I saw that one but it also says Kasowitz has a tendency to run off at the mouth and exaggerate his own contributions/accomplishments. Which sounds exactly like the kind of lawyer Trump would have, but makes me a little skeptical when it's 'a source says he heard Kasowitz say he said it' rather than 'a source heard Kasowitz tell Trump this'.
That's still bragging about obstructing justice.
It's a bold strategy, Cotton.
No, no, no. Cotton's bold strategy was asking if Sessions liked Bond movies.
I saw that one but it also says Kasowitz has a tendency to run off at the mouth and exaggerate his own contributions/accomplishments. Which sounds exactly like the kind of lawyer Trump would have, but makes me a little skeptical when it's 'a source says he heard Kasowitz say he said it' rather than 'a source heard Kasowitz tell Trump this'.
That's still bragging about obstructing justice.
It's a bold strategy, Cotton.
The president does it, his appointees do it, let's see if anyone cares about his lawyers doing it.
I hear a tumbleweed blowing across from Washington.
Schumer said on Maddow that Sessions needs to resign if he continues to refuse to answer the Senate's questions and that contempt of Congress is a thing though it would take a lengthy period of time to litigate. That's the top two Democrats in the Senate.
Call me when a single republican, even one, says it.
Schumer said on Maddow that Sessions needs to resign if he continues to refuse to answer the Senate's questions and that contempt of Congress is a thing though it would take a lengthy period of time to litigate. That's the top two Democrats in the Senate.
Call me when a single republican, even one, says it.
It's still a big deal that Democrats are pushing this angle.
When asked by the pool of reporters covering a midday meeting with Republican lawmakers at the White House whether he supported Mr. Mueller, Mr. Trump gave no answer, even though he often uses such interactions to make headlines or shoot down stories he believes to be fake.
That may have been by design, according to a person who spoke to Mr. Trump on Tuesday. The president was pleased by the ambiguity of his position on Mr. Mueller, and thinks the possibility of being fired will focus the veteran prosecutor on delivering what the president desires most: a blanket public exoneration.
Pleased, but he's going to be surprised when the reaction he gets from Mueller is nothing.
When asked by the pool of reporters covering a midday meeting with Republican lawmakers at the White House whether he supported Mr. Mueller, Mr. Trump gave no answer, even though he often uses such interactions to make headlines or shoot down stories he believes to be fake.
That may have been by design, according to a person who spoke to Mr. Trump on Tuesday. The president was pleased by the ambiguity of his position on Mr. Mueller, and thinks the possibility of being fired will focus the veteran prosecutor on delivering what the president desires most: a blanket public exoneration.
Pleased, but he's going to be surprised when the reaction he gets from Mueller is nothing.
When asked by the pool of reporters covering a midday meeting with Republican lawmakers at the White House whether he supported Mr. Mueller, Mr. Trump gave no answer, even though he often uses such interactions to make headlines or shoot down stories he believes to be fake.
That may have been by design, according to a person who spoke to Mr. Trump on Tuesday. The president was pleased by the ambiguity of his position on Mr. Mueller, and thinks the possibility of being fired will focus the veteran prosecutor on delivering what the president desires most: a blanket public exoneration.
Pleased, but he's going to be surprised when the reaction he gets from Mueller is nothing.
As usual, Trump is a manipulative weasel who's incapable of grasping that not everyone else is a weasel.
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
When asked by the pool of reporters covering a midday meeting with Republican lawmakers at the White House whether he supported Mr. Mueller, Mr. Trump gave no answer, even though he often uses such interactions to make headlines or shoot down stories he believes to be fake.
That may have been by design, according to a person who spoke to Mr. Trump on Tuesday. The president was pleased by the ambiguity of his position on Mr. Mueller, and thinks the possibility of being fired will focus the veteran prosecutor on delivering what the president desires most: a blanket public exoneration.
Pleased, but he's going to be surprised when the reaction he gets from Mueller is nothing.
That just sounds like more attempts at obstruction of justice to me. Informally at the very least.
Yeah, if you go from this statement Trump will be pleased if Mueller clears him. But if he doesn't, and Trump fires him you can draw a direct line from one to the other and it looks like blatant obstruction.
When asked by the pool of reporters covering a midday meeting with Republican lawmakers at the White House whether he supported Mr. Mueller, Mr. Trump gave no answer, even though he often uses such interactions to make headlines or shoot down stories he believes to be fake.
