The Question of Presidential Inability

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 21376
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#76

Post by Addie » Tue May 16, 2017 1:25 pm

New York Times OpEd - David Brooks
When the World Is Led by a Child ...

At base, Trump is an infantalist. There are three tasks that most mature adults have sort of figured out by the time they hit 25. Trump has mastered none of them. Immaturity is becoming the dominant note of his presidency, lack of self-control his leitmotif.

First, most adults have learned to sit still. But mentally, Trump is still a 7-year-old boy who is bouncing around the classroom. Trump’s answers in these interviews are not very long — 200 words at the high end — but he will typically flit through four or five topics before ending up with how unfair the press is to him.
Continue reading the main story

His inability to focus his attention makes it hard for him to learn and master facts. He is ill informed about his own policies and tramples his own talking points. It makes it hard to control his mouth. On an impulse, he will promise a tax reform when his staff has done little of the actual work.

Second, most people of drinking age have achieved some accurate sense of themselves, some internal criteria to measure their own merits and demerits. But Trump seems to need perpetual outside approval to stabilize his sense of self, so he is perpetually desperate for approval, telling heroic fabulist tales about himself. ...

He is thus the all-time record-holder of the Dunning-Kruger effect, the phenomenon in which the incompetent person is too incompetent to understand his own incompetence. Trump thought he’d be celebrated for firing James Comey. He thought his press coverage would grow wildly positive once he won the nomination. He is perpetually surprised because reality does not comport with his fantasies.


¡Qué vergüenza!

User avatar
kate520
Posts: 13383
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#77

Post by kate520 » Tue May 16, 2017 2:12 pm

In answer to Forti:

1. More than Trump. I don't think Pence would actually push The Button, where I'm certain The Donald would if peeved enough.
2. Pence should last so long. He is as stinky from Russia as Trump, just takes more showers and keeps his head down. I suspect when details are finally revealed as to the extent of Trump's perfidy, we will see Pence's, too.


Patriotism is the last refuge of a Scoundrel.
Samuel Johnson
April 7, 1775

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 8012
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#78

Post by Mikedunford » Tue May 16, 2017 4:40 pm

Fortinbras wrote:And again the question, how badly do we want Mike Pence to be President?
Depends on the "we," I suppose.

For the "we" who are paying attention to the shit that's going on, and have the necessary perception* to comprehend the tremendous danger that we face under the current state of affairs, I'd say that we desperately want Mike Pence to be President. Because a President Pence will undoubtedly cause substantial harm to the country, but it will be "W" harm. It will be normal politics. It will be the kind of thing that the entire political system was designed to deal with, that can (the electorate willing) be repaired in relatively short order.

Trump is a semi-sentient dumpster fire who is perpetually shadowed by a guy with the nuke codes.


*i.e. any level greater than that possessed by the average amphetamine-crazed, repeatedly concussed chipmunk.


I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 5860
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#79

Post by RoadScholar » Tue May 16, 2017 4:55 pm

I think the situation is exactly as MikeD describes it.

Richard Nixon would be a better president now than Trump, and he's dead. Well, pretty close.

Pence would be another Republican in the White House. What we have now is nothing less than an existential threat to the Republic.


The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.

User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 3490
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 5 dogs, 2 cats, the neighbor's cat, and 1 horse

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#80

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Tue May 16, 2017 5:12 pm

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz ... evaluation?
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Amid concerns about Donald Trump’s fitness to be President, former President Barack Obama said on Tuesday that he was willing to serve as “temp President” while Trump undergoes psychiatric evaluation.

“It would just be a temp thing,” Obama told reporters. “As soon as psychiatrists determine that Donald Trump is mentally stable and fit to serve as the most powerful officeholder in the world, I’d step aside.”

Obama said that he was a “logical choice” to serve as temp President because of his eight years in the White House. “For starters, I know how the light switches work,” he said.

Obama said that, once installed as temp President, he would look after the day-to-day running of the White House: “You know—vetoing bills, naming Supreme Court Justices, that kind of thing.”

Asked how he envisioned his working relationship with Vice-President Mike Pence, Obama said, “I think Mike has been working so darn hard, he really deserves a vacation. Joe Biden has said he’ll fill in for a while.”


