Trump 36: We Shall Overcome

[Audrey2]

20 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

Although I am a pacifist at heart, giving the Taliban everything it wants without getting anything of consequence in return just because you want to get out of the war in Afghanistan, is categorically the most cowardly and utterly stupid thing to do in Afghanistan.

Trump appears ready to cut and run in Afghanistan

 

In a really uncomfortable way, this makes sense. I know Pence is drooling when he thinks of making the US a "Christian" nation; that is, giving the conservative Christian church the ultimate authority. Trump would be doing the same for Islam. Afghanistan has been ruled by the Taliban before, with disastrous results, especially for women and children. Sadly, Trump cares about neither.

Note: There is a difference between mainline Christianity or Islam and the level these far right groups want to take their religion.

[Rachel333]

So even Fox News is supporting CNN's lawsuit against Trump. https://thehill.com/homenews/media/416630-fox-news-backs-cnns-lawsuit-against-trump-administration He must be fuming right now.

[47of74]

23 minutes ago, Rachel333 said:

So even Fox News is supporting CNN's lawsuit against Trump. https://thehill.com/homenews/media/416630-fox-news-backs-cnns-lawsuit-against-trump-administration He must be fuming right now.

Yeah I was just coming here to make note of that myself.  I'm all ready to go...

I imagine Faux "News" is supporting CNN because they know the next time there's a Democrat in the White House if they don't support journalists now they could be in the same boat if the Democrat decides that their "journalists" can't be in the White House. 

[47of74]

The BTs are taking Fox’s support of CNN as well as expected.

[onekidanddone]

Hello FJ Degreed Law Professionals:

I had to look up the definition of an  Amicus Brief and my question is thus:  

Is the filing party always on the side of the plaintiff?  Does this mean FOX stands with CNN or do they just want to gather all the intel they can in support of Trump?

[fraurosena]

33 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

Hello FJ Degreed Law Professionals:

I had to look up the definition of an  Amicus Brief and my question is thus:  

Is the filing party always on the side of the plaintiff?  Does this mean FOX stands with CNN or do they just want to gather all the intel they can in support of Trump?

I am NOT a Law Professional, and I don't play one on tv. However, as all the reporting is that Faux is backing CNN, I believe that those journalists may have read the brief and know it is in support of CNN. I'll  go check if I can find the brief anywhere and will post it as soon as I do.

Darn it, I've found something, but it's a PACER doc that I can't open. However, as I was looking, I did find the WH memorandum in opposition to motion.  

It's a doozy. In essence, they're stating Acosta was disruptive and the presidunce is allowed to use his discretion to revoke his hard pass. 

 

[fraurosena]

Here's the Pacer docket one, in case one of you can open it. Not sure what it's about.

 

[fraurosena]

@onekidanddone, this article is quite clear that Faux is supporting CNN. Apparently  Jay Wallace, Faux's president, issued a statement to that effect. He also says they intend to file an amicus brief, not that it has been done already. Maybe that's why I couldn't find it.

Fox News will join rival CNN in its legal fight over Jim Acosta’s White House access

Quote

Fox News has said it would join rival CNN in its legal battle to restore the access of White House reporter Jim Acosta, maintaining that press credentials “should never be weaponised.” Fox, which has often been praised by US President Donald Trump, said the revoking of the CNN reporter’s press pass raises concerns over freedom of the press.

“Fox News supports CNN in its legal effort to regain its White House reporter’s press credential,” the news channel’s president Jay Wallace said in a statement.

“We intend to file an amicus brief with the US District Court. Secret Service passes for working White House journalists should never be weaponised. While we don’t condone the growing antagonistic tone by both the president and the press at recent media avails, we do support a free press, access and open exchanges for the American people.”

But the Trump Administration isn’t giving any ground despite the position of Fox News.

In a legal filing it said Mr Trump has “broad discretion” to regulate journalists’ access.

“The President and White House possess the same broad discretion to regulate access to the White House for journalists (and other members of the public) that they possess to select which journalists receive interviews, or which journalists they acknowledge at press conferences,” the White House said in its response to the suit. “No journalist has a First Amendment right to enter the White House.”

 

[47of74]

2 hours ago, onekidanddone said:

Hello FJ Degreed Law Professionals:

I had to look up the definition of an  Amicus Brief and my question is thus:  

Is the filing party always on the side of the plaintiff?  Does this mean FOX stands with CNN or do they just want to gather all the intel they can in support of Trump?

Not quite a degreed law professional yet, but such briefs can be filed in support of either party.   What I think most likely is going on is that Faux "News" is shitting themselves empty that the day will come when there's a Democratic President and if fuck face isn't challenged over this now said Democratic President could use the precedent fuck face is laying down could be use to lock them out of the White House.

And awwww......poor man baby is having a temper tantrum....

Quote

A political clobbering, bickering aides and now a public grenade launched across the White House by the first lady have placed President Donald Trump in a position he loathes: backed into a corner.

A week after standing in the East Room and declaring victory in the midterm elections, the President is isolated and growing more furious by the day. He's openly speculating about replacing more members of his Cabinet, though so far has stopped short of executing the dismissals, leaving those aides in a career purgatory.

At an election night party at the White House, Trump left attendees guessing when he was spotted in a huddle with a potential replacement for his chief of staff, John Kelly, who himself stood awkwardly in a corner.

"Yes, he's pissed -- at damn near everyone," a White House official said, noting the mood in the Oval Office is darker than normal this week. After nearly a month straight of campaigning before adoring crowds, the applause has gone silent and the President has retreated. The tempest has led to rampant speculation inside the building about the fates of other senior staffers, some of whom are beginning to plan their exits.

 

1 hour ago, fraurosena said:

Here's the Pacer docket one, in case one of you can open it. Not sure what it's about.

 

Can't see the actual document, I get a logon screen.

[GreyhoundFan]

From Jennifer Rubin: "A frightful portrait of a president out of control"

Spoiler

The Post reports:

During his 43-hour stay in Paris, [President] Trump brooded over the Florida recount and sulked over other key races being called for Democrats in the midterm elections that he had claimed as a “big victory.” He erupted at his staff over media coverage of his decision to skip a ceremony honoring the military sacrifice of World War I.

The president also was angry and resentful over French President Emmanuel Macron’s public rebuke of rising nationalism, which Trump considered a personal attack. And that was after his difficult meeting with Macron, where officials said little progress was made as Trump again brought up his frustrations over trade and Iran.

Trump hollered at British Prime Minister Theresa May in a phone call, berated aides and insisted on personnel changes likely to worsen morale in an already besieged White House. It is this ongoing funk that may explain his baseless attacks on the voting recount in Florida and his lashing out at CNN reporter Abby Phillip. (“Trump sent political aides in Washington scrambling to prepare detailed briefings for him on the still-to-be-called races. He aired baseless allegations of voter irregularities on Twitter. . . . Still, the president told aides he felt disconnected from the action in his suite at the U.S. ambassador’s residence in Paris — even as he consumed countless hours of television news on the trip.”)

In other words, as bad a Trump’s public outbursts may be, he is even less composed, rational and stable behind closed doors. Once more — as we saw with Bob Woodward’s book, the anonymous op-ed in the New York Times, Michael Wolff’s book, Omarosa Manigault Newman’s tell-all, and countless news reports — the people who work most closely with Trump know best how emotionally, intellectually and temperamentally unfit he is for the job. And yet, they continue to mislead the public, and remain silent after leaving, as to the president’s ability to carry out his duties.

Trump apologists, as they habitually do, will deny and disbelieve reporting. But foreign leaders, outside friends, members of Congress and others who observe him on a daily basis now spill their guts to the media, perhaps to distance themselves from the White House’s downward spiral.

There are several takeaways from all of this.

First, Trump will get worse under pressure. If he is this bad now, imagine what he’ll be like if more associates are indicted, the economy goes to seed or the subpoenas start flying. At some point, unless Trump has him fired, special counsel Robert S. Mueller III will issue his report. Unless it miraculously exonerates him, the president may have a meltdown that will make his trip to France look like a picnic.

Second, self-described saviors of the country, such as the anonymous op-ed writer, are deluding themselves if they believe they are preventing the president from harming the country. Daily, he threatens democratic norms, blemishes the United States’ reputation around the world and makes worse and worse personnel decisions in an effort to surround himself with more compliant aides. If Trump fires Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, it is not clear how many more erratic decisions will be made or how serious the ramifications may be.

Third, all of this points to the gross irresponsibility of Republicans who, for two years, refused to exercise any oversight and continue to spin on his behalf. They would rather excuse the conduct of an unbalanced and hysterical commander in chief then move to limit his powers (e.g., reassert that a first strike is an act of war requiring congressional authorization, claw back power to enact tariffs). They likely will continue to rubber-stamp his executive branch picks, no matter how unprepared and temperamentally unfit they may be. Even more reprehensible, they will heartily endorse him for reelection while maligning his challengers. Maybe if they see control of the Senate slipping away, they will finally cut him loose.

All of this reminds us that Democratic control of the House is only a halfway measure. Unless and until Trump is out of office, the country, our democracy and our security remain at risk.

 

[Howl]

I am truly in fear of the day in January when the new Congress is seated.  Trump is in a downward spiral right now and when his ass starts getting kicked by the Dem majority in the house.....

And if Faux starts changing a little and he doesn't get narcissistic supply from them like he's used to..... WTF might he do?  Guess we'll find out soon enough. 

[Cartmann99]

 

[fraurosena]

Because she is so eminently suited for the job. They make handbags in South Africa, don't they?

 

[fraurosena]

 

[fraurosena]

It looks like things are particularly terrible in the WH right now. More so than usual, if the presidunce needs to tweet about it.

 

[onekidanddone]

13 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

It looks like things are particularly terrible in the WH right now. More so than usual, if the presidunce needs to tweet about it.

 

Oh we really need an ? reaction emoji 

[fraurosena]

It looks like the Mueller investigation is getting really close now...

*sniggers gleefully*

(note: Mueller worked 8 years for Bush junior and then 4 years for Obama, but who's looking at details?)

[fraurosena]

I actually gave a huge belly-laugh when I read this comment on the tweets above:

 

[fraurosena]

Oh yes, something is afoot, indeed.

Tomorrow is day 666 of the presiduncy. Will that be the day of the indictments? Is this why the presidunce is freaking out? Rufus, make it so. 

 

[fraurosena]

Ass-puckering much?

 

[formergothardite]

Someone is in a panic and hoping that he can distract from the fact that things are looking very, very bad for him. Only his most beloved followers are going to believe him. 

[fraurosena]

 

[Drala]

The Trumpster is freaking out.  Wonder what damage he will do to the Republic as the arc of the moral universe bends toward justice over the next several days/weeks/months?  This could get really ugly.

[fraurosena]

5 minutes ago, Drala said:

The Trumpster is freaking out.  Wonder what damage he will do to the Republic as the arc of the moral universe bends toward justice over the next several days/weeks/months?  This could get really ugly.

It's going to be two very unnerving and dangerous weeks...

 

[GreyhoundFan]