That may have been by design, according to a person who spoke to Mr. Trump on Tuesday. The president was pleased by the ambiguity of his position on Mr. Mueller, and thinks the possibility of being fired will focus the veteran prosecutor on delivering what the president desires most: a blanket public exoneration.
Pleased, but he's going to be surprised when the reaction he gets from Mueller is nothing.
I didn't realize the President could fire a special prosecutor.
I honestly thought that was the point; you bring in an outsider who can't be fucked with.
He can't 'fire' them.
He can ask the AG (or, in this case, due to Session's 'recusal' the Deputy AG) to fire him. He can then fire them and keep firing people until someone does it.
He can also issue an Executive Order repealing the DOJ rules which make a Special Counsel a thing which exists. They are not codified in law, they're just rules created by/for the DOJ. So he can make the position 'special counsel' cease to exist, effectively firing Mueller. That would not stop Congress from setting up an independent commission to investigate. The fact that the GOP hold both houses of Congress would stop that, though.
Edit:
Also, I wish Al Franken would be a little more hard-assed. Just watched him do an interview on Lawrence O'Donnel (which I'm only watching because Maddow said Franken would be on - O'Donnel is a little too 'liberal echo chamber' for me, which I feel like is saying something) and while he hit the expected talking points I feel like he really kid-gloves'd Sessions behavior today. Though I understand him wanting to get Sessions to appear before a committee he's actually on.
Schumer said on Maddow that Sessions needs to resign if he continues to refuse to answer the Senate's questions and that contempt of Congress is a thing though it would take a lengthy period of time to litigate. That's the top two Democrats in the Senate.
Call me when a single republican, even one, says it.
It's still a big deal that Democrats are pushing this angle.
Not really as it is the angle anyone watching the proceedings, having a basic understanding of law, and having any fuckin sense would be taking
Schumer said on Maddow that Sessions needs to resign if he continues to refuse to answer the Senate's questions and that contempt of Congress is a thing though it would take a lengthy period of time to litigate. That's the top two Democrats in the Senate.
Call me when a single republican, even one, says it.
It's still a big deal that Democrats are pushing this angle.
Not really as it is the angle anyone watching the proceedings, having a basic understanding of law, and having any fuckin sense would be taking
Not true. It may be obvious but that doesn't mean you necessarily actually say it. The fact that they are outright stating it is an aggressive move on their part.
Schumer said on Maddow that Sessions needs to resign if he continues to refuse to answer the Senate's questions and that contempt of Congress is a thing though it would take a lengthy period of time to litigate. That's the top two Democrats in the Senate.
Call me when a single republican, even one, says it.
It's still a big deal that Democrats are pushing this angle.
Not really as it is the angle anyone watching the proceedings, having a basic understanding of law, and having any fuckin sense would be taking
Not true. It may be obvious but that doesn't mean you necessarily actually say it. The fact that they are outright stating it is an aggressive move on their part.
The argument that it doesn't matter if only democrats say it is far too close to it doesn't matter if anybody says it. It's a silly, silly argument.
ElJeffeNot actually a mod.Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPAmod
I just watched the exchange between Harris and Sessions and i would just like to say I love my new senator.
Lady don't take no shit.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
The deputy AG has pretty explicitly said he's not going to fire the special prosecutor. So first he'd have to fire the deputy AG through Sessions. Which you know would just go over so well.
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
I didn't realize the President could fire a special prosecutor.
I honestly thought that was the point; you bring in an outsider who can't be fucked with.
He can't 'fire' them.
He can ask the AG (or, in this case, due to Session's 'recusal' the Deputy AG) to fire him. He can then fire them and keep firing people until someone does it.
He can also issue an Executive Order repealing the DOJ rules which make a Special Counsel a thing which exists. They are not codified in law, they're just rules created by/for the DOJ. So he can make the position 'special counsel' cease to exist, effectively firing Mueller. That would not stop Congress from setting up an independent commission to investigate. The fact that the GOP hold both houses of Congress would stop that, though.
