem at a time.
Eck!
Trump says the market will crash if he's impeached. Seems, since he mentioned it, he's worried about it. Let's see if he's correct. I'm willing to take the risk.
Dale
Post a Comment