“Saudi Arabia on Monday said it will allow movie theaters to operate in the country for the first time in more than three decades.”
Decadence everywhere. Next thing they’ll have women driving cars.
This piece makes some good points. It also points out that the argument that Moore’s opponent is in favor of partial-birth abortion is based on a twisting of his words.
“The politicization of the religious right has led to a dangerous cultural blindness, in which Christian conservatives often ignore societal and even moral warning signs in order to make tiny political gains. Many seem completely oblivious to the long-term ramifications of their actions. Unless and until pro-lifers realize their battle is first and foremost a cultural one, they will turn the entire nation against their cause —and likely lead to its doom, for at least the next few generations.”
Headline: “Abortion Is the Get-out-of-Jail-Free Card of Republican Politics
Conservative apologia for Roy Moore and hostility toward his opponent are anchored on an issue individual senators are highly unlikely to impact.”
Doesn’t matter what stage the child is in, 1 week or 30, the child still dies. That’s what people have a problem with. It doesn’t make him any less a supporter for him to say I don’t favor it a week before birth, but other times it’s OK.
It’s still abortion, it still ends a life, and he still supports that. That’s just playing semantics to make an unpalatable position seem not so bad. But it’s still bad.
I feel bad for Alabama today. Once again, nobody they want to vote for. 😦
I did see some interesting excuses from both sides on the news story’s comment sections this morning.
R’s who can’t bring themselves to vote for a pro-abortion Dem justify it by saying it’s the lesser of 2 evils. For them it’s hold your nose and try not to look too closely as they vote for an even crazier version of Trump.
R’s that can’t bring themselves to vote for Moore say the country’s watching, and we don’t want them to think we’re hicks for voting for him. As if they won’t still think that about ya’ll after this no matter what happens. That’s cute.
For us out of staters it’s a pass the popcorn kinda day.
Yep. The new norm. Coming soon to a state near you.
Jennifer Rubin’s article that I posted yesterday indicated that Trump’s approval rate among women was 25% and it was 27% among college graduates. Today’s behavior doesn’t help him with those two groups.
“Last week, I blogged how the DOJ demoted Bruce G. Ohr during an investigation into his contacts at Fusion GPS, the firm that produced the infamous on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump.
The story has become more mysterious as Fox News revealed that Ohr’s wife worked at the firm during the election.
From Fox News:
Contacted by Fox News, investigators for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) confirmed that Nellie H. Ohr, wife of the demoted official, Bruce G. Ohr, worked for the opposition research firm last year. The precise nature of Mrs. Ohr’s duties – including whether she worked on the dossier – remains unclear but a review of her published works available online reveals Mrs. Ohr has written extensively on Russia-related subjects. HPSCI staff confirmed to Fox News that she was paid by Fusion GPS through the summer and fall of 2016.
Fusion GPS has attracted scrutiny because Republican lawmakers have spent the better part of this year investigating whether the dossier, which was funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, served as the basis for the Justice Department and the FBI to obtain FISA surveillance last year on a Trump campaign adviser named Carter Page.
Fox News found out this about Mrs. Ohr:
A review of open source materials shows Mrs. Ohr was described as a Russia expert at the Wilson Center, a Washington think tank, when she worked there, briefly, a decade ago. The Center’s website said her project focused on the experiences of Russian farmers during Stalin’s collectivization program and following the invasion of Russia by Nazi forces in 1941. She has also reviewed a number of books about twentieth century Russia, including Reconstructing the State: Personal Networks and Elite Identity in Soviet Russia (2000), by Gerald Easter, a political scientist at Boston College, and Bertrand M. Patenaude’s The Big Show in Bololand: The American Relief Expedition to Soviet Russia in the Famine of 1921 (2002).
HPSCI Chairman David Nunes told Fox that the committee “is looking into all facets of the connections between the Department of Justice and Fusion GPS, including Mr. Ohr.”
————————-
@1:36 Ha. You mean that’s the manufactured non-story of the day.
Be patient, Ricky. The real story of the day (the Alabama election) is sure to give cause for unhinged outrage and recriminations no matter which way the vote goes. The evening is sure to be more entertaining. :–)
AJ – Believe me, I agree with you about abortion. But to many, a person supporting it up to the moment of birth is considered particularly bad. If not, those same people would not make such a big fuss about it, & would merely say he is pro-abortion.
The article makes some other points about the issue, & that conservatives may be hurting their cause by being “one-issue” voters no matter who the conservative candidate may be.
ISTM, that between a non-believer who supports abortion & a self-confessed believer who has questionable morals, & may have lied & slandered the women who’ve accused him, God would be more displeased with the latter. We’re told not to judge those outside the faith, but to judge those within the faith, who should know better.
Gillibrand’s a hack who’s just looking for national recognition for her higher ambitions. She started a tweet war, so she gets what she gets. It’s all quite predictable really.