Edit:
Also, I wish Al Franken would be a little more hard-assed. Just watched him do an interview on Lawrence O'Donnel (which I'm only watching because Maddow said Franken would be on - O'Donnel is a little too 'liberal echo chamber' for me, which I feel like is saying something) and while he hit the expected talking points I feel like he really kid-gloves'd Sessions behavior today. Though I understand him wanting to get Sessions to appear before a committee he's actually on.
Franken talked on I think the Daily Show about how he is personally friendly with all the other senators he works with, which included Sessions. (For example he talks about Sessions' wife knitting a thing for Franken's grandkid, and mentions warning Sessions before the confirmation hearing that he was going to ask tough questions.) For all his many qualities, Franken seems firmly in the "august body" mindset. I couldn't be friends with somebody as racist and destructive as Jeff Sessions, but maybe that's one reason I'm not a senator.
+5
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I didn't realize the President could fire a special prosecutor.
I honestly thought that was the point; you bring in an outsider who can't be fucked with.
He can't 'fire' them.
He can ask the AG (or, in this case, due to Session's 'recusal' the Deputy AG) to fire him. He can then fire them and keep firing people until someone does it.
He can also issue an Executive Order repealing the DOJ rules which make a Special Counsel a thing which exists. They are not codified in law, they're just rules created by/for the DOJ. So he can make the position 'special counsel' cease to exist, effectively firing Mueller. That would not stop Congress from setting up an independent commission to investigate. The fact that the GOP hold both houses of Congress would stop that, though.
Edit:
Also, I wish Al Franken would be a little more hard-assed. Just watched him do an interview on Lawrence O'Donnel (which I'm only watching because Maddow said Franken would be on - O'Donnel is a little too 'liberal echo chamber' for me, which I feel like is saying something) and while he hit the expected talking points I feel like he really kid-gloves'd Sessions behavior today. Though I understand him wanting to get Sessions to appear before a committee he's actually on.
Franken talked on I think the Daily Show about how he is personally friendly with all the other senators he works with, which included Sessions. (For example he talks about Sessions' wife knitting a thing for Franken's grandkid, and mentions warning Sessions before the confirmation hearing that he was going to ask tough questions.) For all his many qualities, Franken seems firmly in the "august body" mindset. I couldn't be friends with somebody as racist and destructive as Jeff Sessions, but maybe that's one reason I'm not a senator.
Having been in the television industry, especially as an actor, Franken probably knows how to work with people that are assholes or awful in some way (e.g., Chevy Chase)
I didn't realize the President could fire a special prosecutor.
I honestly thought that was the point; you bring in an outsider who can't be fucked with.
He can't 'fire' them.
He can ask the AG (or, in this case, due to Session's 'recusal' the Deputy AG) to fire him. He can then fire them and keep firing people until someone does it.
He can also issue an Executive Order repealing the DOJ rules which make a Special Counsel a thing which exists. They are not codified in law, they're just rules created by/for the DOJ. So he can make the position 'special counsel' cease to exist, effectively firing Mueller. That would not stop Congress from setting up an independent commission to investigate. The fact that the GOP hold both houses of Congress would stop that, though.
Edit:
Also, I wish Al Franken would be a little more hard-assed. Just watched him do an interview on Lawrence O'Donnel (which I'm only watching because Maddow said Franken would be on - O'Donnel is a little too 'liberal echo chamber' for me, which I feel like is saying something) and while he hit the expected talking points I feel like he really kid-gloves'd Sessions behavior today. Though I understand him wanting to get Sessions to appear before a committee he's actually on.
Franken talked on I think the Daily Show about how he is personally friendly with all the other senators he works with, which included Sessions. (For example he talks about Sessions' wife knitting a thing for Franken's grandkid, and mentions warning Sessions before the confirmation hearing that he was going to ask tough questions.) For all his many qualities, Franken seems firmly in the "august body" mindset. I couldn't be friends with somebody as racist and destructive as Jeff Sessions, but maybe that's one reason I'm not a senator.
Having worked with many an asshole racist, it can sometimes be easy to forget that they are awful people, especially when you aren't one of their targeted groups
I didn't realize the President could fire a special prosecutor.
I honestly thought that was the point; you bring in an outsider who can't be fucked with.
He can't 'fire' them.
He can ask the AG (or, in this case, due to Session's 'recusal' the Deputy AG) to fire him. He can then fire them and keep firing people until someone does it.