“I’ve been hooked since my first smell of C-4.” Linda Cox, first female Air Force Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician, first to lead her own unit, go to war, be awarded a Bronze Star, and hold the highest enlisted rank of chief master sergeant.

User avatar
June bug
Posts: 5757
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#81

Post by June bug » Tue May 16, 2017 5:22 pm

Mike Dunford wrote:Because a President Pence will undoubtedly cause substantial harm to the country, but it will be "W" harm. It will be normal politics. It will be the kind of thing that the entire political system was designed to deal with, that can (the electorate willing) be repaired in relatively short order.
RoadScholar wrote:Pence would be another Republican in the White House.
IMO Pence can do much more, and more permanent, harm than W. He's a Christian Dominionist, whose influence IMO is already seen in Trump's actions. If he becomes President, he'll push that agenda relentlessly, in the worst case through legislation, at the least via Executive Orders. What he does will not be easily or quickly repaired.

That being said, I agree with Mike and Road Scholar that Pence is still several orders of magnitude less dangerous than the Dumpster Don.



User avatar
HilltownGrrl
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 6:21 pm

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#82

Post by HilltownGrrl » Wed May 17, 2017 8:16 am

Tiredretiredlawyer wrote:http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz ... evaluation?
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Amid concerns about Donald Trump’s fitness to be President, former President Barack Obama said on Tuesday that he was willing to serve as “temp President” while Trump undergoes psychiatric evaluation.

“It would just be a temp thing,” Obama told reporters. “As soon as psychiatrists determine that Donald Trump is mentally stable and fit to serve as the most powerful officeholder in the world, I’d step aside.”

Obama said that he was a “logical choice” to serve as temp President because of his eight years in the White House. “For starters, I know how the light switches work,” he said.

Obama said that, once installed as temp President, he would look after the day-to-day running of the White House: “You know—vetoing bills, naming Supreme Court Justices, that kind of thing.”

Asked how he envisioned his working relationship with Vice-President Mike Pence, Obama said, “I think Mike has been working so darn hard, he really deserves a vacation. Joe Biden has said he’ll fill in for a while.”
As a sign of just how weird the news has been (especially) the last couple of weeks, I read the first sentence as though it this was an actual news report. I wondered about it in the second sentence but, sadly, it wasn't until I hit “For starters, I know how the light switches work,” that I realized it was satire. And then I was very, very sad because I desperately want Obama & Biden back (especially Biden, who always made me laugh). :violin: :crying:

Thanks for posting this, Tired - I needed a bit of ridiculousness to start my day!



User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 3490
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 5 dogs, 2 cats, the neighbor's cat, and 1 horse

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#83

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Wed May 17, 2017 8:17 am

:thumbs: Love me some Borowitz.


“I’ve been hooked since my first smell of C-4.” Linda Cox, first female Air Force Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician, first to lead her own unit, go to war, be awarded a Bronze Star, and hold the highest enlisted rank of chief master sergeant.

User avatar
HilltownGrrl
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 6:21 pm

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#84

Post by HilltownGrrl » Wed May 17, 2017 8:23 am

June bug wrote:IMO Pence can do much more, and more permanent, harm than W. He's a Christian Dominionist, whose influence IMO is already seen in Trump's actions. If he becomes President, he'll push that agenda relentlessly, in the worst case through legislation, at the least via Executive Orders. What he does will not be easily or quickly repaired.

That being said, I agree with Mike and Road Scholar that Pence is still several orders of magnitude less dangerous than the Dumpster Don.
I agree completely with all of this. Pence absolutely terrifies me, as do all Dominionists. It really says something about how horrendous 45 is that we are all in agreement that even with his robotic weirdness & nasty religious mania, Pence would still be better than 45 (with "better" being a very relative term).



User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 3490
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 5 dogs, 2 cats, the neighbor's cat, and 1 horse

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#85

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Wed May 17, 2017 8:25 am

:like: :like: :like:


“I’ve been hooked since my first smell of C-4.” Linda Cox, first female Air Force Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician, first to lead her own unit, go to war, be awarded a Bronze Star, and hold the highest enlisted rank of chief master sergeant.