“Of course, now we have a live trolling war going on between the President and a sitting senator. Welcome to 2017. (And probably the next three or seven years, really.) The origin of this one is no mystery. Gillibrand came out yesterday and demanded that the President step down from office because of his alleged sexual misdeeds in the past. Do you honestly think she’s surprised that he reacted this way? In fact, it’s no stretch of the imagination to suppose that Gillibrand knew this was precisely how Trump would respond. He always takes the bait and loves a fight that gets the media buzzing.
And why did she call for his resignation to begin with? She obviously knew there wasn’t a chance in a million that Trump was suddenly going to say, “Oh… I see what you mean. Fair enough. I’ll just resign now.”
I’m not going to naysay Gillibrand’s seriousness in wanting to root out sexual assault and hold perpetrator’s accountable, even if she was a bit late to the game when it came to Bill Clinton. If that’s her position then she should roll with it. But let’s not be so willfully blind to the reality of American politics today that we ignore the fact that a bruising battle with the President is an immediate ticket to further raising her national profile on a red-hot issue on the path to 2020. Do you believe she’s upset about Trump tweeting what he did? Frankly, I’m guessing her staff was popping some early morning champagne corks as soon as Trump’s tweet hit the internet.
Gone are the days when politicians would issue glancing blows to members of the other party via press release, leaving the media to run off and get some sort of measured response from the press secretary of the aggrieved party. Today we have full-scale troll wars playing out in real time on social media between the officials themselves. Is this better or worse? Hey… you all wanted the internet and instant access to everything imaginable at a moment’s notice.
Uuuhhh, as I understood it the word slut-shame means "to stigmatize (a woman) for engaging in behavior judged to be promiscuous or sexually provocative." Is that really what Warren means? https://t.co/49O718Mxys
I mean, if @SenWarren is using the ordinary meaning of slut-shame, then she's saying Gillibrand engaged in, er., promiscuous or sexually provocative behavior in exchange for campaign contributions, which . . . yikes.
“Consumed by his paranoia about the deep state, Donald Trump has disappeared into the fog of his own conspiracy theories,” declared the Times’ Maureen Dowd.
“Paranoia seizes Trump’s White House,” reported Politico, noting the suspicion that “career intelligence operatives are working to undermine the new president.”
Actually, they were. “It’s no mystery why Trump doesn’t trust U.S. intelligence agencies,” Bloomberg’s Eli Lake wrote last month. “As the old saying goes: Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you. Trump understandably believes the intelligence agencies are out to get him.”
Of course, leaders in the intelligence community would deny they are out to get the president. But in a remarkable new interview, one CIA veteran who served in the agency from 1980 to 2013, who briefed presidents on the most sensitive issues of the day, and is still a prominent voice in intelligence matters is at least conceding that he can understand why the president feels the way he does.
Michael Morell stayed out of politics when he served as the CIA’s No. 2 official. He was the classic nonpartisan operative who served the office, and not the man. “I worked at this nonpolitical agency, bright red line between intelligence and policy, and intelligence and politics,” Morell told Politico’s Susan Glasser this week.
Until Trump. In August 2016, the retired-but-still-active-in-intelligence-matters Morell decided to abandon decades of nonpartisanship and come out in support of Hillary Clinton. In a New York Times op-ed, he praised Clinton’s experience and called Trump a danger to the nation, a threat to its “foundational values,” and an “unwitting agent” for Russia.
“I was so deeply concerned about what a Trump presidency might look like from a national security perspective, and believed that there was such a gap between Secretary Clinton and Donald Trump with regard to how well they would protect the country, that I thought it extremely important to come out and say that,” Morell told Glasser.
Some of Morell’s former colleagues in the intelligence community took the same step. Gen. Michael Hayden, a former CIA director, blasted Trump as Russia’s “useful fool.” Another former top CIA officer, Michael Vickers, pronounced Trump unfit. And the agency’s then-director, John Brennan, openly clashed with Trump.
These were all men who came out of the nonpolitical tradition of American intelligence. And all chose, for the first time, to publicly take sides in a presidential campaign.
Of course, it’s safe to say that each assumed Clinton would win. But when Trump prevailed, amazingly enough, he thought the intelligence agencies were against him.
“Let’s put ourselves in Donald Trump’s shoes,” Morell said to Glasser. “So what does he see? Right? He sees a former director of CIA and a former director of NSA, Mike Hayden … criticizing him and his policies. Right? And he would rightfully have said, ‘Huh, what’s going on with the intelligence guys?'”
“And then he sees a former acting director and deputy director of CIA criticizing him and endorsing his opponent,” Morell continued. “And then he gets his first intelligence briefing, after becoming the Republican nominee, and within 24 to 48 hours, there are leaks out of that that are critical of him and his then-national security adviser Mike Flynn.”
“And so, this stuff starts to build, right? And he must have said to himself, ‘What is it with these intelligence guys? Are they political?'””
———————
“Georgetown Law Professor Randy Barnett had a tweet on December 5, 2017, that I’ve been meaning to write about.
It reflects a subject I, and others, have been focusing on since election night — the refusal of Democrats and #NeverTrump Republicans to accept the outcome of the election not just emotionally, but as to the transfer of power that continues to this day, over a year since the 2016 election.
