Trump, May 2017: 100 days of [unintelligible]

rainierwolfcastle.gif

You don't say

McMaster just walked by gaggle of press outside Sean's office: "This is the last place in the world I want to be...I'm leaving."

— Justin Sink (@justinsink) May 15, 2017

*ba-dum-tish*

Donald Trump concealed classified information from the Russian government, with few exceptions.

— Josh Barro (@jbarro) May 15, 2017

Ex-CIA officer to me on WaPo bombshell: "Whoever gave us the intel won't next time."

— Michael Weiss (@michaeldweiss) May 15, 2017

maybe Trump accidentally leaked the leak

yes that's the joke

― 𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Monday, May 15, 2017 6:04 PM

you did see how quickly we posted, or did McCain's arms block your sight?

I'd kinda say that a president's 'right' to leak classified information ends where the consequences of his leaking it will result in material damage to American lives and well-being. There's this thing called due process of the law which is supposed to supersede a president's authority. We don't need no stinking monarchy.

Per that point

Likely this was leaked because an operation was just blown by POTUS or US spooks don't want to be on the hook for when Russia derails it.

— Michael Weiss (@michaeldweiss) May 15, 2017

Of interest

Told my listeners I'll wait 48hrs on the Trump-Russia intel story to see if this too gets retracted. But I know one of the sources. Credible

— Erick Erickson (@EWErickson) May 15, 2017

someone is literally going to die because of this

Thousands of people

Every tweet. Every goddamn tweet of his predicts a future lined with his own fuck-ups. He's like a time traveler failing to warn himself. pic.twitter.com/tXFsdSWrkD

— Chuck Wendig (@ChuckWendig) May 15, 2017

a right-wing supreme court (thanks obama & senate dems)

lol okay, really placing the blame where it belongs there eh

― Οὖτις, Monday, May 15, 2017 4:38 PM (twenty-eight minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

what do we have now? a supposedly "destroyed" senate and a right-winger in scalia's spot

what could we have had, a year ago? the same "destroyed" senate and a liberal in scalia's spot.

mcconnell dared the democrats to do something against truly unprecedented blocking of constitutional process, and they backed down.

democrats made their stand against gorsuch (admirable) and mcconnell duly nuked the place and here we are.

yes i'm more mad at democrats for this turn of events because i expect maximum bullshit from the GOP always, and dems appear to have learned nothing from the last 8 years, or were happy not to learn because they have other goals in mind than mine.

Trump likes to show off his office toys.This is the intel equivalent of Trump showing ppl Shaq's shoe at Trump Tower https://t.co/kLIlZrKtVj

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) May 15, 2017

(not knowing the ins and outs of senate procedure -- i'm assuming schumer could have wielded whatever powers mcconnell just did)

so you think Reid should've foreseen Scalia's death more than 2 years in advance, nuked the filibuster, waited for Scalia to die, and then pushed through Gorsuch w 51 votes?

yeah that makes sense

i'm assuming schumer could have wielded whatever powers mcconnell just did

go get your fuckin shine box

and then pushed through Gorsuch w 51 votes?

sorry I meant Garland here

lol i'm forgetting some important numbers here aren't i

but since you asked re: reid, my answer is yes!

November 2013: Reid, as Majority Leader strips filibuster on party-line vote for many Senate confirmations votes, but leaves filibuster in place for SC nominees.
November 2014: Democrats lose control of the Senate in mid-term elections, McConnell becomes Majority Leader.
Feb 2016: Scalia dies
March 2016: Obama nominates Garland, McConnell refuses to even bring up his nomination through the Judiciary Committee, much less give it a floor vote. Senate Dems are powerless, since they are in the minority
Nov 2016: Trump wins, Garland's nomination is effectively dead
March 2017: Trump nominates Gorsuch, Democrats - in an unprecedented move and lead by Schumer - filibuster the nomination. McConnell strips the SC filibuster on a party-line vote, Gorsuch is confirmed.

in Nov 2013 Reid had no way of knowing a) that Scalia would die, b) that Dems would lose the Senate in 2014, c) that McConnell would block Garland's nomination.

Holding this lack of foresight against him is insane, sorry.

what is the actual point of hashtag-the-resistance? why on earth are all of the twitter centrist hillary dem types so bent on impeachment?

and this is just a v wtf mischaracterization - I see impeachment chatter on twitter from the crankiest cranks of the left, berniebros, Sarah Silverman's celeberal crew etc.