He can also issue an Executive Order repealing the DOJ rules which make a Special Counsel a thing which exists. They are not codified in law, they're just rules created by/for the DOJ. So he can make the position 'special counsel' cease to exist, effectively firing Mueller. That would not stop Congress from setting up an independent commission to investigate. The fact that the GOP hold both houses of Congress would stop that, though.
Edit:
Also, I wish Al Franken would be a little more hard-assed. Just watched him do an interview on Lawrence O'Donnel (which I'm only watching because Maddow said Franken would be on - O'Donnel is a little too 'liberal echo chamber' for me, which I feel like is saying something) and while he hit the expected talking points I feel like he really kid-gloves'd Sessions behavior today. Though I understand him wanting to get Sessions to appear before a committee he's actually on.
Franken talked on I think the Daily Show about how he is personally friendly with all the other senators he works with, which included Sessions. (For example he talks about Sessions' wife knitting a thing for Franken's grandkid, and mentions warning Sessions before the confirmation hearing that he was going to ask tough questions.) For all his many qualities, Franken seems firmly in the "august body" mindset. I couldn't be friends with somebody as racist and destructive as Jeff Sessions, but maybe that's one reason I'm not a senator.
I saw that section on the Daily Show and I understand where he's coming from. You have to get along with the people you have to work with...
In general.
This feels like an exceptional case. Sessions isn't a Senator anymore and as hyperbolic as it sounds I don't think it's actually hyperbolic to say that our entire system of government is under seige. Trump especially and the entire GOP to a lesser - but still significant - degree are doing things which are actively destructive to our nation and our form of governance. If ever there was a time to go beyond "getting along with the guys with whom you have to work", this is it.
I think we've clearly entered a new phase of the Trump presidency. The old pattern that has been commented about (paraphrasing because I really don't want to risk a google for the original wording):
1. Reports are coming out that Trump has shat himself
2. Trump's underlings: "That's ridiculous, there's no way that Trump would shit himself"
3. Trump: "I SHAT MYSELF ON PURPOSE!"
Step 2 has changed. Now step 2 is "I believe it would be inappropriate to discuss the topic of shitting oneself."
I didn't realize the President could fire a special prosecutor.
I honestly thought that was the point; you bring in an outsider who can't be fucked with.
He can't 'fire' them.
He can ask the AG (or, in this case, due to Session's 'recusal' the Deputy AG) to fire him. He can then fire them and keep firing people until someone does it.
He can also issue an Executive Order repealing the DOJ rules which make a Special Counsel a thing which exists. They are not codified in law, they're just rules created by/for the DOJ. So he can make the position 'special counsel' cease to exist, effectively firing Mueller. That would not stop Congress from setting up an independent commission to investigate. The fact that the GOP hold both houses of Congress would stop that, though.
Edit:
Also, I wish Al Franken would be a little more hard-assed. Just watched him do an interview on Lawrence O'Donnel (which I'm only watching because Maddow said Franken would be on - O'Donnel is a little too 'liberal echo chamber' for me, which I feel like is saying something) and while he hit the expected talking points I feel like he really kid-gloves'd Sessions behavior today. Though I understand him wanting to get Sessions to appear before a committee he's actually on.
Franken talked on I think the Daily Show about how he is personally friendly with all the other senators he works with, which included Sessions. (For example he talks about Sessions' wife knitting a thing for Franken's grandkid, and mentions warning Sessions before the confirmation hearing that he was going to ask tough questions.) For all his many qualities, Franken seems firmly in the "august body" mindset. I couldn't be friends with somebody as racist and destructive as Jeff Sessions, but maybe that's one reason I'm not a senator.
Counterpoint to that though, Franken was also recently on Marc Maron's podcast and was much more emphatic about how shitty a lot of modern Republicans are, and specifically called out Sessions more than once as being all-around awful. He did mention that he has to work with these people, but took a much harder "I am not friends with these people and they are fucking things up for everyone" stance talking with Marc. Like, Marc specifically mentioned that Daily Show comment and Franken wasn't shy about clarifying that it didn't mean they were actually buddy-buddy.