Here is Prof. Barnett’s tweet, referencing the attempt by outgoing CFPB Director Richard Cordray preemptively to install Leandra English as Interim Director over the objections of the Trump administration.
The tweet references a separate tweet from law professor Josh Blackman about attempts of the CFPB bureaucracy to subvert the authority of Mick Mulvaney, the Interim Director appointed by Trump:
Democrats’ #Resistance is creating a genuine constitutional crisis in which governmental power is not allowed by them to be peacefully transferred after a lawful election. The potential for escalation is very very dangerous.
I think this is right.
The peaceful transition of power is fundamental to our constitutional system. The attempt, which still in the courts, to prevent the Trump administration from appointing an Interim Director of the CFPB is not even the most stark such example.”
—————
“And so it continues, with
the apparent set-up of the incoming administration on a phony Logan Act violation,
the Mueller investigation that obviously has strayed far from alleged Russian interference in the election to post-election political strategy of the incoming Trump administration,
the unprecedented delay in confirming nominees that Dems didn’t even object to for the sake of depriving Trump of the ability to control the bureaucracy,
the rogue elements in the intelligence community and FBI leaking information (assuming news reports are not completely lying about their sourcing),
and so on and so on.
There has been a never-ending attempt not just to oppose Trump and Republican legislative and policy initiatives, which is legitimate politics, but to prevent the transfer of power. It is, as I wrote last August, a Slow-Motion Coup d’Etat, and it’s dangerous.
Which is why anti-anti-Trumpism is a legitimate pro-constitutional form of resistance to the slow motion coup:
You don’t need to be pro-Trump to be against those who collectively are a greater threat to our liberty than Trump.
Being anti-anti-Trump is no vice, at least not now.”
Also, I have to take some issue with this statement from your link.
“Unless and until pro-lifers realize their battle is first and foremost a cultural one, they will turn the entire nation against their cause —and likely lead to its doom, for at least the next few generations.””
This is easily proven to be false, and a known argument made frequently by pro-choicers. It’s intellectually lazy as well. Pro-lifers have been consistent on the issue for quite some time, it doesn’t change because a different person is running for office. There has not been a flight due to their stance. In fact, quite the opposite. And as medical science and ultrasounds advance, it gets harder and harder to push the falsehoods the pro-abortion side have pushed for years, even more will join our side.
“A Gallup poll showed that Americans have been pretty evenly split on abortion for some time, but pro-life advocates have slowly grown their numbers, edging past those in favor of pro-choice views.
Gallup’s May 2017 poll revealed that 43 percent of Americans say abortion is morally acceptable, while 49 percent say it is morally wrong.
Gallup’s 2015 and 2016 annual polls showed that the percentage of pro-life proponents rose, while that of pro-choice advocates fell. The 2017 poll also shows that the number of independent pro-lifers has been increasing since 2001.”
————————–
“A new National poll has some surprising and contradictory results when it comes to abortion, and it shows the number of people calling themselves pro-life on abortion at its highest level in two years.
The new Rasmussen survey finds that a majority of Americans are morally opposed to abortion and that number includes a majority of women who took a position.
But the polling data also finds that a majority of people refer to themselves as pro-choice as opposed to pro-life on abortion. But with the majority of Americans say abortion is morally unacceptable the polling results clearly show that some people who consider themselves pro-choice don’t really support abortion and more accurately line up with the pro-life position opposing abortion is morally unacceptable.
The Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 52% of Likely U.S. Voters consider themselves pro-choice on the issue of abortion, while 42% say they are pro-life. The number of voters who are pro-choice is down slightly from 54% in April, while the number who consider themselves pro-life is at its highest level since July 2014.”
It is pretty amazing that on a day when a Trumpkin who is an actual pedophile may be elected to the US Senate, the Real Donald Trump, using only a single Tweet, was able to shift the focus back to his own sexual assaults.
I’m afraid that the media and Trump-haters have degraded the concept of pedophilia. I would not recommend it, but I have known 2 women (one I knew well) who married at the age of 13. She married a man in his mid 20s. She was not pregnant. They were happily married for 50+ years until he died. They had 5 God-fearing children who grew up to be business owners, ministers and faithful employees—- and one black sheep that got drunk with some friends, robbed a bank with a shotgun, and attended his father’s funeral handcuffed to a Marshal.
It is my understanding that pedophiles do not stop when they marry. We should try to be more accurate than the Washington Post.
President Trump calls his accusers “women who I don’t know and/or have never met.” The list includes a former business partner, a contestant in one of his beauty pageants, a reporter who interviewed him and an Apprentice contestant. https://t.co/H0m8AgWHry
Never Trumpers are consistently against pedophilia, whether it is the homosexual pedophilia of the Trumpkin Milo of the heterosexual pedophilia of the Trumpkin Moore.
Rick, I think in most cases he attempted to date them, but there is no mention of attempts at sex. Also, pedophilia is interest in a pre-pubescent child. Interest in a 16-year-old is a different matter, and a different word. (Euphibia or something like that.)
