« My scripts for calling my Senators about the Muslim/refugee ban | Main | Now is the time to start studying Chinese »

January 29, 2017

Comments

Elevating Bannon to the Security Council is one thing. He's Trump's yes man, and primary 'advisor'.

I really wish that Bannon was merely a Trump "yes man." Unfortunately, he isn't there just to agree with whatever Trump's whim of the instant is. He is, from all appearances, actually driving some of the worst actions that Trump is taking.

Scott Adams is an incredibly smug and loathsome human being, so if clicking on his website helps him in some way, don't click on this link. I read him so you don't have to. But he makes the same observation Sebastian makes. Trump is flooding the news with various outrageous policies and/ or remarks, so it is hard to keep up. If some of the outrage on some issues turns out to be overblown, it works in his favor. I see this at the conservative blogs I read. Any mistaken criticism of Trump ( real or imaginary) is taken as an excuse to ignore all criticism of Trump. I guess we all live in epistemic bubbles to some degree, but Trump is amplifying the problem, maybe deliberately.

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/156399716951/outrage-dilution

I think this is the natural outgrowth of the conservative 'outrage of the day' strategy with Obama.

After a while, they realized that screaming about nonsense loses the interest of the public, who get worn down. The difference is that these outrages are real, but have the same shelflife of attention.

I know I discounted almost everything that the rightwing press said about Obama (and the World) for the last 8 years, and literally stopped looking at it since it just caused high blood pressure.

A close friend and Trump supporter whom I served with in Iraq had this to say when I asked him if he is still a proud Trump supported after the policy to exclude our interpreters/fellow Iraqi/Kurdish Soldiers that we worked with:

We got to start extreme to start anew.

jrudkis:

Where does your friend get his news? Can you think of any way to pierce his bubble & realize how horrible that way of thinking is? It does sound very much like things Bannon has said.

Sebastian:

Your post is overall a YES from me, but your "digression" at the end is a HELL YES.

The thing is, being a "low information" citizen shouldn't be this dire. You should be able to work hard at something else and only pay attention to politics occasionally, without investing many hours a week at it, not to mention daily emotion.

Dr. Science,

Fox, Facebook, etc. And no, I spent a year along with his adult kids giving him facts and thought.

Interestingly, his father was an immigrant (Philippines), and he was a great leader for Soldiers of all races/creeds/gender/orientation. Literally was ahead of the curve on issues like that. He was onboard in 2007 that Obama was the best of the bunch running. So this is a new attitude that doesn't fit his history, but facts don't matter anymore. His longtime employer did just move to China, and while he got a great buy out, that might be the initiator.

For anybody who is interested, the petition to stop or postpone Trump's State Visit is going up very fast, currently up to over 790,000, but adding thousands every minute or so. I haven't seen anything like it since the petition to rerun the Brexit vote. Like that one, it probably won't achieve that much, but it's a handy stick with which to beat the super-sensitive POTUS. If anybody wants to look at it from time to time, this is the link:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928

GftNC, do you suppose that all those signatures are from illegal immigrants to the UK. ;-)

It seems likely to be the spin put on the petition by the White House....

Best thing to do with a Trump state visit to the UK is detain him at the airport while you "figure out what's going on", then send him to Syria.

Don't send him back, please.

I wonder if yanking the CotJCoS from the NSC might cast a first shadow doubt in the minds of any significant number of Trump-supporting servicemembers. I'm not optimistic, but maybe, if they notice...

Well wj, it's ready-made for him to put that spin on it, since as you know he "revealed" some time ago that vast swathes of the country and big cities in the UK are no-go areas for police and non-Muslims. So it all figures.

Did you see this, from the Fox twitter feed? I just posted it on the other thread.

https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/825814926019141633

I've been wondering this. Suppose, for the sake of discussion, that Parliament did force the PM to rescind the invitation for a state visit. What would Trump's dedication to getting revenge for perceived slights lead him to do?

Something juvenile and more damaging to the US than to Britain, most likely. But what exactly? I expect most us here aren't petty enough to guess. But I do wonder.

Before I spout off and call Donny and his rabid supporters racist 'effing assholes, what is the difference as between "NSC meetings" and the "Principals Committee"?

