Purgatory: Oops - your Trump presidency discussion thread.

14546485051168

Comments

  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    edited October 2018
    romanlion wrote: »

    :lol: :lol:

    OK, let me put this to you: Why should he be confirmed?

    AFZ

    Well, the short answer is that I haven't seen any reason he shouldn't be.

    That answer lacks credibility from someone who claimed Senate confirmation of Merrick Garland would literally destroy America. See also.
    romanlion wrote: »
    The temperament complaints don't really do it for me either because assuming he is innocent (novel concept to be sure) I think he was well within an expected range of emotion during his response to the committee.

    It should be remembered that Kavanaugh's threats of vengeance ("what goes around comes around") and his conspiracy theorizing come from his prepared remarks, not spontaneous outbursts.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    romanlion wrote: »
    Ohher wrote: »

    Do you regard "I'm not aware of the incident, but I believe Dr. Blasey" as a refutation?

    I regard it as idiotic.

    "Yeah I know she said I was there, but I can't remember anything about it. I'm sure she's right though!"

    How about his answering a question about agreeing to an FBI investigation with, "Senator, I went to Yale . . ." followed by a reiteration of items from his resume without ever responding to the simple yes-no question? This doesn't raise a red flag, or suggest a sense of entitlement?

    I actually wasn't looking for anyone in that room without a sense of entitlement, since there were none.

    He also ignored the extremely relevant "Do you believe Anita Hill?!"

    Is this the new justification for opposing his nomination?

    So would you hire this guy to work for you in a responsible position, despite numerous folks coming forward to say he's lying about activities in high school and college, despite an admitted-to history of drinking (which was clearly pretty heavy) and which continues into the present ("I still like beer")?
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    It matters no longer what we think. Susan Collins is making up her mind right now. Manchin is a lost cause.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    I'll wait until the actual vote, in hope of John McCain's ghost returning to the Senate floor tomorrow morning for a thumbs down. Hope Collins has her retirement plans lined up.
  • I hope to shit that when the time comes for Susan Collins to announce that she's running for something bigger (because what the hell else could all this eternal public posturing be about?), the American people will remember that every time she's had a chance to do something, she's done...nothing.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    Susan Collins will vote for Kavanaugh. She gave Kavanaugh the benefit of the doubt re the accusation of Christine Blasey Ford, but was convinced by her sincerity. Everything else she said in her long address was much less significant than that.
  • Now that I think about that, she has done something. Raise people's expectations and then dash them.
  • anoesis wrote: »
    I hope to shit that when the time comes for Susan Collins to announce that she's running for something bigger (because what the hell else could all this eternal public posturing be about?), . . .

    Susan Collins already ran for Governor of Maine. She finished third, which is pretty unimpressive for a major party nominee.
  • And does she have Parkinson's? She'll need Medicare in retirement. (Pre-existing condition, anyone?)
  • romanlion wrote: »
    I think he was well within an expected range of emotion during his response to the committee.
    Expected range of emotion possibly. However that is no excuse whatsoever for constantly deflecting questions - I listened to a substantial chunk of his part of the hearing and I was shocked to see a sitting judge, let alone a future Supreme Court nominee, duck and weave in response to questioning under oath.

    The fact that the GOP want to press on in the face of that behaviour, aside from the truth or otherwise of the allegations, is the really depressing part of this farce as far as I'm concerned.
  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    One of the things I don't understand is why the appointments are for life. Kavanaugh is only in his early 50s - he could be pushing his far-right agenda for another 35 years.

    (Where's that "eek" smilie when I need it?)
  • Piglet wrote: »
    One of the things I don't understand is why the appointments are for life.

    The original idea was to preserve the independence of the Judiciary. If a judge can be fired, or has to worry about having his job renewed, whoever holds the power to do so would, theoretically, have undue influence over judicial decisions.
  • romanlion wrote: »
    But he [Trump] didn't really mock her did he?

    Here's the video of Trump not mocking Dr Ford.... To suggest that isn't mockery is deeply disingenuous as best.

    What is really concerning to me is the arguments used against Ford are so ignorant. She might not be telling the truth and she might be mistaken. None of us were there and hence we cannot know for sure. However those that have argued this have done so on the basis of hunches or suppositions that are completely wrong about sexual assault survivors. That is how you build a culture of silence where it is impossible for victims to be heard and you give prospective abusers absolute freedom and zero accountability.