Debra, Your position @ 7:54 is very dangerous. It is essentially the same argument that homosexual pedophiles make when they are trying to lower the age of consent in various states. States have statutory rape laws for a reason. Our young teenagers must be protected from the Milos, the Roy Moores and the Harvey Milks of the world.
Cheryl, Did you not read the graphic account of Moore’s sexual contact with the 14 year old or the assault on the 16 year old waitress in his car behind the dumpster after he offered to “give her a ride home”?
My position, Ricky, is simply historical—like the accusations against Roy Moore. I’m not supporting Moore–nor am I condemning him. I don’t know the truth of the matter, and I have not developed a strong opinion about him one way or the other. But if he is elected, he definitely should be received by the Senate.
I can rarely get behind the Washington Post’s paywall. On the rare occasions when I find I inadvertently have, I close it out and look for a more reputable source on the topic. They’ve gotten pretty bad since they drew the target around all things Trumpian. :–/
Debra, People who never read the Washington Post or the New York Times often think Moore was just trying to date girls, that Mueller is corrupt and Trump is truthful. However, you heard the 16 year old’s press conference. We discussed it that day. I think you believe her.
Ricky, People who do rely on WaPo, and their 5 dozen Trump muckrakers, often believe their biased accounts. And whether or not I believe the woman’s account or not, I’m not going to help her play the political game she’s playing. Period. It may or may not be true, I don’t know. But one thing I know for sure: it’s decades old. That matters to me because I believe that people do change—sometimes for the better and sometimes not. But when these things happened, and why they are being brought up now also matters to me. At this point, I do not think the truth of many specific claims (against the President as well) are really knowable—and in some cases are not really relevant to the political agenda that is being decided right now. And I’m not all that taxed about it either. Over the years, I have found my expectations of public officials are greatly lowered. Sometimes I’m pleasantly surprised. I’m rarely negatively surprised. In politics, weakness and treachery abound. All need our prayers.
It’s halftime. The NYT was right, and conservative Stephen Hayes gives credit to The Washington Post. The Post’s stories about Moore’s assaults on young girls clearly made the difference in a very close race.
Huge kudos to the Washington Post and great old-fashioned, fact-based reporting on an issue of tremendous consequence.
Mainly for Kim, who seemed to be closest to this race: seen on FB tonight (by a former reporter colleague): So impressed with a certain southern state right now …
I don’t think there’s any joy in electing either of those guys. One is Roy Moore, the other is for legal baby killing. What’s there to be thrilled about?
I’m not laughing at you. I’m just pointing out the fact that despite electing Jones, Dems will still view you folks as backward, Bible thumpin’ hicks. This won’t change that.
And I am laughing at the whole circus that politics have become.
They’ve had their panties in a bunch since Trump was elected. Nothing changes in that department.
But just remember, you folks wanted Jones, you got him. And one less vote for anything R’s had dreams of passing. You’ve essentially lost the majority in the Senate when you include the turncoats like McCain, Murkowski, and Snowe. Good luck on getting those tax cuts and anything else through now.
Pat yourself on the back. You certainly did your part for the #Resistance. Noses, spite, and all that.
Wandering Views 
From “World” on line:
“Saudi Arabia on Monday said it will allow movie theaters to operate in the country for the first time in more than three decades.”
Decadence everywhere. Next thing they’ll have women driving cars.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Roy Moore decision day?
LikeLike
This piece makes some good points. It also points out that the argument that Moore’s opponent is in favor of partial-birth abortion is based on a twisting of his words.
“The politicization of the religious right has led to a dangerous cultural blindness, in which Christian conservatives often ignore societal and even moral warning signs in order to make tiny political gains. Many seem completely oblivious to the long-term ramifications of their actions. Unless and until pro-lifers realize their battle is first and foremost a cultural one, they will turn the entire nation against their cause —and likely lead to its doom, for at least the next few generations.”
Headline: “Abortion Is the Get-out-of-Jail-Free Card of Republican Politics
Conservative apologia for Roy Moore and hostility toward his opponent are anchored on an issue individual senators are highly unlikely to impact.”
http://reason.com/blog/2017/12/08/abortion-is-the-get-out-of-jail-free-car
LikeLiked by 1 person
Kizzie,
And it matters either way why?
He supports abortion. Period. Full Stop.
Doesn’t matter what stage the child is in, 1 week or 30, the child still dies. That’s what people have a problem with. It doesn’t make him any less a supporter for him to say I don’t favor it a week before birth, but other times it’s OK.
It’s still abortion, it still ends a life, and he still supports that. That’s just playing semantics to make an unpalatable position seem not so bad. But it’s still bad.
LikeLike
I feel bad for Alabama today. Once again, nobody they want to vote for. 😦
I did see some interesting excuses from both sides on the news story’s comment sections this morning.
R’s who can’t bring themselves to vote for a pro-abortion Dem justify it by saying it’s the lesser of 2 evils. For them it’s hold your nose and try not to look too closely as they vote for an even crazier version of Trump.
R’s that can’t bring themselves to vote for Moore say the country’s watching, and we don’t want them to think we’re hicks for voting for him. As if they won’t still think that about ya’ll after this no matter what happens. That’s cute.