The peanut gallery is trying to stay in line here, and it's only been a litter over a week.

Uh no, taking the DNI and JCS off the NSC is to make sure they don't get in the way of plans to be implemented and don't have time to pull a Seven Days in May.

Trumpkins are picking targets.

Everything gets easier if the US is at war and the world hates us.

Members of the "Principles Committee" are members of NSC who will be present at all NSC meetings barring exceptional circumstances vs. invited attendees to specific meetings. In effect, "Principles" are the NSC. CJCOS and DNI are explicitly authorized to attend and participate in committee meetings by statute, but (also per statute) this is subject at the direction of the President. DNI and CJCOS just got bumped from de facto member to invited attendee status, so it's quite reasonable to refer to them as having been removed from the Council as the linked article and OP.

The terminology arises from there also being a Deputy's Committee which is, unsurprisingly, their deputies.

And afterwards, maybe after a few dozen kilotons get dropped by a loyal pilot, it ain't gonna matter much for Democrats to get Trump and Bannon outofthere and yell to the world

"It wasn't us! Not our fault!"

The world won't listen, just surround the US with diplomatic, economic, and military walls (which is what Bannon wants) and tell us to make them trust again someday. Somehow, like eliminating the Republican Party like it was the Nazi Party.

And then we can get to work. Start by bringing back the Count.

Elevating Bannon to the Security Council is one thing. He's Trump's yes man, and primary 'advisor'.

I'm with wj, Bannon is not a yes man. And his eleveation to the NSC is no small thing.

Agreed that removing the joint chiefs is bizarre to the point of being disturbing.

Director of National Intelligence has also been demoted from principal status.

So, a National Security Council whose principals do not include the DNI or any of the joint chiefs. No intel, no military.

But who will include an ex-hedge fund, ex-movie producer, ex-snotty conservative blog editor who wants to break everything in sight.

Fabulous.

Trump is the living embodiment of the Gish Gallop. It is horrifying to watch the evil spread.

Sebastian may remember I have been calling for civil war since 2004 or so, back went many of you kids were in kneepants or something.

Bout time Democrats brought the wars back home: Iraqis and Libyans and Syrians and Yemeni shouldn't have to die so that Democrats can feel all peaceable while they outsource the wetwork of Empire to their allies in the Republican Party.

I think our sins are finally catching up with us. This Nova Roma should go up in flames.

Still lurking and reading everything. You'd think after a decade of burning hate I would retire, but one needs a reason to go on, and I have a mountain of corpses to look forward to.

Good to hear from you bob, although not happy to see reality bending toward your worldview (no offense). from reports I am seeing CBP acting like trumps private security force at Dulles

I echo Ugh's sentiments, but the Count wasn't kicked out, the door is always open, though one may think of it in the same was as the door was open in the Hateful Eight...

I've always appreciated your insight (and your J-pop knowledge) so welcome, but please try to avoid turning your fire out anyone here. thx

NV, what is your take on Trump's service members support? Is it different between those serving now and those who are out?

Yonatan Zunger wonders if this is the trial run for a coup.

https://www.balloon-juice.com/2017/01/29/quebec-city-mosque-shooting/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/30/quebec-mosque-shooting-canada-deathshttps:

http://juanitajean.com/victoria-texas/

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/15/us/washington-mosque-arson/

Nice to see mcmanus back in play. Hi back at you GFTNC.

I'll be along once in a while. I'm placing myself behind a wall, like the useless media, except there is no pay.

Looks like Sebastian is taking my place, to his credit, though he lacks my edge, but I kid. The “chaff” theory is on the money. How many shiny horrific occurrences can any one person, or a Nation, find appalling as they are softened up for the one truly appalling thing? They’ll tell you to pack some things and report to the staging area. You’ll thank them for the straw they throw down in the boxcars.

We are all beggars now. Bannon to the left, little mother, Ryan to the right.

The Beast is considering your case.

I've miscalculated. I thought the next one would be the Beast.

Like a juggler, I'm training myself to hold a volume of Proust, Joyce, Austen, or Dostoevsky in one hand while learning to operate a fully automatic piece of killing military weaponry in the other, as the machete twirls in the air above me in reserve for those special conservative Trump Republican snowflakes, the cold-blooded, conservative murderers.