― Οὖτις, Monday, May 15, 2017 5:41 PM (forty-six minutes ago)

i'm having some trouble following goole's #gametheory train of thought but i definitely don't think this is true, it's definitely the centrist/BlueNation types who are pushing most vocally for impeachment ime

Prior to Garland nobody had done what McConnell did. And what's more, I don't think anyone had ever even filibustered a Supreme Court nominees before (someone remind me if this happened w Fortas before he was withdrawn?). It was totally unprecedented.

xp

it's definitely the centrist/BlueNation types who are pushing most vocally for impeachment ime

this could be true, but I don't follow any of them on twitter so idk!

The Democrats did not have a majority in the Senate when Scalia died, making it impossible for them to push through Garland's nomination without any Republicans. Obama could have done a recess appointment (and I wish he had) but, as I understand it, it only would have lasted until January 3rd of this year, at which point Garland would need to go through the confirmation process anyway in order to remain on the Court.

So basically, Obama could have put Garland on the court, he could have been there for a bunch of decisions that went to the liberal wing anyway, and then he could have fallen off of the court again until Trump was sworn in and put forward Gorsuch anyway.

there is also not a lot of overlap ime between bernie bros and the louise mensch disciples, i think your leftist xls needs some recalibrating xp

the recess appointment would've been a real risky move either way, courts might have struck it down or McConnell could've maneuvered around it etc.

nonetheless I did advocate for that course of action at the time

xp

there is also not a lot of overlap ime between bernie bros and the louise mensch disciples

idk when all the hardcore Bernie supporters I know here in SF are tweeting it that's a big enough sample size for me

i have wanted the filibuster gone since forever! i am an accelerationist about nothing except the filibuster. that is, ahem, yes, a different argument than i was making above, which doesn't make much sense given the numbers. whoops. forgot the sequence of events there.

my memory is, as you see, kind of bad. i swear there was another issue where reid nuking the filibuster was a possibility and he didn't.

I 100% support the filibuster because I am a minority and I know what majorities in this country like to do to minorities.

Reid's "nuclear option" move was always strictly in terms of federal judicial nominees - it was never about the SCOTUS (Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan all went through relatively smoothly), much less about legislation.

the filibuster is currently standing between us and full-bore implementation of the GOP agenda in congress, btw.

xp

don't doubt for a second that McConnell would be ramming through all sorts of shit with his 51 votes RIGHT NOW if he could

oh i think when just the first push comes to shove he'll roll right over it

i support getting rid of the filibuster but it's dicey because the senate is always going to be an inherently conservative body relative to the general population

argggh pay attention please. McConnell has repeatedly he does not support and has no plans to abolish the filibuster - he could have done it already if he thought he had the votes from his caucus, but I don't doubt him when he notes that this would really be divisive and it's likely there'd be GOP defections if he tried to do it. Dems would all vote against such a move, and all they would need would be a few vulnerable Senators who understand the history of the Senate and party dynamics and losing elections and the fact that traditionally the filibuster has inarguably benefited *conservatives* more than it has liberals. They are not gonna disarm themselves of something they will probably need very shortly.

xp

at this moment McConnell won't do it

McMaster gonna give a statement

Looks like it happened?

Statements from Tillerson, McMaster and Dina Powell come all at once pic.twitter.com/SvGQ7uLrWs

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) May 15, 2017

Or is McMaster going to give a further statement.

Pretty much those all seem to be hedging.

Another one from Erickson

I am always skeptical of these breathless stories, but I know one of the sources who is pro-Trump and really perturbed at his boss.

— Erick Erickson (@EWErickson) May 15, 2017

can't we just get a tape of the convo from the Russians? maybe wikileaks can help out

just because Trump didn't reveal 'sources or methods' doesn't mean he didn't give valuable information. as the WaPo article said, "the identification of the location was seen as particularly problematic, officials said, because Russia could use that detail to help identify the U.S. ally or intelligence capability involved."

so have I got this right, on 5/9 Trump fired Comey, on 5/10 he shared highly classified info with Russian ambassador sometime before or after a photo-op with the Russian press in the oval office, on 5/11 he admitted to suborning obstruction of justice in the Lester Holt interview, and on 5/12 he threatened Comey with blackmail in a twitter message about secret tapes...

Full week!

multi-xps Whatever McMaster says will be the Trump administration's statement, with McMaster as the delivery vehicle.

Hope he gets the time to reread his book tonight, then.

I see no "malice" -- I see a moron.

yeah, this isn't trump delivering to his superiors, it's trump being a colossal imbecile

As do we all, Mr. Speaker.

.@SpeakerRyan spox on WaPo story: "The speaker hopes for a full explanation of the facts from the administration." pic.twitter.com/OG9IywhWKJ

— Scott Wong (@scottwongDC) May 15, 2017