For us out of staters it’s a pass the popcorn kinda day.
Yep. The new norm. Coming soon to a state near you.
LikeLike
Yikes,
I guess everything, including the scandals and egos, is bigger in Texas.
————————–
Roy Moore is probably wondering why this guy gets a pass from some Republicans.
LikeLike
Apart from Roy Moore, this is the story of the day.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/the-fix/wp/2017/12/12/trump-takes-the-bait-in-sexually-suggestive-tweet-about-kirsten-gillibrand/
Jennifer Rubin’s article that I posted yesterday indicated that Trump’s approval rate among women was 25% and it was 27% among college graduates. Today’s behavior doesn’t help him with those two groups.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Another new one to add to the list of incestuous relationships on Mueller’s team. I’m sure it’s just another coincidence.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2017/12/demoted-doj-officials-wife-worked-at-fusion-gps/
“Last week, I blogged how the DOJ demoted Bruce G. Ohr during an investigation into his contacts at Fusion GPS, the firm that produced the infamous on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump.
The story has become more mysterious as Fox News revealed that Ohr’s wife worked at the firm during the election.
From Fox News:
Contacted by Fox News, investigators for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) confirmed that Nellie H. Ohr, wife of the demoted official, Bruce G. Ohr, worked for the opposition research firm last year. The precise nature of Mrs. Ohr’s duties – including whether she worked on the dossier – remains unclear but a review of her published works available online reveals Mrs. Ohr has written extensively on Russia-related subjects. HPSCI staff confirmed to Fox News that she was paid by Fusion GPS through the summer and fall of 2016.
Fusion GPS has attracted scrutiny because Republican lawmakers have spent the better part of this year investigating whether the dossier, which was funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, served as the basis for the Justice Department and the FBI to obtain FISA surveillance last year on a Trump campaign adviser named Carter Page.
Fox News found out this about Mrs. Ohr:
A review of open source materials shows Mrs. Ohr was described as a Russia expert at the Wilson Center, a Washington think tank, when she worked there, briefly, a decade ago. The Center’s website said her project focused on the experiences of Russian farmers during Stalin’s collectivization program and following the invasion of Russia by Nazi forces in 1941. She has also reviewed a number of books about twentieth century Russia, including Reconstructing the State: Personal Networks and Elite Identity in Soviet Russia (2000), by Gerald Easter, a political scientist at Boston College, and Bertrand M. Patenaude’s The Big Show in Bololand: The American Relief Expedition to Soviet Russia in the Famine of 1921 (2002).
HPSCI Chairman David Nunes told Fox that the committee “is looking into all facets of the connections between the Department of Justice and Fusion GPS, including Mr. Ohr.”
————————-
Move along….. nothing to see here….. 🙄
LikeLike
@1:36 Ha. You mean that’s the manufactured non-story of the day.
Be patient, Ricky. The real story of the day (the Alabama election) is sure to give cause for unhinged outrage and recriminations no matter which way the vote goes. The evening is sure to be more entertaining. :–)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Debra, Who was the moron whose Tweet created the story?
LikeLike
AJ – Believe me, I agree with you about abortion. But to many, a person supporting it up to the moment of birth is considered particularly bad. If not, those same people would not make such a big fuss about it, & would merely say he is pro-abortion.
The article makes some other points about the issue, & that conservatives may be hurting their cause by being “one-issue” voters no matter who the conservative candidate may be.
ISTM, that between a non-believer who supports abortion & a self-confessed believer who has questionable morals, & may have lied & slandered the women who’ve accused him, God would be more displeased with the latter. We’re told not to judge those outside the faith, but to judge those within the faith, who should know better.
LikeLike
Are you not entertained?!
Gillibrand’s a hack who’s just looking for national recognition for her higher ambitions. She started a tweet war, so she gets what she gets. It’s all quite predictable really.
https://hotair.com/archives/2017/12/12/trump-vs-gillibrand-trolling-war-america-deserves/
“Of course, now we have a live trolling war going on between the President and a sitting senator. Welcome to 2017. (And probably the next three or seven years, really.) The origin of this one is no mystery. Gillibrand came out yesterday and demanded that the President step down from office because of his alleged sexual misdeeds in the past. Do you honestly think she’s surprised that he reacted this way? In fact, it’s no stretch of the imagination to suppose that Gillibrand knew this was precisely how Trump would respond. He always takes the bait and loves a fight that gets the media buzzing.
And why did she call for his resignation to begin with? She obviously knew there wasn’t a chance in a million that Trump was suddenly going to say, “Oh… I see what you mean. Fair enough. I’ll just resign now.”
I’m not going to naysay Gillibrand’s seriousness in wanting to root out sexual assault and hold perpetrator’s accountable, even if she was a bit late to the game when it came to Bill Clinton. If that’s her position then she should roll with it. But let’s not be so willfully blind to the reality of American politics today that we ignore the fact that a bruising battle with the President is an immediate ticket to further raising her national profile on a red-hot issue on the path to 2020. Do you believe she’s upset about Trump tweeting what he did? Frankly, I’m guessing her staff was popping some early morning champagne corks as soon as Trump’s tweet hit the internet.