    But here's my guilty secret: There is a part of me that doesn't believe Dr Ford's account. Not because I think she's lying. Not because I think she's mistaken but because I don't want to believe her. When she described how the boys were laughing as she was trapped, I didn't want to believe her. You see, I don't want to believe people behave like that. I don't want to look at the horror of that kind of cruelty. But people do. This is one of the big problems with stories of sexual assault - we don't want to believe. This is perfectly natural. It is deeply shocking how common violence against women is. It is a horrible thing to face up to. Most of us do not want to face it. So we make ourselves feel more comfortable by pretending that it’s not that bad and/or it’s not that common. What Christine Ford described is attempted rape. That’s a serious sexual assault. You see this is cowardice on my part. The very least any decent person owes to victims of assault is the courage to honestly face the fact that such things happen and that if anyone is telling you such a story, it almost certainly happened to them. (I have been in that position many times). The courage to honestly face this difficult reality is so much less than the courage it takes for victims to speak up. As I said, it’s just a part of me, but it is a part I have to fight against.

    I will tell you what’s more cowardly though and that’s the behaviour of the GOP members of the committee. Knowing that they couldn’t attack her directly, they avoided doing so in the committee hearing – they knew how bad it would look. That hasn’t stopped them doing it behind her back.

    Kavanagh is of course entitled to be considered innocent until proven guilty - no one's saying he should be locked up – although apparently it’s ok to call for Dr Ford to be locked up without any evidence… But that’s to miss the point; such an accusation should be taken seriously by the Senate and it is a desperately bad situation when it’s not. From start-to-finish the committee has sought to bury the accusations – remember it’s more than one – and avoid proper investigation. Presumption of innocence only applies to criminal cases anyway. If you’re talking about privileged positions like working with vulnerable groups, an accusation that does not meet the threshold for conviction could still disqualify you from such a job. This is true is my line of work, but apparently if it’s the SCOTUS and you have the right politics, then you don’t even have to worry about such claims being investigated.

    However, even if he is innocent, he almost-certainly perjured* himself in the committee. His answers about the Yearbook were false. As has been pointed out elsewhere his answers as to what certain comments meant were either very surprising or deliberately misleading. Not to mention his evasive answers and aggression around his drinking habits which were potentially inaccurate as well.

    The issue is bigger than Ford or Kavanagh: the indecent haste to ensure he is appointed risks tainting the Supreme Court for decades. The greatest irony of all is that the ones doing it are the same who claim to worship the Constitution.

    AFZ

    P.S. I recently learned that during his work for Kenneth Star, 20 years ago, Kavanagh was hugely partisan and out to get Bill Clinton, so his assault on the Clintons in his (oh so calm and reasonable) statement was entirely in character.

    *Perjury is essentially defined as knowingly giving an untruthful or misleading answer relating to a material matter. (The exact wording of the statutes is more complex but the essence is clear. if what you say is true, it’s not perjury. If you clearly believe it to be true, it’s not perjury. If it’s not material to the case, it’s not perjury.
  • romanlionromanlion Shipmate
    edited October 2018

    Here's the video of Trump not mocking Dr Ford.... To suggest that isn't mockery is deeply disingenuous as best.

    Just to be clear...are you opposed to the Kavanaugh nomination, or Trump?

  • When I'm in California in November do you think I'll be able to find a bumper sticker that says, "I believe in conspiracy theories and I vote".

    paid hysterics indeed...
  • romanlion wrote: »
    Just to be clear...are you opposed to the Kavanaugh nomination, or Trump?
    From where I'm sitting, both Kavanaugh and Trump are worth opposing because of the lack of respect either have for the institutions they represent and because of the long-term damage I fear that will do those institutions.
  • BoogieBoogie Heaven Host
    I’ve been thinking to myself “Why do I care?” This decision doesn’t affect me in any way. US law doesn’t touch my life.

    But I do care, very deeply. My heart has sunk at this news and I can’t shake the feeling off.

    I feel for young Americans, I feel for all Americans - even those screaming their support for him in a rally, as if at a football match. How did they get to this point? How did they become so totally blinkered?

    Politics - the processes by which the essential matters of life are decided - has become reality TV crossed with celebrity wrestling, the baying crowd shouting for their ‘favourite’.

    Humanity is lessened by all this.
  • And for those thinking that Trump/Kavanaugh was a big discontinuity Bush made calls reassuring Collins about Kavanaugh.

    The purpose of a system is what it does.
  • Boogie wrote: »
    I’ve been thinking to myself “Why do I care?” This decision doesn’t affect me in any way. US law doesn’t touch my life.

    But I do care, very deeply. My heart has sunk at this news and I can’t shake the feeling off.