So Josh Marshall is both smart and is a person who Knows Things. As we know, he was a major driver of the initial version of this story last summer. Got from him to Maddow and kinda took on a life of its own. He's been skeptical of the most serious possible variations for a long time. He's starting to bring up the worst possible scenario over the last week, where he previously hasn't even contemplated it as an outside chance. Namely that Trump is not a useful idiot, it wasn't just Flynn or Kushner, but that Trump himself actively colluded with the Russians. It reads like he's still skeptical about it, but he's talking about it now. I find this ominous.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I think we've clearly entered a new phase of the Trump presidency. The old pattern that has been commented about (paraphrasing because I really don't want to risk a google for the original wording):
1. Reports are coming out that Trump has shat himself
2. Trump's underlings: "That's ridiculous, there's no way that Trump would shit himself"
3. Trump: "I SHAT MYSELF ON PURPOSE!"
Step 2 has changed. Now step 2 is "I believe it would be inappropriate to discuss the topic of shitting oneself."
That's...something?
The President is too inexperienced to not shit himself.
+7
Options
BlackDragon480Bluster KerfuffleMaster of Windy ImportRegistered Userregular
I think we've clearly entered a new phase of the Trump presidency. The old pattern that has been commented about (paraphrasing because I really don't want to risk a google for the original wording):
1. Reports are coming out that Trump has shat himself
2. Trump's underlings: "That's ridiculous, there's no way that Trump would shit himself"
3. Trump: "I SHAT MYSELF ON PURPOSE!"
Step 2 has changed. Now step 2 is "I believe it would be inappropriate to discuss the topic of shitting oneself."
That's...something?
The President is too inexperienced to not shit himself.
"And I say unto you, Encopresis now, Encopresis tomorrow, Encopresis forever!"
No matter where you go...there you are. ~ Buckaroo Banzai
I think we've clearly entered a new phase of the Trump presidency. The old pattern that has been commented about (paraphrasing because I really don't want to risk a google for the original wording):
1. Reports are coming out that Trump has shat himself
2. Trump's underlings: "That's ridiculous, there's no way that Trump would shit himself"
3. Trump: "I SHAT MYSELF ON PURPOSE!"
Step 2 has changed. Now step 2 is "I believe it would be inappropriate to discuss the topic of shitting oneself."
That's...something?
The President is too inexperienced to not shit himself.
Look, the President... he's new to big boy pants. He's not steeped in the...in the 'going to the little boys' room' policies.
PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
+16
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
So Josh Marshall is both smart and is a person who Knows Things. As we know, he was a major driver of the initial version of this story last summer. Got from him to Maddow and kinda took on a life of its own. He's been skeptical of the most serious possible variations for a long time. He's starting to bring up the worst possible scenario over the last week, where he previously hasn't even contemplated it as an outside chance. Namely that Trump is not a useful idiot, it wasn't just Flynn or Kushner, but that Trump himself actively colluded with the Russians. It reads like he's still skeptical about it, but he's talking about it now. I find this ominous.
There's something Very Serious Person about deciding some level of depravity here to be beyond the realm of possibility. Maybe it's more convincing for Josh Marshall's readers that he'll have carefully played the skeptic by the time he arrives at the bottom of those penrose stairs, but the rest of us walked to the end of that circle a lot faster. Marshall's point that a less extreme scenario covers the facts as we know them is a useful one, but that doesn't mean that the more extreme version is actually less likely.
The fact remains that we all saw Trump collude with the Russians on TV when he asked them to hack Hillary, just as we all saw him admit to obstructing justice in firing Comey on TV. We know these things happened, and nothing is going to change that (or act on it) until the midterms. People want to uncover this conspiracy that isn't even covered up, because admitting the truth of blatant injustice is more depressing than forever trying to solve this My First Jugsaw puzzle, 4 pieces, one missing. Hint: it's a snake. It says so right on the goddamn box.
That's not collusion, that's being an asshole on TV. Collusion is say giving Russians internal polling information in order to better effect an actual theft of the election. Promising an end to the sanctions for Russian assistance during the election that kind of thing.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I think the point is that it's an obvious Freudian slip that should've made everybody sit up and take notice. And lo and behold, people on his staff have connections to Russia.
Twenty Sided on
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
The point is that, so long as none of knows the truth, you're outsmarting yourself to judge that the most obvious answer is the least likely possibility.
I'm not sure what the GOP strategy here is.
If Mueller is allowed to do his job, Trump and/or his campaign (including Sessions) will almost certainly be found guilty of something, and they know it.
