Dumbfuck in charge

[sdoyel]

This is so good:

[Deleted User 89]

This is so good:

from that story...

https://www.propublica.org/article/us-e ... oronavirus

but as DC so kindly tried to deflect, the shortage at the national stockpile was all Obama’s fault

[Shirley]

From the former Director of the Office of Government Ethics:



Then, there was the open presidential profiteering and clues that hard-to-prove conflicts of interest were significantly influencing policy. But Republicans in Congress ensured that no one could dig too deeply into those, and they enabled it by refusing to conduct oversight. /2

Next came Trump's tests of the enforceability of laws--a little push against the tent wall here and a big jab against it there, followed by even bigger tests and a growing awareness that many laws don't have teeth or depend upon the executive branch to enforce them. /3

Along the way came the firings of the two most critical law enforcement officials precisely because they permitted investigations of Trump. The Attorney General's firing should have triggered his removal from office. But wild-eyed Senators were hot on the trail of more judges. /4

This emboldened Trump and taught him a lesson. He had come into government unaware that "personnel is policy." Now he both understood that and knew the Senate would let him treat the government like The Apprentice: only the most slavishly obedient appointees would survive. /5

Ordinarily, the game of musical appointees would have concerned members of Congress, particularly as Trump began to find replacements who didn't care about their oaths of office. But those judges continued to excite Republican Senators, and Trump's base made them nervous. /6

Oversight began only after the Democrats took the House. But Trump's hold on the Senate was absolute. We don't know what assurances he received behind the scenes, but we saw even longtime Republican Senators abandon previously espoused principles to protect him in plain sight./7

With that protection, Trump engaged in a previously unthinkable level of resistance to congressional oversight. The collapse of this Constitutional safeguard was a potentially mortal wound. It didn't go down without a fight, the House included "obstruction" in his impeachment. /8

But the Senate has the final say. With one exception, Republican Senators didn't even maintain a pretense of honoring their oaths. They ended the sham impeachment trial quickly. The failure of this second constitutional safeguard, moved the republic into a life-or-death crisis./9

What remained was the hope that whistleblowers and witnesses could still come forward. Maybe the people could demand action—if they knew the facts. But Republicans in Congress and their staffs, aided by fringe media outlets, worked to terrorize a suspected whistleblower. /10

Witnesses faired no better. Even some Senators who had spent their careers professing support for witnesses, gave Trump free rein to retaliate against them too. The stakes became high enough that whistleblowers and witnesses would henceforth think twice about coming forward./11

But Trump wasn't done. The White House began to speak of expanding its purge beyond political appointees to include career Feds, whose due process rights exist to prevent politicians from harnessing them for corrupt aims or, at least, silence any who might report wrongdoing. /12


The head of the Office of Special Counsel, which protects career Feds from political retaliation, remained silent—as did Republican Senators. Whether or not Trump follows through, the mere threat pressures career Feds to put loyalty to Trump above loyalty to the Constitution. /13

Individual government officials may have the moral fiber and ethics to resist the pressure. But the legal safeguards that help the federal workforce as a whole remain loyal to the American people and the rule of law over a rogue politician have been weakened. That's dangerous./14

A last line of defense in this war on ethics and law is the Inspector General community. They're the eyes of the American people, objective investigators traditionally freed to pursue accountability by the safeguard of bipartisan congressional protection./15

But the Trump era is a bad time for safeguards. Trump's eye has turned to the IGs, and Republican Senators have forsaken them—no hearings, no media blitz, only a few meek chirps of mild concern. Even the self-anointed patron saint of IGs, Chuck Grassley, has abandoned them. /16

What began with the fall of the ethics program is entering the end game with the potential fall of the Inspector General community. The government is failing us, safeguards that took two centuries to build have crumbled, and fascism is eyeing this republic like lunch. /17

It's down to the people. There is a chance in November to reclaim this land for democracy and reject fascism. But the obstacles are tremendous. Trump has the advantage of incumbency, decades of Republican voter suppression, and a third branch that increasingly seems political./18

A sign of things to come, the Supreme Court ramped up the voter suppression by sending Wisconsin voters into a war zone in our species' fight against an ancient enemy, disease. A global pandemic has ground America to a halt, complicating the upcoming presidential election. /19

Republican Senators are trotting out their Hillary Clinton playbook, hoping to abuse their authority again and wound Trump's leading political rival by Benghazi-Uranium-One-But-Her-Emailsing him. And they've given Trump their blessing for him to solicit foreign interference. /20

Trump's Attorney General has even opened a special channel for Trump's private attorney to funnel information from abroad to the Justice Department. Fascism is having a hell of a day in America, and things will get much worse before November. /21