    I feel for young Americans, I feel for all Americans - even those screaming their support for him in a rally, as if at a football match. How did they get to this point? How did they become so totally blinkered?

    Politics - the processes by which the essential matters of life are decided - has become reality TV crossed with celebrity wrestling, the baying crowd shouting for their ‘favourite’.

    Humanity is lessened by all this.

    Totally. Totally. I am so sad myself. America, trying so hard to 'make itself great again', in the process obliterating what little was left of what was actually great. I know, I do know, that the American Dream was nothing more than a dream for most people, that a foundational myth is just that, a myth - but a myth is not a falsehood, so much as a vehicle for conveying ideas/ideals, rather than truths. And the ideal, the idea, that the rest of the world has bought, along with America, is that here 'every man makes his own life'. That it's your merit that matters, not your credit. That what you do defines you, not what you were born, or who you know. My bloody eye it does. The upper echelons look after their own, come what may, pull whatever levers are necessary. Clearly, there exists, in the United States, as well, a privileged sphere, where one can sail through life without ever facing the inconvenience of such a thing as a consequence.

    Congratulations, America. You're just like everywhere else.
  • romanlion wrote: »

    Here's the video of Trump not mocking Dr Ford.... To suggest that isn't mockery is deeply disingenuous as best.

    Just to be clear...are you opposed to the Kavanaugh nomination, or Trump?

    What a strange question. I am opposed to injustice. I am opposed to the rushed confirmation of a man who has had credible accusations made against him that have not been investigated. I am opposed to the confirmation of a man who lied under oath in his confirmation hearings. I am opposed to the confirmation of a man who is clearly temperamentally unsuited and unbelievably partisan.

    You see, as I said, this is much bigger than Kavanaugh himself. This tainted process undermines the SCOTUS and thus the rule of law.

    And Trump himself is a prize arsehole; there is apparently no one he won't mock when playing to a crowd; the disabled, the bereaved, the abused...

    Frankly, as a republican friend of mine put it; if you're not opposed to Trump, then there's something wrong with you.

    AFZ
  • If you're not opposed to Trump, then there's something wrong with you.

    Should be displayed on every billboard, on banners towed behind airplanes, on the crawl of every TV show that has a crawl (and even those that don't), on the logo of every company that has a logo, etc. etc.
  • If you're not opposed to Trump, then there's something wrong with you.

    Should be displayed on every billboard, on banners towed behind airplanes, on the crawl of every TV show that has a crawl (and even those that don't), on the logo of every company that has a logo, etc. etc.

    Sure, as long as we acknowledge that, cathartic as it might be to see such announcements, no one currently supporting Trump is going to change their mind because Trump-haters tell them there's something amiss about their character.

  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    romanlion wrote: »

    Here's the video of Trump not mocking Dr Ford.... To suggest that isn't mockery is deeply disingenuous as best.

    Just to be clear...are you opposed to the Kavanaugh nomination, or Trump?

    I'm not a US citizen so my opinion about Kavanaugh is that of an interested outsider. If I had been a Senator I would have voted no, for reasons already given.

    As a citizen of the world I think President Trump is a dangerous destabilising force. That's why I'm opposed to him.
  • This has been a most entertaining episode, almost sad to see it end. Should the vote hold you have to admit it's a pretty remarkable victory for Trump. Hard to imagine any other GOP POTUS having had the stomach for it.

    I wonder if RBG wears a fitbit...
  • An amazing clusterfuck really, but it'll be a long time before I forget Kavanaugh's snarling and snivelling face. His Master's Voice, really.
  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    Boogie wrote: »
    I’ve been thinking to myself “Why do I care?” This decision doesn’t affect me in any way. US law doesn’t touch my life.

    But I do care, very deeply. My heart has sunk at this news and I can’t shake the feeling off.

    I feel for young Americans, I feel for all Americans - even those screaming their support for him in a rally, as if at a football match. How did they get to this point? How did they become so totally blinkered?

    Politics - the processes by which the essential matters of life are decided - has become reality TV crossed with celebrity wrestling, the baying crowd shouting for their ‘favourite’.

    Humanity is lessened by all this.
    Well said, Boogie.

    It's at times like these that we need the "notworthy" icon back. :)
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    It is a remarkable victory for President Trump personally and it may indeed have energised the GOP base for the midterms. It will certainly have energised even further Democratic or Democratic-leaning women voters.
  • As far as The Economist is concerned the question is whether it's energised more blue-collar men than their wives.
  • I'm not sure it is that remarkable. GOP-majority Senate confirms Republican President's nominee, News at 11... It seems to me that the many of the GOP senators have been as enthusiastic about Kavanagh as Trump. Whether they actually believe in Kavanagh or are scared of Trump's cult probably varies between individuals but there is a whole chunk of Republicanism that accept Trump whatever the hell he does or says because they get their judges and tax cuts.