If Mueller is gotten rid of, there may be a huge outrage and political consequences and they have to either distance themselves from Trump, or protect him.
In either case, wouldn't it be best to get over it as soon as possible?
Either get rid of Mueller, now, or turn on Trump, now.
Whichever you do, you will have more time to deal with the aftermath before next election.
The problem with getting rid of Trump is a complete nutbar white supremacist came within 5000 votes of becoming the Republican candidate for Governor in Virginia, a purple leaning blue state tonight. That's what they're afraid of.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I think we've clearly entered a new phase of the Trump presidency. The old pattern that has been commented about (paraphrasing because I really don't want to risk a google for the original wording):
1. Reports are coming out that Trump has shat himself
2. Trump's underlings: "That's ridiculous, there's no way that Trump would shit himself"
3. Trump: "I SHAT MYSELF ON PURPOSE!"
Step 2 has changed. Now step 2 is "I believe it would be inappropriate to discuss the topic of shitting oneself."
That's...something?
Actually I think that becomes step 4, because the original #2 (tee hee) still happens.
I'm not sure what the GOP strategy here is.
If Mueller is allowed to do his job, Trump and/or his campaign (including Sessions) will almost certainly be found guilty of something, and they know it.
If Mueller is gotten rid of, there may be a huge outrage and political consequences and they have to either distance themselves from Trump, or protect him.
In either case, wouldn't it be best to get over it as soon as possible?
Either get rid of Mueller, now, or turn on Trump, now.
Whichever you do, you will have more time to deal with the aftermath before next election.
The problem is it isn't exactly clear who goes down with Trump. There's been an effort to protect the Vice President as much as possible but he's already caught in the quick sand of all this. The Republicans are in "rescue even Trump" in the off chance that other cabinet members and possibly even the VP end up answering for all this.
And the reason why they want to protect the VP is because next in succession is Paul Ryan, who NOBODY has any respect for and he's hardly a strong personality. He shouldn't even be Speaker of the House. The difference is, between him and the current administration, he's spineless and laughable.
I'm not sure what the GOP strategy here is.
If Mueller is allowed to do his job, Trump and/or his campaign (including Sessions) will almost certainly be found guilty of something, and they know it.
If Mueller is gotten rid of, there may be a huge outrage and political consequences and they have to either distance themselves from Trump, or protect him.
In either case, wouldn't it be best to get over it as soon as possible?
Either get rid of Mueller, now, or turn on Trump, now.
Whichever you do, you will have more time to deal with the aftermath before next election.
The problem is it isn't exactly clear who goes down with Trump. There's been an effort to protect the Vice President as much as possible but he's already caught in the quick sand of all this. The Republicans are in "rescue even Trump" in the off chance that other cabinet members and possibly even the VP end up answering for all this.
And the reason why they want to protect the VP is because next in succession is Paul Ryan, who NOBODY has any respect for and he's hardly a strong personality. He shouldn't even be Speaker of the House. The difference is, between him and the current administration, he's spineless and laughable.
Which leaves them the option of getting rid of Mueller and stopping the investigation.
Maybe they are hoping Fox can taint Muellers and the investigations image first before doing it, but waiting makes it more likely something comes out (and if/when investigation is stopped, gets leaked).
Nyysjan on
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
I'm not sure what the GOP strategy here is.
If Mueller is allowed to do his job, Trump and/or his campaign (including Sessions) will almost certainly be found guilty of something, and they know it.
If Mueller is gotten rid of, there may be a huge outrage and political consequences and they have to either distance themselves from Trump, or protect him.
In either case, wouldn't it be best to get over it as soon as possible?
Either get rid of Mueller, now, or turn on Trump, now.
Whichever you do, you will have more time to deal with the aftermath before next election.
The problem is it isn't exactly clear who goes down with Trump. There's been an effort to protect the Vice President as much as possible but he's already caught in the quick sand of all this. The Republicans are in "rescue even Trump" in the off chance that other cabinet members and possibly even the VP end up answering for all this.
And the reason why they want to protect the VP is because next in succession is Paul Ryan, who NOBODY has any respect for and he's hardly a strong personality. He shouldn't even be Speaker of the House. The difference is, between him and the current administration, he's spineless and laughable.
Which leaves them the option of getting rid of Mueller and stopping the investigation.