See ya round, lovers. I’ve said enough to seal it.

Here’s a soundtrack for the End of it all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TE-wx_jpQUc

More removal:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/46827_Donald_Trump_Removes_the_Judicial_Branch_From_the_Our_Government_Section_of_the_White_House_Website

Yonatan Zunger wonders if this is the trial run for a coup.

Reading that sped my pulse up a bit. If there's a mastermind behind all this, it's Bannon, and I think we've all read his stated desire to wreak havoc on our nation's institutions. I hope against hope that I'm just being paranoid.

The Zunger piece seems to demand more coordination and sophistication from Trump and Bannon than seems warranted.

That said, if Bannon really is testing the strength of the collateral bar rule (among other things) then we are potentially in big trouble.

The Zunger piece seems to demand more coordination and sophistication from Trump and Bannon than seems warranted.

Trump's a tool, in more than one sense. Bannon's the one who worries me, at least in terms of planning and executing power grabs. Trump might blow something up out of pure incompetence or impulse, but he's too much of a child mentally to hatch longer-term schemes on his own.

But, yeah, it might be a bit of stretch for Bannon as well. Still, the possibility that he really knows what he's doing isn't remote enough for me and my peace of mind.

lj: ... the Count wasn't kicked out

Very true. DocSci merely threatened to ban him for making a "threat" about rape. That ticked me off, because the relevant passage in The Count's comment was a malediction, not a threat. And the main point anyway was that the idiot Congressman in question should be "forced to prove it".

The difference between a malediction and a threat is substantial. "Drop dead" is not the same as "I'm coming to kill you". But context matters: when the speaker is a Caligula or a Saddam, the hearer is entitled to take either phrase as a threat. Even when the speaker is a Sarah Palin or an Alex Jones, a malediction (pronounced before an audience of millions) can amount to a threat by incitement. And even when the speaker is a self-styled witch-doctor, his malediction can be a threat -- if the hearer takes voodoo seriously. Otherwise a malediction is at worst an impolite expression of righteous anger.

When ill-wishing is backed by power, its mere expression is arguably a threat. It's the powerful among us who should keep that in mind.

--TP

My objection (so far as it went, which ain't that far) to the Count was that his language was ceasing to shock. Which makes me uncomfortable with myself.

While we're in dystopian mode, Emptywheel on executive orders and surveillance is a timely read;
https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/01/30/the-ironies-of-the-eo-12333-sharing-expansion-for-obama-and-trump/

Yes, well I'm sure our RW contingent can explain how Trump's most recent statute-violating executive order is completely okay when compared to the tyrant Obama's tyrannical executive order tyranny.

Nigel wrote:

"My objection (so far as it went, which ain't that far) to the Count was that his language was ceasing to shock. Which makes me uncomfortable with myself."

Why, the Count himself would agree with that assessment, which might be one reason he was leaving anyway. Now, if he would just leave already! ;)

Tony: I appreciate the delineation of threat versus malediction. The Count might have been having some trouble getting on top of the difference. I'll have a chin wag with him.

"Banquo: It will be rain tonight.

1ST Murderer: Let it come down."


"Bring out the Gimp." Pulp Fiction.

Nigel wrote:

"My objection (so far as it went, which ain't that far) to the Count was that his language was ceasing to shock. Which makes me uncomfortable with myself."

Why, the Count himself would agree with that assessment, which might be one reason he was leaving anyway. Now, if he would just leave already! ;)

Tony: I appreciate the delineation of threat versus malediction. The Count might have been having some trouble getting on top of the difference. I'll have a chin wag with him.

"Banquo: It will be rain tonight.

1ST Murderer: Let it come down."


"Bring out the Gimp." Pulp Fiction.

Nigel wrote:

"My objection (so far as it went, which ain't that far) to the Count was that his language was ceasing to shock. Which makes me uncomfortable with myself."

Why, the Count himself would agree with that assessment, which might be one reason he was leaving anyway. Now, if he would just leave already! ;)

Tony: I appreciate the delineation of threat versus malediction. The Count might have been having some trouble getting on top of the difference. I'll have a chin wag with him.

"Banquo: It will be rain tonight.