User avatar
Gregg
Posts: 625
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 6:09 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH USA
Occupation: We build cars

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#86

Post by Gregg » Wed May 17, 2017 10:18 am

HilltownGrrl wrote:
June bug wrote:IMO Pence can do much more, and more permanent, harm than W. He's a Christian Dominionist, whose influence IMO is already seen in Trump's actions. If he becomes President, he'll push that agenda relentlessly, in the worst case through legislation, at the least via Executive Orders. What he does will not be easily or quickly repaired.

That being said, I agree with Mike and Road Scholar that Pence is still several orders of magnitude less dangerous than the Dumpster Don.
I agree completely with all of this. Pence absolutely terrifies me, as do all Dominionists. It really says something about how horrendous 45 is that we are all in agreement that even with his robotic weirdness & nasty religious mania, Pence would still be better than 45 (with "better" being a very relative term).
It helps that he'll be a political cripple.


Honorary Commander, 699th Airborne Assault Dachshund Regiment
Deadly Sausage Dogs from the Sky

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 21376
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#87

Post by Addie » Wed May 17, 2017 10:21 am

New York Times OpEd - Ross Douthat
The 25th Amendment Solution to Remove Trump ...

It is a child who blurts out classified information in order to impress distinguished visitors. It is a child who asks the head of the F.B.I. why the rules cannot be suspended for his friend and ally. It is a child who does not understand the obvious consequences of his more vindictive actions — like firing the very same man whom you had asked to potentially obstruct justice on your say-so. ...

The Trump situation is not exactly the sort that the amendment’s Cold War-era designers were envisioning. He has not endured an assassination attempt or suffered a stroke or fallen prey to Alzheimer’s. But his incapacity to really govern, to truly execute the serious duties that fall to him to carry out, is nevertheless testified to daily — not by his enemies or external critics, but by precisely the men and women whom the Constitution asks to stand in judgment on him, the men and women who serve around him in the White House and the cabinet.

Read the things that these people, members of his inner circle, his personally selected appointees, say daily through anonymous quotations to the press. (And I assure you they say worse off the record.) They have no respect for him, indeed they seem to palpate with contempt for him, and to regard their mission as equivalent to being stewards for a syphilitic emperor. ...

Meanwhile, from the perspective of the Republican leadership’s duty to their country, and indeed to the world that our imperium bestrides, leaving a man this witless and unmastered in an office with these powers and responsibilities is an act of gross negligence, which no objective on the near-term political horizon seems remotely significant enough to justify.

There will be time to return again to world-weariness and cynicism as this agony drags on. Right now, though, I will be boring in my sincerity: I respectfully ask Mike Pence and Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell to reconsider their support for a man who never should have had his party’s nomination, never should have been elevated to this office, never should have been endorsed and propped up and defended by people who understood his unfitness all along.

Now is a day for redemption. Now is an acceptable time.


¡Qué vergüenza!

User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 18975
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#88

Post by TollandRCR » Wed May 17, 2017 10:39 am

Addie wrote:New York Times OpEd - Ross Douthat
The 25th Amendment Solution to Remove Trump ...

Now is a day for redemption. Now is an acceptable time.
:thumbs:


“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut

User avatar
rpenner
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 3:08 pm
Location: Silicon Valley, California
Contact:

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#89

Post by rpenner » Wed May 17, 2017 5:48 pm

Amendment XXV [Presidential Succession (1967)] Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
CRS Annotated Constitution has nothing on Section 4.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/



User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 8012
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#90

Post by Mikedunford » Wed May 17, 2017 6:48 pm

rpenner wrote:
Amendment XXV [Presidential Succession (1967)] Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
CRS Annotated Constitution has nothing on Section 4.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/
You generally only get annotations on the parts of the Constitution that have been used.


I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 21376
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#91

Post by Addie » Fri Jun 09, 2017 1:30 pm

The Hill
Pelosi ‘very worried’ about Trump’s fitness for office

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is questioning President Trump’s fitness to hold his office.

The House Democratic leader said Friday that Trump may simply lack the curiosity, discipline and stamina to be a competent commander in chief. Trump’s Friday Twitter attack on former FBI Director James Comey, Pelosi said, is just the latest evidence.

“The president’s fitness for office is something that has been called into question,” Pelosi said during a press briefing in the Capitol. “It takes a certain curiosity to learn the facts, to base your comments on evidence and data and truth. It takes a certain discipline to be able to prioritize what is important as we try to bring the country together. And it takes some kind of stamina to keep your thoughts together.