Maybe they are hoping Fox can taint Muellers and the investigations image first before doing it, but waiting makes it more likely something comes out (and if/when investigation is stopped, gets leaked).
I think their plan, if they have one, is to just try and get as much done and hope that nothing comes out of the investigation anytime soon. All they've got is bad choices, but one is bad now and the other is bad in the future.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
I'm not sure what the GOP strategy here is.
If Mueller is allowed to do his job, Trump and/or his campaign (including Sessions) will almost certainly be found guilty of something, and they know it.
If Mueller is gotten rid of, there may be a huge outrage and political consequences and they have to either distance themselves from Trump, or protect him.
In either case, wouldn't it be best to get over it as soon as possible?
Either get rid of Mueller, now, or turn on Trump, now.
Whichever you do, you will have more time to deal with the aftermath before next election.
The problem is it isn't exactly clear who goes down with Trump. There's been an effort to protect the Vice President as much as possible but he's already caught in the quick sand of all this. The Republicans are in "rescue even Trump" in the off chance that other cabinet members and possibly even the VP end up answering for all this.
And the reason why they want to protect the VP is because next in succession is Paul Ryan, who NOBODY has any respect for and he's hardly a strong personality. He shouldn't even be Speaker of the House. The difference is, between him and the current administration, he's spineless and laughable.
Which leaves them the option of getting rid of Mueller and stopping the investigation.
Maybe they are hoping Fox can taint Muellers and the investigations image first before doing it, but waiting makes it more likely something comes out (and if/when investigation is stopped, gets leaked).
I think their plan, if they have one, is to just try and get as much done and hope that nothing comes out of the investigation anytime soon. All they've got is bad choices, but one is bad now and the other is bad in the future.
And both are getting worse as time goes on.
That said, i guess there probably is no actual agreement which way to go, and trying to do both would be worse than either.
Posts
No, no, no. Cotton's bold strategy was asking if Sessions liked Bond movies.
The president does it, his appointees do it, let's see if anyone cares about his lawyers doing it.
I hear a tumbleweed blowing across from Washington.
Call me when a single republican, even one, says it.
It's still a big deal that Democrats are pushing this angle.
Pleased, but he's going to be surprised when the reaction he gets from Mueller is nothing.
https://nyti.ms/2tjN8ba
That just sounds like more attempts at obstruction of justice to me. Informally at the very least.
As usual, Trump is a manipulative weasel who's incapable of grasping that not everyone else is a weasel.
Yeah, if you go from this statement Trump will be pleased if Mueller clears him. But if he doesn't, and Trump fires him you can draw a direct line from one to the other and it looks like blatant obstruction.
This is gonna turn into one of those "Ivanka talked me out of it" stories isn't it
I honestly thought that was the point; you bring in an outsider who can't be fucked with.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
He can't 'fire' them.
He can ask the AG (or, in this case, due to Session's 'recusal' the Deputy AG) to fire him. He can then fire them and keep firing people until someone does it.
He can also issue an Executive Order repealing the DOJ rules which make a Special Counsel a thing which exists. They are not codified in law, they're just rules created by/for the DOJ. So he can make the position 'special counsel' cease to exist, effectively firing Mueller. That would not stop Congress from setting up an independent commission to investigate. The fact that the GOP hold both houses of Congress would stop that, though.
Edit:
Also, I wish Al Franken would be a little more hard-assed. Just watched him do an interview on Lawrence O'Donnel (which I'm only watching because Maddow said Franken would be on - O'Donnel is a little too 'liberal echo chamber' for me, which I feel like is saying something) and while he hit the expected talking points I feel like he really kid-gloves'd Sessions behavior today. Though I understand him wanting to get Sessions to appear before a committee he's actually on.
Not really as it is the angle anyone watching the proceedings, having a basic understanding of law, and having any fuckin sense would be taking
Not true. It may be obvious but that doesn't mean you necessarily actually say it. The fact that they are outright stating it is an aggressive move on their part.
The argument that it doesn't matter if only democrats say it is far too close to it doesn't matter if anybody says it. It's a silly, silly argument.
Lady don't take no shit.