Gone are the days when politicians would issue glancing blows to members of the other party via press release, leaving the media to run off and get some sort of measured response from the press secretary of the aggrieved party. Today we have full-scale troll wars playing out in real time on social media between the officials themselves. Is this better or worse? Hey… you all wanted the internet and instant access to everything imaginable at a moment’s notice.
ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?”
LikeLike
As for Fauxahontas’ response to it all…..
I don’t think that means what she thinks it means. 🙂
————————
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just because you’re paranoid, doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-top-intel-official-rethinks-maybe-we-shouldnt-have-attacked-a-new-president/article/2643208
“Consumed by his paranoia about the deep state, Donald Trump has disappeared into the fog of his own conspiracy theories,” declared the Times’ Maureen Dowd.
“Paranoia seizes Trump’s White House,” reported Politico, noting the suspicion that “career intelligence operatives are working to undermine the new president.”
Actually, they were. “It’s no mystery why Trump doesn’t trust U.S. intelligence agencies,” Bloomberg’s Eli Lake wrote last month. “As the old saying goes: Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you. Trump understandably believes the intelligence agencies are out to get him.”
Of course, leaders in the intelligence community would deny they are out to get the president. But in a remarkable new interview, one CIA veteran who served in the agency from 1980 to 2013, who briefed presidents on the most sensitive issues of the day, and is still a prominent voice in intelligence matters is at least conceding that he can understand why the president feels the way he does.
Michael Morell stayed out of politics when he served as the CIA’s No. 2 official. He was the classic nonpartisan operative who served the office, and not the man. “I worked at this nonpolitical agency, bright red line between intelligence and policy, and intelligence and politics,” Morell told Politico’s Susan Glasser this week.
Until Trump. In August 2016, the retired-but-still-active-in-intelligence-matters Morell decided to abandon decades of nonpartisanship and come out in support of Hillary Clinton. In a New York Times op-ed, he praised Clinton’s experience and called Trump a danger to the nation, a threat to its “foundational values,” and an “unwitting agent” for Russia.
“I was so deeply concerned about what a Trump presidency might look like from a national security perspective, and believed that there was such a gap between Secretary Clinton and Donald Trump with regard to how well they would protect the country, that I thought it extremely important to come out and say that,” Morell told Glasser.
Some of Morell’s former colleagues in the intelligence community took the same step. Gen. Michael Hayden, a former CIA director, blasted Trump as Russia’s “useful fool.” Another former top CIA officer, Michael Vickers, pronounced Trump unfit. And the agency’s then-director, John Brennan, openly clashed with Trump.
These were all men who came out of the nonpolitical tradition of American intelligence. And all chose, for the first time, to publicly take sides in a presidential campaign.
Of course, it’s safe to say that each assumed Clinton would win. But when Trump prevailed, amazingly enough, he thought the intelligence agencies were against him.
“Let’s put ourselves in Donald Trump’s shoes,” Morell said to Glasser. “So what does he see? Right? He sees a former director of CIA and a former director of NSA, Mike Hayden … criticizing him and his policies. Right? And he would rightfully have said, ‘Huh, what’s going on with the intelligence guys?'”
“And then he sees a former acting director and deputy director of CIA criticizing him and endorsing his opponent,” Morell continued. “And then he gets his first intelligence briefing, after becoming the Republican nominee, and within 24 to 48 hours, there are leaks out of that that are critical of him and his then-national security adviser Mike Flynn.”
“And so, this stuff starts to build, right? And he must have said to himself, ‘What is it with these intelligence guys? Are they political?'””
———————
Yes, and yes.
LikeLike
A genuine Constitutional crisis, brought to you by Democrats and their new best buddies, the Never-Trumpers.
Be sure to thank them. 🙂
https://legalinsurrection.com/2017/12/democrats-resistance-is-creating-a-genuine-constitutional-crisis/
“Georgetown Law Professor Randy Barnett had a tweet on December 5, 2017, that I’ve been meaning to write about.
It reflects a subject I, and others, have been focusing on since election night — the refusal of Democrats and #NeverTrump Republicans to accept the outcome of the election not just emotionally, but as to the transfer of power that continues to this day, over a year since the 2016 election.
Here is Prof. Barnett’s tweet, referencing the attempt by outgoing CFPB Director Richard Cordray preemptively to install Leandra English as Interim Director over the objections of the Trump administration.
The tweet references a separate tweet from law professor Josh Blackman about attempts of the CFPB bureaucracy to subvert the authority of Mick Mulvaney, the Interim Director appointed by Trump:
Democrats’ #Resistance is creating a genuine constitutional crisis in which governmental power is not allowed by them to be peacefully transferred after a lawful election. The potential for escalation is very very dangerous.
I think this is right.
The peaceful transition of power is fundamental to our constitutional system. The attempt, which still in the courts, to prevent the Trump administration from appointing an Interim Director of the CFPB is not even the most stark such example.”