“And I’m very worried about his fitness.”


¡Qué vergüenza!

User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 3490
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 5 dogs, 2 cats, the neighbor's cat, and 1 horse

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#92

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Sun Jun 11, 2017 2:11 pm

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... ump-215166
When Congress Almost Ousted a Failing President
It’s Andrew Johnson, not Andrew Jackson, who provides the best model for Trump’s collapsing presidency.

It was an ugly scene that left reporters slack-jawed. The president of the United States—a man notoriously short of temper and stubborn in his disregard for polite convention—had addressed a howling throng of political supporters outside the White House. Rambling and incoherent, he managed to refer to himself over 200 times over the course of an otherwise wild, angry screed. He incited the crowd to violence against his political enemies, including prominent member of the House of Representatives. A moderate news outlet critically observed that he was “the first of our Presidents who has descended to the stump, and spoken to the people as if they were a mob.”

Though Donald J. Trump has attempted to situate his presidency in the tradition of Jacksonian populism, it is another Andrew—Andrew Johnson, the man who staged that lowly performance—who provides the more apt comparison. A full-throated white supremacist and rabble-rousing populist, Johnson—who came to power in 1865 after President Abraham Lincoln’s assassination—offended friends and foes alike with his unrestrained rhetoric and rash exercise of executive authority. As president, he veered from one self-manufactured crisis to another. His political enemies suspected that he colluded closely with enemies of the state.

But it was his impeachment and ensuing Senate trial that offer the best lesson for contemporary observers. If any president deserved removal from office, surely it was Andrew Johnson. And yet he thwarted his opponents’ attempt to drive him from office, however narrowly. His acquittal raised the bar for future generations and makes it unlikely that any president—no matter how widely despised, unsuccessful or objectionable—can be booted from the White House, short of committing a demonstrable crime.
:snippity:
A congressman observed that as Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase gaveled the historic assembly into session, “some of the members of the House near me grew pale and sick under the burden of suspense.” Against the dull silence of the upper chamber, Senator Edmund G. Ross could discern “the shuffling of feet, the rustling of silks, the fluttering of fans,” and the low cadences of political intrigue. Near the White House, large crowds gathered outside the Ebbitt House on Fourteenth Street, where members of the national press corps kept their offices. “The sidewalk on Newspaper Row was blockaded during the whole evening by anxious searchers after news,” one reporter wrote. “The crowd became the dispenser of rumors rather than the recipient of facts.”


“I’ve been hooked since my first smell of C-4.” Linda Cox, first female Air Force Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician, first to lead her own unit, go to war, be awarded a Bronze Star, and hold the highest enlisted rank of chief master sergeant.

User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 3490
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 5 dogs, 2 cats, the neighbor's cat, and 1 horse

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#93

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:36 pm

This is a unique view of Trump's inability:
https://extranewsfeed.com/border-collie ... cad5df21a5
Trump’s White House Pet Discusses Narrow Escape
“Imagine my terror as they told me I might have to go live with that doaty dobber,” said Merle, speaking from a farm outside of London

In the past week, it has come to light that in late March, Donald Trump briefly considered getting a dog as a White House pet, as so many presidents have done before him.

Trump’s canine search team quickly found Merle, a Scottish border collie of rare pedigree living on an exclusive breeding farm outside of London.

While in England, this reporter drove to Sawbridgeworth, Hertfordshire, an area replete with country charm and open spaces, about 50 minutes from the nation’s capital. It is also home to the acclaimed Wakefield Breeder Farm, where Merle agreed to lie down for a vigorous belly rub and a brief interview about his narrow escape from the clumsy, yet tiny grip of the American president.

Merle: For months, every man, woman and child who visited the farm was talking about the numpty American who became president. All the other collies and me, we’d just laugh along with our masters, Robert and Audrey Wakefield. Then one day at the end of March the call came from the White House. Donald Trump was considering getting a Scottish border collie and wanted a young male. That’s when I heard Robert mention me, and I almost barfed up my lamb sausage.

AI: Were you scared?

Merle: Scared, I was mortified! I had heard nothing but awful things about that wispy-haired, sickly-hued, bawbag fuckbumper. I heard he hated women, children, and animals and would no sooner touch a dog than he would his own wife. I had no interest in leaving the farm to go live with that scrote.