1ST Murderer: Let it come down."


"Bring out the Gimp." Pulp Fiction.

Palsy struck me of a sudden right there.

Regards,

John

ISTM we are now back in the state we were in under the Bush Administration with respect to national security issues/Gitmo/NSA spying, which is that the presumption of regularity no longer applies.

(I think that's the correct presumption, essentially that if the government show up in court and says it has done something then the court is going to assume it was done without inquiring further)

ISTM we are now back in the state we were in under the Bush Administration with respect to national security issues/Gitmo/NSA spying

ISTM that Gitmo is still open and NSA spying proceeds forthwith.

The trouble with normal is it only gets worse.

I'm on my phone, so I'll save a reply to lj for later. But can I just throw out a probably-quite-clueless WTH to the LGF link above? They're... not reactionary rightwingers. They were... reasonable-sounding and stuff. I had an ad soliciting aid for refugees. When did THAT happen?

russell - well, I would at least give the Obama administration credit for not actively setting things up to avoid the jurisdiction of the federal courts and keeping everything secret from the american people (although they did less well in this regards on NSA spying). He did want to close Gitmo but Congress shut him down on that with veto proof majorities, although he could have done a better job of it back in 2009 and perhaps have gotten there. And AFAICT there are no more black sites in places where we are not engaged in hostilities, or torture.

But yes, yesterday's beyond the pale is today's new normal.

in other news, google brings it with the Fred Korematsu doodle today (it's his birthday). Well done.

Look at this. Completely fascinating about the Russian payment, and much else. Sent to me by a friend who is usually determinedly (blindly) non-sensationalist, asking should we start panicking:

https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/trial-balloon-for-a-coup-e024990891d5#.6arv7o3o5

NV - LGF went reverse-crazy a while back, or so I've read (never been on the site). Don't recall what prompted it.

I also STM that Gitmo is still open primarily due to the (R) opposition of the Obama years.

Unless he wanted to write a personal check to pay for shutting the place down, there wasn't much more he could do than what he did do.

The NSA stuff, I think he owns some responsibility for, but I just don't think he envisioned Trump + Bannon.

also, the Judicial branch page is back at whitehouse.gov.

Sorry everyone, thought I'd read the whole thread, but apparently not. Still, no harm posting it again I guess - as it used to say at the bottom of telegrams in England: "Free repetition of doubtful words".

See #6 in Doc's and GFTNC's identical link:

Rosneft

Trump got a big taste of this deal. His people did too. And from the looks of the compliant Ryan and McConnell, so did they.

They will kill whomever tries to plumb the depths of the coverup.

Two words: Wilbur Ross. Right up his alley.

Meanwhile, Clinton's paltry emails ....

...... while conservatives permit and enable the wholesale corruption of the entire U.S. Government.

Talk about chaff.

Thanks NV, and when (and if) you have time. I'd remind everyone that there is a open invitation to regulars (for various values of regularity) to post something. If you would like do that in order to make sure that you are hauled away with the rest of us, drop a line to the kitty.

Korematsu is, AFAICT, still good law, BTW.

And don't think people aren't aware...

AFAICT there are no more black sites in places where we are not engaged in hostilities, or torture.

After the last time, a lot of places where we had black sites are unlikely to let that happen again. Their domestic political fallout was way too great.

Tony P, excellent delineation of malediction versus threat. I was very bothered by the Doc's decision myself, because it was clear to me what the Count was doing, and it was not a "rape threat". However, happily the Count still gets to decide when and where he appears, and it is always to the benefit, not to mention delight, of his readers.

Jeebus:

And here’s who he is: an extremely successful conservative provocateur who has a particularly nasty history on issues of immigration, race, and religious minorities. All signs suggest Bannon believes, deeply, that the United States needs to be made into a hub for a new kind of right-wing populism centering on white identity politics — and that this vision is the beating heart of Trump’s cruel new approach to immigration.

Sessions' former aide Stephen Miller makes an appearance too. Sessions' confirmation vote is Tuesday morning.

Tom Levenson at Balloon juice posted this today:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjEAeOshUGQ

Two Shakespeare quotes in one thread should do it for me.