All is not lost. The American people are fired up. But it'll be hard and the outcome's uncertain. That's why I want you to understand how big a deal it is that Trump is going after Inspectors General. This is a late-stage move in an authoritarian coup against the rule of law. /22

[sdoyel]

[sdoyel]

[Deleted User 289]

I just had a video conference with a political advisor who was blunt. He said that after conferring with 3 current Governors and other elected officials (Mayors, etc.) it seems the target date for the majority of Americans getting back to work as "normal" in this country is the end of May.
That's a "HOPEFUL" target. Of course there are MANY factors involved.
He elaborated in terms of different people who CAN NOT work from home and those who CAN continue to work from home.
Anyways, it seems there is a lot of frustration right now between many Governors (more than the 3) and the lack of being able to work in unison and getting direction from the federal government.
This is 100% my comment and not his - Gee, you think it might have something to do with the fact that the majority of the people working on the crisis for the federal government have never had to deal with anything remotely similar to this? I actually cut them some slack but...It sure would be nice to feel we have competent people who have experience handling national crises helping us right now.
When I see people such as Jared Kushner being given important responsibilities and proving they basically have no fucking clue what they are doing - I shudder.

[DCHawk1]

This is so good:

from that story...

https://www.propublica.org/article/us-e ... oronavirus

but as DC so kindly tried to deflect, the shortage at the national stockpile was all Obama’s fault

The thing is I think you're actually serious.

[HouseDivided]

This is so good:

Problem solved?

[HouseDivided]

I just had a video conference with a political advisor who was blunt. He said that after conferring with 3 current Governors and other elected officials (Mayors, etc.) it seems the target date for the majority of Americans getting back to work as "normal" in this country is the end of May.
That's a "HOPEFUL" target. Of course there are MANY factors involved.
He elaborated in terms of different people who CAN NOT work from home and those who CAN continue to work from home.
Anyways, it seems there is a lot of frustration right now between many Governors (more than the 3) and the lack of being able to work in unison and getting direction from the federal government.
This is 100% my comment and not his - Gee, you think it might have something to do with the fact that the majority of the people working on the crisis for the federal government have never had to deal with anything remotely similar to this? I actually cut them some slack but...It sure would be nice to feel we have competent people who have experience handling national crises helping us right now.
When I see people such as Jared Kushner being given important responsibilities and proving they basically have no fucking clue what they are doing - I shudder.

I think the whole issue is that different States and regions are experiencing different conditions. Kansas has 900 cases and 27 deaths. Getting back to work looks different than in NYC or Chicago. Governors would be much better-equipped to make their own call than the POTUS trying to impose a one size fits all approach. That seems wise, not incompetent.

[Deleted User 289]

I think that's exactly it - in terms of different conditions.
Problem is states need to work together. Sure that's on the Governors to work with one another but when they are having conference calls with members of the "task force" and are being told different things it makes it difficult. For example, let say the state of Pennsylvania "opens up" on May 15th but the state of New York isn't going to "open up" until June 1st. Obviously there is a LOT of interstate commerce. Things that states need to work in unison on. What are the "rules" that the federal government wants the states to abide by - or is it completely up to the states to figure that out?

[Deleted User 89]

we’re only as strong as our weakest state/s

here’s looking at you, georgia, florida, alabama, etc...

[HouseDivided]

What are the "rules" that the federal government wants the states to abide by - or is it completely up to the states to figure that out?

It would seem that the original intent of our system was to give sovereignty to States, so with that would come the responsibility to figure such things out. I would contend that the Federal government should stay out of it unless/until there is an impasse of some sort.

[twocoach]

This is so good:

Problem solved?

November. It won't fix every problem but it will fix this problem.

[Deleted User 289]

Not going to fix anything if/when he gets re-elected.

[DCHawk1]

Not going to fix anything if/when he gets re-elected.

Good heavens will this place be crazy, if/when that happens.

[sdoyel]

[Deleted User 289]

Not going to fix anything if/when he gets re-elected.

Good heavens will this place be crazy, if/when that happens.

Crazier. It's already plenty cra cra.
Hopefully no one on here actually kills themself. There was nothing funny meant by that.

[Deleted User 289]

The scary thing is when he insists he didn't say something that he said.
It's a way too frequent occurrence.

[HouseDivided]

This is so good:

Problem solved?

November. It won't fix every problem but it will fix this problem.

You better find somebody besides Dementia Joe and Madea to run against him, then.

[HouseDivided]

The scary thing is when he insists he didn't say something that he said.
It's a way too frequent occurrence.

He tends to conflate what he said and what he meant. He's a verbal processor, which means he thinks while he talks and revises as he goes along. That doesn't work well for a POTUS who is standing in front of a rabid press row intent of parsing every syllable for inaccuracies. He would do much better to adopt BO's strategy of reading his lines and sticking to the talking points. But he won't, so it's a moot point.