“I’ve been hooked since my first smell of C-4.” Linda Cox, first female Air Force Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician, first to lead her own unit, go to war, be awarded a Bronze Star, and hold the highest enlisted rank of chief master sergeant.

User avatar
pipistrelle
Posts: 2428
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:26 am

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#94

Post by pipistrelle » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:46 pm

Addie wrote:The Hill
Pelosi ‘very worried’ about Trump’s fitness for office

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is questioning President Trump’s fitness to hold his office.

The House Democratic leader said Friday that Trump may simply lack the curiosity, discipline and stamina to be a competent commander in chief. Trump’s Friday Twitter attack on former FBI Director James Comey, Pelosi said, is just the latest evidence.

“The president’s fitness for office is something that has been called into question,” Pelosi said during a press briefing in the Capitol. “It takes a certain curiosity to learn the facts, to base your comments on evidence and data and truth. It takes a certain discipline to be able to prioritize what is important as we try to bring the country together. And it takes some kind of stamina to keep your thoughts together.

“And I’m very worried about his fitness.”
Well, there's Sessions, who doesn't care about election interference even enough to ask for a briefing. IANAL but if I were AG, I'd be all over that.



User avatar
Addie
Posts: 21376
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#95

Post by Addie » Fri Jun 23, 2017 7:21 pm

The Atlantic - David Frum
What Happens When a Presidency Loses Its Legitimacy?

Day by day, revelation after revelation, the legitimacy of the Trump presidency is seeping away. The question of what to do about this loss is becoming ever more urgent and frightening. ...

It’s not seriously disputed by anyone in a position of authority in the U.S. government—apart from the president himself—that Donald Trump holds his high office in considerable part because a foreign spy agency helped place him there. So now what?

Trump’s advisers urge the country to shrug the matter off, to focus on jobs and healthcare and let this compromised president continue to receive the most secret intelligence and control the nation’s armed forces. Another story in The Washington Post quoted this response to the latest shocking revelations from Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway:

“As his detractors suffer from this never-ending ‘Russian concussion,’ the president has been tending to business as usual — bilateral meetings, progress on health care, tax and infrastructure reform, and job creation. Conjecture about the mood and momentum of the West Wing is inaccurate and overwrought. The pace is breakneck, the trajectory upward.”

Business as usual? How would that work? It obviously cannot. And in fact, it is not.

The U.S. government is already osmotically working around the presidency, a process enabled by the president’s visible distaste for the work of governance. The National Security Council staff is increasingly a double-headed institution, a zone of struggle between Kushner-Flynn-Bannon types on one side, and a growing staff of capable, experienced, and Russia-skeptical functionaries on the other. The Senate has voted 97-2 to restrict the president’s authority to relax Russia sanctions. It seems the president has been persuaded to take himself out of the chain of command in the escalating military operations in Afghanistan. National-Security Adviser H.R. McMaster recently assured the nation that Trump could not have done much harm when he blabbed a vital secret to the Russian foreign minister in the Oval Office, precisely because the president was not briefed on crucial “sources and methods” information.

In their way, these workarounds are almost as dangerous to the American system of government as the Trump presidency itself. They tend to reduce the president to the status of an absentee emperor while promoting his subordinates into shoguns who exercise power in his name. Maybe that is the least-bad practicable solution to the unprecedented threat of a presidency-under-suspicion. But what a terrible price for the failure of so many American institutions—not least the voters!—to protect the country in 2016 from Russia’s attack on its election and its democracy.


¡Qué vergüenza!

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 21376
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#96

Post by Addie » Sat Jul 01, 2017 8:21 pm

The Hill
Watergate reporter: We are in a 'malignant presidency'

Legendary Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein called the Trump administration a "malignant presidency" on Saturday, and suggested that the wrongdoings committed by the White House were unprecedented. ...

"We are in the midst of a malignant presidency," Bernstein said. "That malignancy is known to the military leaders of the country, it's known to the Republican leadership in Congress who recognize it, and it's known to the intelligence community."

"The presidency of Donald Trump is not functioning," he continued. "It's really not functioning because the character and capabilities of this president are called into grave question in a way that those that know him are raising serious concerns about."