But just in case not, here are some words from Kevin Drum, which rhymes with Frum:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/01/waiting-21st-century-reichstag-fire

You had to hear it there a second time because you heard it here first a few weeks ago.

Double, double, toil and trouble.

Anyone have a fenny snake on them?

Korematsu is a worry, but a longer term one (though much nearer term than I ever would have thought). But it at least requires that we be at war.

You want troublesome Supreme Court law? Look to why there is a 'legitimate' border station more than 60 miles north of the US border near San Diego.

Those reduced Constitutional protections 100 miles from any border (including ALL OF THE COASTS!) rulings (Staring with US v. Martinez-Fuerte I think) have the potential to be dynamite in the hands of a Trump administration. See this old ACLU report and think about how it could be used for just a minute.

Bannon. Scroll down for the cite from the interview.

too late motherfuckas.

Better late than never.

Oh great, the Koch network will save us from Trumpism.

To paraphrase Lindsay Graham, would you rather be shot or poisoned?

I see that I will now have to demote Paul Ryan to third most dangerous man in the U.S. government, behind Trump and Bannon. If Sessions is confirmed then you might fall to 4th Paul!

wj, Poland and Hungary will be happy to house new and improved black sites. The governments of both countries have made it a matter of principle to spit in the face of Europe as often as possible.
If Trump extradites Gülen to Turkey, Erdogan may be open for the nasty business too (if his anger at Russia can be reduced a wee bit. He seems non too happy about The Donald's man crush on Ras Putain).

Wow, the WaPo went all out on the immigration ban in today's soon to be recycled tree edition. Every story on the front page is about it, plus 9 full additional pages (not including coverage on the editorial pages).

Well done.

For those interested, the petition now has 1.5 million signatures out of a population of 65 million. On the news: signatures all coming from areas which voted overwhelmingly against Brexit. Surprise surprise. Meantime, thousands of people have closed Whitehall as they protest as close as they can get to Downing Street. On the news also: middle America which voted for Trump is solidly behind his actions so far. You can see what a problem it presents for responsible Republican lawmakers: what should they do, and how should they do it to avoid a civil war?

Heard on the radio today that May vowed the state visit would go forward citing long-term relations with the US. She may want to have a look at Trump's approval ratings and the demographics of his support.

Oh great, the Koch network will save us from Trumpism.

To paraphrase Lindsay Graham, would you rather be shot or poisoned?

Neither. I'm not a fan of Libertarianism, but it is the polar opposite of authoritarianism, and much of the DT's latest stuff--including the re-ordering of the NSC--is moving more and more in that direction. It will be interesting to see what the Repubs do about it. At least McCain has found his voice.

I'm still thinking the shortest rope to climb is the 25th Amendment, Sec. 4.

You need 2/3 of the House and 2/3 of Senate to agree to that McKinney (assuming Trump contests the determination), along with Pence and a majority of the principle officers of the executive departments.

Impeachment only requires half the House and 2/3 of the Senate, but then they would be the "first mover," I guess.

You need 2/3 of the House and 2/3 of Senate to agree to that McKinney (assuming Trump contests the determination), along with Pence and a majority of the principle officers of the executive departments.

Yep, but if you have Pence and a majority of the cabinet saying the DT can't carry out the duties of the office, *that* is much easier to address--all congress has to do is agree--than coming up with crimes and misdemeanors and having a trial. More to the point, if DT becomes President-By-Decree Donald "Breitbart" Trump, getting a consensus that he has to go should be do-able.

True, didn't think about the process in the House/Senate for impeachment, although they could short-circuit if they wanted to ISTM.

It's 10 days in!

Heard on the radio today that May vowed the state visit would go forward citing long-term relations with the US. She may want to have a look at Trump's approval ratings and the demographics of his support.

I doubt she'll cancel the visit. The Queen has had to receive authoritarian dictators before (e.g. Ceaușescu). She's a tough old bird (the Queen, that is). But when he visits, it is bound to be pretty embarrassing - they'll try to close what roads they can citing traffic concerns, but the rest will be lined with protesters, holding banners or doing what some of the WW2 survivors did when Hirohito drove by in the carriage, turning their backs as he passed.

doing what some of the WW2 survivors did when Hirohito drove by in the carriage, turning their backs as he passed.