—————
“And so it continues, with
the apparent set-up of the incoming administration on a phony Logan Act violation,
the Mueller investigation that obviously has strayed far from alleged Russian interference in the election to post-election political strategy of the incoming Trump administration,
the unprecedented delay in confirming nominees that Dems didn’t even object to for the sake of depriving Trump of the ability to control the bureaucracy,
the rogue elements in the intelligence community and FBI leaking information (assuming news reports are not completely lying about their sourcing),
and so on and so on.
There has been a never-ending attempt not just to oppose Trump and Republican legislative and policy initiatives, which is legitimate politics, but to prevent the transfer of power. It is, as I wrote last August, a Slow-Motion Coup d’Etat, and it’s dangerous.
Which is why anti-anti-Trumpism is a legitimate pro-constitutional form of resistance to the slow motion coup:
You don’t need to be pro-Trump to be against those who collectively are a greater threat to our liberty than Trump.
Being anti-anti-Trump is no vice, at least not now.”
LikeLike
Kizzie,
Also, I have to take some issue with this statement from your link.
“Unless and until pro-lifers realize their battle is first and foremost a cultural one, they will turn the entire nation against their cause —and likely lead to its doom, for at least the next few generations.””
This is easily proven to be false, and a known argument made frequently by pro-choicers. It’s intellectually lazy as well. Pro-lifers have been consistent on the issue for quite some time, it doesn’t change because a different person is running for office. There has not been a flight due to their stance. In fact, quite the opposite. And as medical science and ultrasounds advance, it gets harder and harder to push the falsehoods the pro-abortion side have pushed for years, even more will join our side.
http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/13/poll-number-of-pro-life-advocates-is-increasing/
“A Gallup poll showed that Americans have been pretty evenly split on abortion for some time, but pro-life advocates have slowly grown their numbers, edging past those in favor of pro-choice views.
Gallup’s May 2017 poll revealed that 43 percent of Americans say abortion is morally acceptable, while 49 percent say it is morally wrong.
Gallup’s 2015 and 2016 annual polls showed that the percentage of pro-life proponents rose, while that of pro-choice advocates fell. The 2017 poll also shows that the number of independent pro-lifers has been increasing since 2001.”
————————–
http://www.lifenews.com/2016/11/28/new-poll-percentage-of-people-who-call-themselves-pro-life-at-highest-level-in-over-two-years/
“A new National poll has some surprising and contradictory results when it comes to abortion, and it shows the number of people calling themselves pro-life on abortion at its highest level in two years.
The new Rasmussen survey finds that a majority of Americans are morally opposed to abortion and that number includes a majority of women who took a position.
But the polling data also finds that a majority of people refer to themselves as pro-choice as opposed to pro-life on abortion. But with the majority of Americans say abortion is morally unacceptable the polling results clearly show that some people who consider themselves pro-choice don’t really support abortion and more accurately line up with the pro-life position opposing abortion is morally unacceptable.
The Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 52% of Likely U.S. Voters consider themselves pro-choice on the issue of abortion, while 42% say they are pro-life. The number of voters who are pro-choice is down slightly from 54% in April, while the number who consider themselves pro-life is at its highest level since July 2014.”
LikeLike
It is pretty amazing that on a day when a Trumpkin who is an actual pedophile may be elected to the US Senate, the Real Donald Trump, using only a single Tweet, was able to shift the focus back to his own sexual assaults.
LikeLike
I’m afraid that the media and Trump-haters have degraded the concept of pedophilia. I would not recommend it, but I have known 2 women (one I knew well) who married at the age of 13. She married a man in his mid 20s. She was not pregnant. They were happily married for 50+ years until he died. They had 5 God-fearing children who grew up to be business owners, ministers and faithful employees—- and one black sheep that got drunk with some friends, robbed a bank with a shotgun, and attended his father’s funeral handcuffed to a Marshal.
It is my understanding that pedophiles do not stop when they marry. We should try to be more accurate than the Washington Post.
LikeLike
Speaking of Trump’s own sexual assaults:
LikeLike
Debra, Moore did not marry the 14 year old or the other young girls. He sexually assaulted them.
LikeLike
Never Trumpers are consistently against pedophilia, whether it is the homosexual pedophilia of the Trumpkin Milo of the heterosexual pedophilia of the Trumpkin Moore.
LikeLike
Rick, I think in most cases he attempted to date them, but there is no mention of attempts at sex. Also, pedophilia is interest in a pre-pubescent child. Interest in a 16-year-old is a different matter, and a different word. (Euphibia or something like that.)
LikeLiked by 2 people
Debra, Your position @ 7:54 is very dangerous. It is essentially the same argument that homosexual pedophiles make when they are trying to lower the age of consent in various states. States have statutory rape laws for a reason. Our young teenagers must be protected from the Milos, the Roy Moores and the Harvey Milks of the world.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cheryl, Did you not read the graphic account of Moore’s sexual contact with the 14 year old or the assault on the 16 year old waitress in his car behind the dumpster after he offered to “give her a ride home”?