"To report on a malignant presidency, what it means, and where it's going," he said. "This president is not in control of the presidency in a way that it is functioning." ...

"We are in foreign territory. We have never been in a malignant presidency like this before."


¡Qué vergüenza!

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 24522
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ (Rawly NC)
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#97

Post by Foggy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 8:34 pm

What was your first clue, Carl? :think:


If dogs run free, why not we?

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 4990
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#98

Post by Sam the Centipede » Sat Jul 01, 2017 11:12 pm

We're lucky that no foreign leaders have yet noticed any problems with the US President and his team! :rotflmao: :rotflmao:



User avatar
Addie
Posts: 21376
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#99

Post by Addie » Mon Jul 03, 2017 8:12 am

Daily Beast
Our Founding Fathers Feared a Trump

The Founders had a major fear for the future of the American republic: that it would collapse into tyranny.

Some day a leader would win an election for president and then use the power and resources available to him as chief executive to disembowel democracy to the point of transforming it into an autocracy. And they knew just what sort of character would do that: a flamboyant charlatan who lied at every turn, used those lies to channel resentments at the status quo into votes that sent him into office, and then did not scruple to abuse his new power to amass even more power. In short, they feared the election of a Donald Trump.

They knew a lot about tyrants. They had worked very hard to get out from under one, King George III of Great Britain. Since 1760, when he ascended to the throne, they had watched in horror as Great Britain’s limited monarchy and Parliamentary democracy, once revered as the best government in the world, slid into practices that history taught prepared the way for tyranny. Benjamin Franklin identified these in 1775 when he wrote home from London about the “extream Corruption prevalent among all Orders of Men in this old rotten State [and the] Numberless and needless Places, enormous Salaries, Pensions, Perquisites, Bribes, groundless Quarrels, foolish Expeditions, false Accompts or no Accompts, Contracts and Jobbs [that] devour all Revenue and produce continual Necessity in the Midst of natural Plenty.” ...

The only way to guarantee the preservation of the republic and to prevent tyranny, the Constitution writers finally agreed, was through having separate legislative, executive, and judicial branches, and by embedding in the Constitution powers that enabled each to exert “checks and balances” on the others. Washington agreed, writing to Lafayette that under the new system America “can never be in danger of degenerating into a monarchy, an Oligarchy, an Aristocracy, so long as there shall remain any virtue in the body of the People.” He added that the Constitution had “more checks and barriers against the introduction of Tyranny… than any government instituted among mortals,” but that, given human nature, it was nonetheless a gamble. ...

In short, the Founders knew that if the checks and balances proved to be not strong enough to restrain the executive, or if the legislative and judicial branches, convinced by a crisis, yielded too much power to the executive—well, that way lay tyranny, because a president would then be able to do whatever he pleased, even if in the process he destroyed the republic.

So they were grateful that as chief executive they would have a Washington, not some lesser, mere grasping mortal who every day in office would show to the world an increasing inability to resist the thrill of wielding ever more power while displaying all the signs of becoming a tyrant.


¡Qué vergüenza!

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 21376
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Re: The Question of Presidential Inability

#100

Post by Addie » Mon Jul 03, 2017 8:28 am

New York Times Op-Ed
Charles M. Blow: The Hijacked American Presidency

Every now and then we are going to have to do this: Step back from the daily onslaughts of insanity emanating from Donald Trump’s parasitic presidency and remind ourselves of the obscenity of it all, registering its magnitude in its full, devastating truth.

There is something insidious and corrosive about trying to evaluate the severity of every offense, trying to give each an individual grade on the scale of absurdity. Trump himself is the offense. Everything that springs from him, every person who supports him, every staffer who shields him, every legislator who defends him, is an offense. Every partisan who uses him — against all he or she has ever claimed to champion — to advance a political agenda and, in so doing, places party over country, is an offense.

We must remind ourselves that Trump’s very presence in the White House defiles it and the institution of the presidency. Rather than rising to the honor of the office, Trump has lowered the office with his whiny, fragile, vindictive pettiness. ...

But his words shouldn’t have shocked. His tweet was just another pebble on a mountain of vulgarities. This act of coarseness was in fact an act of continuity. Trump was being Trump: the grossest of the gross, a profanity against propriety.


¡Qué vergüenza!

Post Reply

Return to “The Resistance”