He's gonna send them such a tweet!!

McK, two weeks ago I would have said the 25th A stuff was nutty. Today, I wouldn't.

I have absolutely no idea where this is all going to land.

I have absolutely no idea where this is all going to land.

The moon, it'll be yuuuuge! The best.

Meanwhile, in response to a "Dissent Memo" (on the ban and its likely effect of increasing terrorist threats) sent by various diplomats (a channel available to them since the Vietnam War for registering views different from the Administration's) Spicer said "They should either get with the program or get out." So that's even more State Dept people going soon. The project of making sure that there's nobody who knows anything in any position of power or influence proceeeds nicely...

GftNC - and that circles us back to the title of the post, Trump/Bannon want yes men in the rest of the executive branch, that will do whatever Trump/Bannon tell them to do and, as a bonus, not know any better.

Very true Ugh.

By the way, I don't think we've heard from Marty for a while. How's he doing, Marty? Done anything yet worthy of your condemnation? How's he doing in the dictator stakes versus Obama?

more on bannon:

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/donald-trump-steve-bannon-234347

(Only sort of) Sorry for the snark. Everybody needs an outlet sometimes.

So that's even more State Dept people going soon. The project of making sure that there's nobody who knows anything in any position of power or influence proceeeds nicely...

I'm wondering how Rex Tillerson is taking this. I'm no fan, but I don't think the man is a fool, and I'm sure he didn't sign on to endorse destructive idiocy, or head a department that is losing career civil servants. Could he be having second thoughts?

In for a penny, in for a pound, snarkwise:

McKinney, do your 02.42 and 02.58 posts mean that you now think we are not being a bunch of hysterical Chicken Lickens, or however you put it in a post not many days ago? I know you mentioned the 25th Amendment then, but it seemed more theoretical to you at the time.

And this is the kind of thing that might sound good while having serious discussion at the bar after too many drinks, but I have no idea how it will be implemented in practice - nor do any of the affected portions of the Executive Branch.

It's government by slogan.

Not being able to carry out his duties-- does that mean simple incompetence? Is there any kind of precedent? Not with the President, obviously, but I was wondering if there might be some similar provision with state constitution and if so was it ever invoked?

Sessions:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-hard-line-actions-have-an-intellectual-godfather-jeff-sessions/2017/01/30/ac393f66-e4d4-11e6-ba11-63c4b4fb5a63_story.html?postshare=9221485808310560&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.1a2a1a124eea

McKinney, do your 02.42 and 02.58 posts mean that you now think we are not being a bunch of hysterical Chicken Lickens, or however you put it in a post not many days ago? I know you mentioned the 25th Amendment then, but it seemed more theoretical to you at the time.

I'm not sure what post you're referring to. I don't recall using a phrase similar to "hysterical Chicken Lickens" (I would have said "Chicken Little", for one thing), because that approach normally doesn't produce thoughtful responses. This isn't an open thread and I don't have the time to defend my thoughts about how the various sets and subsets across the spectrum have responded to DT.

That said, there is a lot of hyperbole. There is a lot of overstating the case and a lot of reading the worst into things to make a partisan, or anti-Trump point. That said, to repeat the old phrase, just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.

I'm generally in favor of much stricter immigration rules and practices. I don't support publicly humiliating the President of Mexico, the population of Mexico or the many, many Americans who descend from Mexican citizens and who remain culturally attached to Mexico. To make it a bit plainer, I think he's been a world class asshole in handling a problem I'd like to see handled much more effectively. He is not helping, in the long run, the case for border enforcement.

Putin is a thug and always has been. Few on the left ever said so until recently. The reset was a product of leftwing, post cold war thinking and was incredibly naive (as was GWB's looking into Putin's eyes and seeing someone who wasn't there). He ran the f'ing KGB for crying out loud. Obama was an idiot when he told the Russians he'd be a lot more flexible on missiles in Poland after he was re-elected and DT is an idiot now. Bipartisan idiocy. The Soviets and the Russians were and always will be hyper nationalist, quasi-barbarian, expansionist dicks. That's just the way they roll. DT has a lot of exposure sucking up to Putin et al.