LikeLike
Here is the account of the “date” with the 14 year old:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/woman-says-roy-moore-initiated-sexual-encounter-when-she-was-14-he-was-32/2017/11/09/1f495878-c293-11e7-afe9-4f60b5a6c4a0_story.html?utm_term=.7359cd458d5c
LikeLike
Here is the account of the assault on the 16 year old. Debra and I both heard this poor woman describe the incident on TV. She was very believable.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-woman-accuses-moore-of-sexual-misconduct-when-she-was-a-minor/2017/11/13/e661a3d2-c8a8-11e7-8321-481fd63f174d_story.html?utm_term=.6e7834ec7f99
LikeLike
Just one example of a homosexual activist wanting to lower the age of consent:
https://www.mercatornet.com/mobile/view/lower_age_of_consent_says_gay_rights_campaigner
LikeLike
AJ – You’re right about the growing acceptance of pro-life views. This article is better, & it addresses both conservative & liberal believers. . .
“The Biggest Loser in the Alabama Election
It’s not Republicans or Democrats, but Christian witness.”
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2017/december-web-only/roy-moore-doug-jones-alabama-editorial.html?utm_source=ctdirect-html&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_term=9474712&utm_content=553681450&utm_campaign=email
LikeLike
My position, Ricky, is simply historical—like the accusations against Roy Moore. I’m not supporting Moore–nor am I condemning him. I don’t know the truth of the matter, and I have not developed a strong opinion about him one way or the other. But if he is elected, he definitely should be received by the Senate.
LikeLike
I can rarely get behind the Washington Post’s paywall. On the rare occasions when I find I inadvertently have, I close it out and look for a more reputable source on the topic. They’ve gotten pretty bad since they drew the target around all things Trumpian. :–/
LikeLike
Speaking of older people leading young people astray:
I sent this article to my son and he had a one-word response: “Scum!” I agree.
LikeLike
There is enough about Moore to dislike without the allegations
LikeLiked by 1 person
Debra, People who never read the Washington Post or the New York Times often think Moore was just trying to date girls, that Mueller is corrupt and Trump is truthful. However, you heard the 16 year old’s press conference. We discussed it that day. I think you believe her.
LikeLike
For what it’s worth:
https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/alabama-senate-special-election-roy-moore-doug-jones?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=b-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news#eln-forecast-section
LikeLike
Ricky, People who do rely on WaPo, and their 5 dozen Trump muckrakers, often believe their biased accounts. And whether or not I believe the woman’s account or not, I’m not going to help her play the political game she’s playing. Period. It may or may not be true, I don’t know. But one thing I know for sure: it’s decades old. That matters to me because I believe that people do change—sometimes for the better and sometimes not. But when these things happened, and why they are being brought up now also matters to me. At this point, I do not think the truth of many specific claims (against the President as well) are really knowable—and in some cases are not really relevant to the political agenda that is being decided right now. And I’m not all that taxed about it either. Over the years, I have found my expectations of public officials are greatly lowered. Sometimes I’m pleasantly surprised. I’m rarely negatively surprised. In politics, weakness and treachery abound. All need our prayers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m not supporting Moore. I’m just pointing out that not all the accusations are of attempts at sex and that interest in teenagers is not pedophilia.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Trump: I sexually assault women.
Women: That’s true. Trump sexually assaulted us.
Trumpkins: We can’t know what happened.
LikeLike
It turns out the demoted FBI agent called Trump an “idiot”. Doesn’t that qualify him to be the Secretary of State?
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/12/fbi-agents-trump-mueller-texts-294156
LikeLike
It’s 9:15. Moore is still ahead, but the NYT gives Jones an 84% chance on winning. I’m switching to basketball.
LikeLike
It’s halftime. The NYT was right, and conservative Stephen Hayes gives credit to The Washington Post. The Post’s stories about Moore’s assaults on young girls clearly made the difference in a very close race.
LikeLike
Mainly for Kim, who seemed to be closest to this race: seen on FB tonight (by a former reporter colleague): So impressed with a certain southern state right now …
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am proud of my state but disappointed in my county
AJ no reason to degrade my state and laugh at us.
LikeLike
LikeLike
I don’t think there’s any joy in electing either of those guys. One is Roy Moore, the other is for legal baby killing. What’s there to be thrilled about?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Kim,
I’m not laughing at you. I’m just pointing out the fact that despite electing Jones, Dems will still view you folks as backward, Bible thumpin’ hicks. This won’t change that.
And I am laughing at the whole circus that politics have become.
LikeLike
If you elect a clown to be the President, you will have the circus.
LikeLiked by 1 person
GOP panic?
They’ve had their panties in a bunch since Trump was elected. Nothing changes in that department.
But just remember, you folks wanted Jones, you got him. And one less vote for anything R’s had dreams of passing. You’ve essentially lost the majority in the Senate when you include the turncoats like McCain, Murkowski, and Snowe. Good luck on getting those tax cuts and anything else through now.
Pat yourself on the back. You certainly did your part for the #Resistance. Noses, spite, and all that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah Ricky, ‘cuz Washington, DC was totally fine until he showed up. 🙄
And to this day, I’ll still take the clown over the criminal harpy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Congratulations, Kim. :–)
LikeLike