    AFZ



  • romanlion wrote: »

    ...
    Is this the new justification for opposing his nomination?

    Although there is much to choose from, my biggest objection to Kavanagh is his opinion that a sitting President has no obligation to cooperate with law enforcement - cannot be indicted / charged, cannot be subpoenaed, cannot be interviewed by any agency or institution. Kavanagh's argument is that this would interfere with the President's exercise of his/her office. My response is that is why the USA has a Vice-President and is one of the potential issues addressed by the 25th Amendment; Kavanagh just blows away the whole notion of equality before the law - which is supposedly one of the founding values of the USA - and the only logical reason he presents is that the President's calendar is already full. That Kavanagh can stand up and say that and not lose his job as a federal judge, but actually be promoted, is a fucking national disgrace.


    roman lion, do you think the President is above the law? Do you think the President shouldn't be bothered by trivial matters like a criminal investigation? Do you think Donald Trump should be able to shoot someone on 5th Avenue with no consequences? That sounds more like a king than an elected representative to me. Y'all might as well start tearing the Constitution into little squares for toilet paper and designing a crown for King Donald.


    And before you reply "innocent until proven guilty", the issue is not whether the President is guilty of a crime; the issue is whether s/he should be doing the job while a crime is being investigated. If a federal employee would be suspended with or without pay in a similar situation, why would the President be any different?


  • Chris Van Hollen was pretty good in the Senate just now.
  • RuthRuth Shipmate
    Boogie wrote: »
    I’ve been thinking to myself “Why do I care?” This decision doesn’t affect me in any way. US law doesn’t touch my life.

    But I do care, very deeply. My heart has sunk at this news and I can’t shake the feeling off.

    Right back atcha. I was on vacation with my family in Yosemite when I read the Brexit vote results and found myself choking back tears. Why do I care? I'll never live in Britain, and all the touristy bits I haven't seen yet will still be there next time I visit. But I do care. A Western democracy should not be discussing whether or not it will have enough food next year. It saddens me that the country that is the source of things I love - language, literature, Anglicanism - is doing itself damage that could take a generation or more to undo.

    And then of course I wonder how long it will take us in the US to undo the damage being done to our institutions.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    Periodically I check into the Brexit thread here, and then back out in utter dismay and bewilderment. I can hardly bear to see a country I visited only once, briefly, but which is the source of so much cultural wealth, so damaged. And then turn to see the wreckage that's been mounting at my back . . .

    Here's a prediction: there will be no elections in November of 2020. Don't ask me how or why or when: I just think the Republicans are going to do away with any possibility of losing their death-grip on us.
  • Fuck, Ohher. I cannot imagine the mindset one must be in to contemplate that. I'm crying.

    What Boogie, Ruth and you wrote. While it doesn't compare to living it, it is hard watching you all live through Trump, and Brexit, on the other side of the world. I know it can do jack shit, but my love and hope are with you.
  • I have to say that today I feel as if I am living in an alternative universe. Stop the world I want to get off, because this one is unreal and scary.
  • anoesis wrote: »

    Congratulations, America. You're just like everywhere else.

    Only better.

  • I’ve been thinking to myself “Why do I care?” This decision doesn’t affect me in any way. US law doesn’t touch my life.

    I recall isolationists in the United States making similar statements as Germany turned to the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

    If the Trump economic policies cause Wall Street to crash. You will certainly feel the pinch. Since he is trying to undermine previous EPA fuel economy rules and has pulled out of the Paris Accords, you will certainly feel the pinch.

    Likewise, if Brexit cannot be stopped, we Americans will feel the pinch.
  • Boogie wrote: »
    I’ve been thinking to myself “Why do I care?” This decision doesn’t affect me in any way. US law doesn’t touch my life.
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    I recall isolationists in the United States making similar statements as Germany turned to the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

    How old are you? :astonished:
  • Maybe the 49 is 1849! :wink:
  • Every Supreme Court needs a small angry man.

    AFZ
  • jedijudyjedijudy Heaven Host
    I hope RBG gives K the hairy eyeball.

    The vote for Kavanagh was no surprise. It was a huge punch to the gut and a betrayal of epic proportions. The FBI had their orders from the White House, I'm sure.

    Ohher, I've had nightmares about T becoming dictator for life.
  • Simon ToadSimon Toad Shipmate
    edited October 2018
    I have had nightmares about death squads in Argentina... see, I can't even speak it.