The limits on immigration from the 7 predominantly Muslim countries has points I agree with and points I disagree with. I have huge issues with the process and the rollout, process including the lack of prior consultations with a host of key players within the gov't. Attempting to, by decree, impair rights of permanent residents is beyond the pale. Inexcusable.

I'm no fan of regulation. I think college kids don't need guidance from DC to get to third base. I don't think every school should be required to let young boys use the girls bathroom just because the young boys claim to actually be girls. I've dealt with and am dealing with the Feds and I find them, more often than not, to be completely unreasonable, unbelievably arrogant and completely disinterested in any conversation except their own. And, on more than one occasion, dishonest. From the EEOC the DOL to the IRS, I've seen them lie or get others to lie to advance their ends. So, not a fan, as I think I've made clear before.

I've also had dealings--customs officials for example--of common sense and proportion. I find the FBI to be much easier to deal with than DOJ lawyers. Just a couple of examples.

So, on its face, I get the sense underlying DT's decree on regulations. I also get that it sounds better--to paraphrase Ugh, like something someone like me would say after a couple of drinks--as a talking point than as actual policy.

I'm hitting high points here, not explicating in detail, so no need to call to my attention everything I've overlooked. I'm well aware that the forgoing is very cursory.

*If* what we are seeing is the genesis of a coterie of far right wing theorist (keeping this neutral for the moment) cronies forming the de facto cabinet and controlling not only the narrative but policy, I see the middle and some portion of the right agreeing that they have to go. I'm very disturbed about the topic of Sebastian's post.

I will also say, just as a thought, that if DT and his crowd keep the market roiling week in and week out, the investor class is going to be pissed. Very pissed. And when they are pissed, a lot of people with (R) behind their names get pissed too.

Pissed as in angry, not intoxicated.

Not being able to carry out his duties-- does that mean simple incompetence? Is there any kind of precedent? Not with the President, obviously, but I was wondering if there might be some similar provision with state constitution and if so was it ever invoked?

The amendment was passed in 1967. I always assumed itwas to have a lawful way of avoiding a Dr. Strangelove scenario. There is no objective standard for removal. It's just the say-so of the VP and a majority of the cabinet. You won't see such a finding unless there is clear public support OR the DT tries to pop a nuke without clear and convincing justification and Pence agrees that he has to intervene.

The Chicken Licken thing was just my, purposely English, exaggerated version of something you said about the way most of us *may* have been overreacting about Trump, and what he might have been going to do. You were judicious, and I think even in the same post might have pointed us to the 25th Amendment, if the worst came to the worst. Your general attitude towards immigration and regulations, I believe, are reasonably well-known (or reasonably surmised) here. But thanks for letting us know which developments so far are unacceptable to you. I wish we had a way of monitoring the "unacceptability" factor with other rightwingers, because presumably a tipping point has to be reached before most of the Rs in the House and the Senate will be prepared to stand up against it.

I wish we had a way of monitoring the "unacceptability" factor with other rightwingers

Oh, we do. We call it "the polls". Or, the "wind" as in which way does it blow?

Pissed as in angry, not intoxicated.

Or both, perhaps. :)

Bannon doesn't talk all that much in public, so he's not that well known. He seems to want to break things - whatever he can get away with - and to maximize the power he can either wield himself or have access to via Trump. Or, whoever.

I have no idea what he wants to do with it. I.e., what goal he has in mind, if any. He generally describes himself as an "economic nationalist" but I can think of 100 ways of being an economic nationalist without breaking everything.

He's a scary dude, precisely because I don't think anybody really knows WTF he wants.

Trump is, really, just a flaming narcissistic ass. He's not unintelligent, and in some ways he's pretty freaking sharp. I think his basic insight that there were a hell of a lot of people who felt unrepresented by both parties was apt. But he's such a freaking bundle of issues that every damned thing he touches is going to be a clusterf---. And folks around him are going to exploit that, most notably Bannon.

Priebus is probably going to be a good boy and do what he's told, Kushner is going to ride the wave and make himself unbelievably freaking rich.

Bannon is going to push whatever the hell his agenda is like a freaking bulldozer, and Trump is going to basically be an out of control mess.

McK, I know you find some of the things folks say here to be wild leftist rantings, and I don't really mind that. Sometimes there's something to that perception.

