« Comey, Comey, Comey! | Main | What's the best Midwestern news site? »

May 10, 2017

Comments

True!

Welcome home, Seb.
Always nice to see you on the front page.
Or in the comments, for that matter.

pretext
Did you see the date on Rosenstein's letter?
Compare to the date of Comey's firing.

You said he was so bad

For a certain kind of conservative, it's all about tribal identity. The idea that anyone could be upset by the firing of a detested someone from the other tribe because the firing was done in bad faith, in violation of policy or applicable law, or in the least gracious possible way, just doesn't register.

Rosenstein is reportedly unhappy at being cast as the instigator of the firing (though if this report is correct, he provided the pretext at Trump's demand):
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-trumps-anger-and-impatience-prompted-him-to-fire-the-fbi-director/2017/05/10/d9642334-359c-11e7-b373-418f6849a004_story.html

Trump has absolutely no concept of discretion. We're used to the idea that the President necessarily has to play a lot of things close to his chest, and that most of the things he says in public have been carefully vetted by his staff. With Trump, if he has a thought he sees no reason he shouldn't instantly broadcast it to the world on Twitter.

To his fans, it makes him seem refreshing and genuine--it's why he usually scored higher than Hillary Clinton on measures of honesty. It didn't mean that he didn't lie all the time, it meant that they felt he had no filter and that what you were seeing was the real Donald Trump.

It's also terrifying, because this is clearly the work of a careless man.

"Rosenstein is reportedly unhappy at being cast as the instigator of the firing"

Rosenstein is about to find out that loyalty only flows in one direction with Trump.

Rosenstein should never have been loyal to Trump. He was supposed to be loyal to his job, his nation, and the principle of rule by law.

This violates the principle of Trump's Razor: the stupidest possible explanation that accounts for all the facts is correct.

When a leader demands personal fealty, and the signing of NDA's, there's a term for that type of government, but it isn't "democracy".

is it a MAGAcracy ?

Perhaps a solution for dealing with scum of the political variety as well...?
http://pages.societyforscience.org/keep-germs-away

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad