This is fucking brilliant

[ex-khobar Andy]

In a parliamentary system such as the UK's and Canada's, a minister who is unable or unwilling to carry out the party or PM policy will usually resign. Sometimes that minister might think (foolishly or not) that s/he has the support of the public on this issue and might seek to overturn the PM. Think Geoffrey Howe and Margaret Thatcher. Howe's resignation speech so badly wounded Thatcher that it led to her resignation as PM and to John Major. In my opinion a Good Thing. (I met Geoffrey Howe at a party some years later - a mutual friend had invited us both - I asked him about that speech. He was more interested in grabbing some sandwiches off the buffet table at the time, and told me not to believe everything I read. Good advice.)

In a presidential system, especially one in which the President is also Head of State, there is no mechanism for a protest from within the system which might lead to a change in direction or policy or personnel (or all three). The president is there for four years; if you resign he will just find someone else to do the job, more to his liking. I recognize the strength of the constitutional basis of the republic, and I am well aware that wishing it were a little more flexible might lead to otherwise unintended consequences. Which is why I say that, if there is a silver lining to the Trump presidency, it may be that we all need a reminder from time to time that the guy with the big megaphone who tells us that he has all the answers and is smarter than the rest of us generally (a) doesn't and (b) isn't.

[Sue U]

Lifted off the Twatter machine:

Thomas Sadoski
‏Verified account @ThomasSadoski

I want to join the chorus of celebration for whomever wrote this but I find myself stuck on one point: if, anonymous writer, you and others actually thought of invoking the 25th and DIDN’T and rather chose to operate on your own you aren’t protecting us.

You have rather chosen to circumvent the constitution in order to protect your values and worldview. You choose to operate around an acknowledged incompetent in order to accomplish your policy desires and beliefs. You have deprived us all our due process and voice.

As a Supreme Court nominee sits in his confirmation hearing, potentially locking your stated worldview into the judiciary for decades, you pat yourself on the back and lecture us about tribalism. You are not a hero. You are a coup.

You are not an example of heroism, you are the worst kind of tyrant: one who would hide from the fight, one who would rather obfuscate and manipulate than stand tall in the arena of this republic and let the best ideas win. You are exactly the opposite of John McCain.

There will be any number of people who want to praise you for this piece of self-serving hucksterism you’ve written. But know this with absolute certainty: you deserve no praise. You deserve the contempt and scorn of all free men and women. You are a joke. You are Donald Trump.

https://twitter.com/ThomasSadoski/statu ... 1031539712

[Sue U]

In a parliamentary system such as the UK's and Canada's, a minister who is unable or unwilling to carry out the party or PM policy will usually resign. Sometimes that minister might think (foolishly or not) that s/he has the support of the public on this issue and might seek to overturn the PM. Think Geoffrey Howe and Margaret Thatcher. Howe's resignation speech so badly wounded Thatcher that it led to her resignation as PM and to John Major. In my opinion a Good Thing. (I met Geoffrey Howe at a party some years later - a mutual friend had invited us both - I asked him about that speech. He was more interested in grabbing some sandwiches off the buffet table at the time, and told me not to believe everything I read. Good advice.)

In a presidential system, especially one in which the President is also Head of State, there is no mechanism for a protest from within the system which might lead to a change in direction or policy or personnel (or all three). The president is there for four years; if you resign he will just find someone else to do the job, more to his liking. I recognize the strength of the constitutional basis of the republic, and I am well aware that wishing it were a little more flexible might lead to otherwise unintended consequences. Which is why I say that, if there is a silver lining to the Trump presidency, it may be that we all need a reminder from time to time that the guy with the big megaphone who tells us that he has all the answers and is smarter than the rest of us generally (a) doesn't and (b) isn't.

This is one reason why I have advocated for a multi-party parliamentary system with proportional representation. If we had the type of government that is more in line with what other western democracies use, abuse-of-power problems could be addressed, for example, in a no-confidence vote.

[wesw]

my PBS station has started airing episodes of Yes Minister, and Yes, Prime Minister


if you want to truly understand the deep state phenomenon , I highly recommend them

[Long Run]

I disagree with the interpretation that the writer, as an unelected official, is somehow undermining democracy by curbing the worst of Trump's impulses. Not many examples were provided, but here is one:

On Russia, for instance, the president was reluctant to expel so many of Mr. Putin’s spies as punishment for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. He complained for weeks about senior staff members letting him get boxed into further confrontation with Russia, and he expressed frustration that the United States continued to impose sanctions on the country for its malign behavior. But his national security team knew better — such actions had to be taken, to hold Moscow accountable.

The senior staff knew what had to be done and advocated for tougher sanctions on Russia. Trump complains that he was boxed in and had to agree to the sanctions. I am guessing that many presidents got boxed in by internal and external factors and had to agree to things they would have preferred not to. These people are simply advocating for a position within an administration. Ideally, smart people sit around a table and have a vigorous debate about how to handle things. That happens in this administration just like in other administrations (probably a lot more in other administrations). And, just like in other administrations, this one has people advocate more behind the scenes to make their positions more likely to be adopted. If someone is too Machievellian they will be eventually tossed out or marginalized.

On the other hand, I don't see how this op-ed piece will help matters; the first rule of fight club . . .

[ex-khobar Andy]

Now Rand Paul is pressing Trump to get a lie detector and go round all the senior WH people. I am not sure that Trump wants to be in the same zip code as a lie detector. I would pay good money to see that.

[Big RR]

[ex-khobar Andy]

One line from the editorial piece:

Some of his aides have been cast as villains by the media. But in private, they have gone to great lengths to keep bad decisions contained to the West Wing, though they are clearly not always successful.

One wonders where we would be if they had not managed to stop some of the 'bad decisions.' Would we by now have even more evidence (not that any is needed, IMO) of the man's extraordinarily inability to do the job? Could we see some of the stuff they managed to stop?

[wesw]

I wish I could take credit, but a pundit, Howie Kurtz, hung a monker on the writer of the op-ed....

DeepState Throat.......

and pretty funny that he used a phrase that only mike pence uses..... lodestar...., funny

[Lord Jim]

The current thinking on "lodestar" is that since Henry Kissinger used it in his tribute at McCain's funeral, and the author of the Op-ed piece is obviously a great admirer of McCain's, he (or she) most likely got the idea to use the word from watching Kissinger's eulogy...

Which doesn't narrow down the list of possible authors very much...

[wesw]

for some reason I m leaning toward coates, larry o'dumbass may have the inside info and just pretended to figure it out. he is full of shit like that. he is like a friggin gargoyle.....

he is on right after the mad=komododragon

[Econoline]

[RayThom]

I'm going with John Kelly. He's an old military man who likes orderly directives, plus he knows how to use buzzwords he picks up from other subordinates effectively.

Although I enjoyed the brutal NYT Op-Ed like every other Drumpf hater and lover of our Constitution, I think it was a cheap shot against our Democratic process in general. That said, I truly hope the originator gets outed and sees how our court system and/or the court of public opinion handles it.

I'm holding to my earlier diagnosis that Lord Dampnut is suffering from neurosyphilis, just like his hero, Al Capone. C'mon 25th Amendment -- do your thing.

[ex-khobar Andy]

It's quite well written. Maybe they should just find the staffer with a GED and there's your culprit.

[Econoline]

• • Slate today is taking the rare step of publishing a letter someone sent us from inside an ongoing bank robbery. We have done so at the request of the author, who is currently robbing a bank, but would like to minimize his exposure to criminal charges from this whole bank robbery thing now that it seems to be going south. We invite you to submit a question about this essay or our vetting process here.

  
  
  “Machine Gun” Bill McGuire, the leader of the gang of hardened criminals currently robbing the First National Bank, is facing a test to his leadership unlike any faced by a modern American bank robber.
  
  It’s not just that the building is surrounded by police officers. Or that he’s running out of hostages to bargain with. Or even that the sentries he posted in the loading dock don’t seem to be responding over their walkie-talkies anymore.
  
  The dilemma—which he does not fully grasp—is that many of the senior henchmen inside his own gang are working diligently from within the bank to paint ourselves as heroes in the press while continuing to stuff our duffel bags with as much money as we can grab.

(Read the rest of this fucking brilliant "letter" here.)

[MajGenl.Meade]

Who is this "brilliant" and is there informed consent?

[Lord Jim]

One of the most hilarious aspects of this is Il Boobce trying to claim that this article somehow endangers national security...

pssst...Donald....

The fact that you're an amoral, unhinged nutbar who is completely unfit for the office you hold wasn't exactly a state secret before the Op-ed was published...

That kinda falls into the category of "general knowledge"...

That kitty got out of the bag a long time ago...

[wesw]

yeah, and he was wrong about "treason?".

it was sedition, not treason.

just vote you big baby. ..., oh that s right YOU voted for Hillary.....

...and Pelosi this election???????

please unbunch your panties and adapt.

I have, I changed the way I catch crabs this year, because for the last ten years or so I have been miserable doing it, and now?

...now I m catching more crabs than ever.

adapt man adapt.

accept the results of the election you seditious old sombitch.....

[dales]

...now I m catching more crabs than ever.

Might want to consult a druggist for an over the counter remedy.

[Lord Jim]

...now I m catching more crabs than ever.

Might want to consult a druggist for an over the counter remedy.

I was going to suggest switching to a higher class knocking shop...