But to be perfectly frank, I'm just waiting to see if Bannon is really a fucking Nazi or not. It really is not out of the question, or even that unlikely. At some point, he's going to have to show his hand.

If he is, maybe I'll get myself a couple of big dogs and some guns. Either that, or reconcile myself to some kind of non-violent resistance, and assume that I'm going to get f****ed up one way or the other.

Off we go!

Well, Bannon says he is "a Leninist" and that he wants to destroy the state. Perhaps we should do what too many failed to do with Trump, and take him at his word. Which is to say, literally.

This is a good time to start a philosophical question: Is it better for good people to stay in position and try to mitigate, or should they resign, and leave the positions open for sycophants?

The Chairman, Joint Chiefs, for example. Should he quit, or do his best?

For the people at the upper levels, stay and try to mitigate, and at least potentially be in a position to catch wind of nefarious plans. Says my naive paranoia.

Holy fucking shit:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/30/politics/donald-trump-immigration-order-department-of-justice/index.html

Not really a surprise, given Trump's usual (reflexive) response when someone contradicts or tries to thwart him. On anything.

I expect the Acting AG was well aware of the probable reaction. But she chose to do the right thing. The interesting question is how many levels of the Justice Department Trump will find himself having to go thru before he finds someone who will agree to defend the indefensible.

Seems he found someone. Probably not quite as big a deal as I initially thought.

Separately, Poor little Marco:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/rubio-says-his-staff-was-told-state-department-was-ordered-not-to-talk-about-immigration-order

Actually, my personal animus toward Rubio aside, this is some bad hoo doo.

liberal japonicus | January 30, 2017 at 03:32 AM

"I've always appreciated your insight (and your J-pop knowledge) so welcome, but please try to avoid turning your fire out anyone here. thx"

Now that the thread has gone aways I guess I can explain why I am not coming back. the above was a setup.

Although I read two non-fiction books about Japan a month, and fiction by Japanese authors I don't count (currently at over 150 read, current reading is on Japanese Romantic School pre-war poets); and watch 5-10 Japanese movies a month (all of Ozu, Naruse, Mizoguchi,Oshima, Koreeda);and watch anime every night; and have talked about Japanese prints and Japanese feudalism on this site; and although liberal japonicus knows this very well and knows I know she knows it.

She tells the group ("j-pop") that my main interest as an old man is in Japanese adolescent girl groups, pretends innocence, and sets me up so if I get at all insulted or angry it's my fault.

I don't need that shit.

fwiw, LJ is a guy.

The Chairman, Joint Chiefs, for example. Should he quit, or do his best?

i could be wrong, but i think it will take a hell of a lot more than trump and bannon to get mattis to stand down.

On the collateral bar rule and what to do, if anything, if the executive branch decides to ignore the federal judiciary:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/what_happens_if_donald_trump_refuses_a_federal_court_order.html

Memo to the GOP congress critters: trump and Bannon are not on your side unless the situation suits them.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-immigration-congress-order-234392

Mattis silent so far. And not Chairman. He has political latitude.

Discussion of Trump's "two for one" executive order on regulations today:

http://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/1/30/14441430/trump-executive-order-regulations

"I will also say, just as a thought, that if DT and his crowd keep the market roiling week in and week out, the investor class is going to be pissed. Very pissed. And when they are pissed, a lot of people with (R) behind their names get pissed too. "

This is probably not true. The investor class has the ability to take advantage of roiling markets, in fact roiling markets are better for them. They make money on the changes, either way. Who eventually gets screwed in roiling markets are the middle class investors. Invested in your popular stocks and funds that at best eventually go up some but almost always after the little guys have sold off and the investor class get to skim another 5% off their investments as they sell to the little on the back way up. That single phenomenon has accounted for the greatest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the .1% over the last 50 years. Little guys lose(or break even), big guys win, rinse and repeat.

Watch the chaff strategy tomorrow, Supreme announcement early to replace all other concerns. I'm betting on the farthest right, least qualified candidate. (And Jeff Sessions gets confirmed in part because the Acting AG pressed the issue), and who will even mention it with "whats his name" being nominated for the court.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Blog powered by Typepad