Franken talked on I think the Daily Show about how he is personally friendly with all the other senators he works with, which included Sessions. (For example he talks about Sessions' wife knitting a thing for Franken's grandkid, and mentions warning Sessions before the confirmation hearing that he was going to ask tough questions.) For all his many qualities, Franken seems firmly in the "august body" mindset. I couldn't be friends with somebody as racist and destructive as Jeff Sessions, but maybe that's one reason I'm not a senator.
Having been in the television industry, especially as an actor, Franken probably knows how to work with people that are assholes or awful in some way (e.g., Chevy Chase)
Having worked with many an asshole racist, it can sometimes be easy to forget that they are awful people, especially when you aren't one of their targeted groups
I saw that section on the Daily Show and I understand where he's coming from. You have to get along with the people you have to work with...
In general.
This feels like an exceptional case. Sessions isn't a Senator anymore and as hyperbolic as it sounds I don't think it's actually hyperbolic to say that our entire system of government is under seige. Trump especially and the entire GOP to a lesser - but still significant - degree are doing things which are actively destructive to our nation and our form of governance. If ever there was a time to go beyond "getting along with the guys with whom you have to work", this is it.
1. Reports are coming out that Trump has shat himself
2. Trump's underlings: "That's ridiculous, there's no way that Trump would shit himself"
3. Trump: "I SHAT MYSELF ON PURPOSE!"
Step 2 has changed. Now step 2 is "I believe it would be inappropriate to discuss the topic of shitting oneself."
That's...something?
Counterpoint to that though, Franken was also recently on Marc Maron's podcast and was much more emphatic about how shitty a lot of modern Republicans are, and specifically called out Sessions more than once as being all-around awful. He did mention that he has to work with these people, but took a much harder "I am not friends with these people and they are fucking things up for everyone" stance talking with Marc. Like, Marc specifically mentioned that Daily Show comment and Franken wasn't shy about clarifying that it didn't mean they were actually buddy-buddy.
Let's hope Mueller has a special birthday surprise for him. Not that I expect such a thing to happen, but let's hope.
The President is too inexperienced to not shit himself.
"And I say unto you, Encopresis now, Encopresis tomorrow, Encopresis forever!"
~ Buckaroo Banzai
Look, the President... he's new to big boy pants. He's not steeped in the...in the 'going to the little boys' room' policies.
There's something Very Serious Person about deciding some level of depravity here to be beyond the realm of possibility. Maybe it's more convincing for Josh Marshall's readers that he'll have carefully played the skeptic by the time he arrives at the bottom of those penrose stairs, but the rest of us walked to the end of that circle a lot faster. Marshall's point that a less extreme scenario covers the facts as we know them is a useful one, but that doesn't mean that the more extreme version is actually less likely.
The fact remains that we all saw Trump collude with the Russians on TV when he asked them to hack Hillary, just as we all saw him admit to obstructing justice in firing Comey on TV. We know these things happened, and nothing is going to change that (or act on it) until the midterms. People want to uncover this conspiracy that isn't even covered up, because admitting the truth of blatant injustice is more depressing than forever trying to solve this My First Jugsaw puzzle, 4 pieces, one missing. Hint: it's a snake. It says so right on the goddamn box.
If Mueller is allowed to do his job, Trump and/or his campaign (including Sessions) will almost certainly be found guilty of something, and they know it.
If Mueller is gotten rid of, there may be a huge outrage and political consequences and they have to either distance themselves from Trump, or protect him.
In either case, wouldn't it be best to get over it as soon as possible?
Either get rid of Mueller, now, or turn on Trump, now.
Whichever you do, you will have more time to deal with the aftermath before next election.
If they let the investigation go on, both outcomes become worse.
Letting investigations go on, while protecting Trump, is the worst option to pick.
If you can't turn on Trump, you have to stop the investigation.
And the reason why they want to protect the VP is because next in succession is Paul Ryan, who NOBODY has any respect for and he's hardly a strong personality. He shouldn't even be Speaker of the House. The difference is, between him and the current administration, he's spineless and laughable.
Maybe they are hoping Fox can taint Muellers and the investigations image first before doing it, but waiting makes it more likely something comes out (and if/when investigation is stopped, gets leaked).
I think their plan, if they have one, is to just try and get as much done and hope that nothing comes out of the investigation anytime soon. All they've got is bad choices, but one is bad now and the other is bad in the future.
That said, i guess there probably is no actual agreement which way to go, and trying to do both would be worse than either.
They are really going to be doing this?