    But they are nightmares.
  • jedijudy wrote: »
    The FBI had their orders from the White House, I'm sure.

    From the New York Times:
    An exasperated President Trump picked up the phone to call the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, last Sunday. Tell the F.B.I. they can investigate anything, he told Mr. McGahn, because we need the critics to stop.

    Not so fast, Mr. McGahn said.

    Mr. McGahn, according to people familiar with the conversation, told the president that even though the White House was facing a storm of condemnation for limiting the F.B.I. background check into sexual misconduct allegations against Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, a wide-ranging inquiry like some Democrats were demanding — and Mr. Trump was suggesting — would be potentially disastrous for Judge Kavanaugh’s chances of confirmation to the Supreme Court.

    This has always been the "tell" for me. Both the White House and Senate Republicans have acted in ways that made sense only if they knew any serious investigation of Brett Kavanaugh would turn up some really ugly stuff. That's why the Judiciary Committee had no interest in questioning Mark Judge, or any of Kavanaugh's other accusers, or closely examining Kavanaugh's finances. The White House's opposition to a wider ranging FBI probe is of a piece with this, if anonymous "people familiar with the conversation" between Trump and McGahn are to be believed.
  • Simon Toad wrote: »
    I have had nightmares about death squads in Argentina... see, I can't even speak it.

    But they are nightmares.

    Leonard Cohen has a few words in Democracy (is Coming to the USA).

    "It's coming from the sorrow on the street
    The holy places where the races meet
    From the homicidal bitchin'
    That goes down in every kitchen
    To determine who will serve and who will eat
    From the wells of disappointment
    Where the women kneel to pray
    For the grace of God in the desert here
    And the desert far away
    Democracy is coming to the u.s.a"

    America's not better, it's not worse. It's just really good at media. I'm as guilty as anyone of paying excessive attention.
  • Cheers mate. That is a top-shelf dose of positivity. I love the swinging of the worry beads in the video. Does anyone know the artwork that features?
  • Crœsos wrote: »
    From the New York Times:
    An exasperated President Trump picked up the phone to call the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, last Sunday. Tell the F.B.I. they can investigate anything, he told Mr. McGahn, because we need the critics to stop.

    Not so fast, Mr. McGahn said.

    Mr. McGahn, according to people familiar with the conversation, told the president that even though the White House was facing a storm of condemnation for limiting the F.B.I. background check into sexual misconduct allegations against Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, a wide-ranging inquiry like some Democrats were demanding — and Mr. Trump was suggesting — would be potentially disastrous for Judge Kavanaugh’s chances of confirmation to the Supreme Court.
    Is this level of leaking unprecedented? Unusual?
  • Climacus wrote: »
    Is this level of leaking unprecedented? Unusual?

    I'm not enough of an historian to say if it's truly "unprecedented" (a lot of leaking went on during Watergate, from Mark Felt to Martha Mitchell and almost everyone in between), but it is unusual. For comparison, the Obama administration was virtually leak free. Or, more accurately, there were virtually no leaks of this sort, designed to make the administration and the president look bad. There were still the basic background leaks designed to make the leaker look good or advance an agenda, but nothing along the lines of "the president spiked an FBI investigation because his Supreme Court nominee wouldn't be able to stand scrutiny (and also the FBI is now factoring in the political wishes of the White House into its operations)".
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    I don't know; it seems to be SOP for this administration. Much as I'd like to believe the leakage is the work of diligent, truth-loving, Constitution-preserving souls furtively working on behalf of American democracy, I fear that it's really just another trumpian ploy to keep everyone, including the media and the public, running around in confused, pointless, distracted circles while the next Real Outrage gets cobbled together behind the scenes to become the next appalling fait accompli by the White House.
  • Thank you.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    Ohher wrote: »
    Periodically I check into the Brexit thread here, and then back out in utter dismay and bewilderment. I can hardly bear to see a country I visited only once, briefly, but which is the source of so much cultural wealth, so damaged. And then turn to see the wreckage that's been mounting at my back . . .

    Here's a prediction: there will be no elections in November of 2020. Don't ask me how or why or when: I just think the Republicans are going to do away with any possibility of losing their death-grip on us.
    Firstly Article 2i of the Constitution limits the term to 4 years and the 22nd Amendment limits a President to 2 terms. Secondly to change either of those requires a 2/3rds majority in both House and Senate, AND confirmation by 3/4s of the States.

    Mind you, Trump can cause enough chaos in the time he may have legitimately.

Sign In or Register to comment.