Who will be next to speak out about Trump?

[TheDeamon]

Senator Ben Sasse, Republican, Nebraska:
"I want more briefings but, more importantly, I want the whole White House to start acting like a team on a mission to tackle a real problem. Navarro’s Larry, Moe and Curly junior-high slap fight this week is yet another way to undermine public confidence that these guys grasp that tens of thousands of Americans have died and tens of millions are out of work."

It's the argument Trump should be making, but won't because the Democrats will have a field day with parts of it.

We're at a cross-roads on what to do, the Economic Argument, paired with those actuarial tables, makes a strong argument for keeping things open to the maximum extent possible.

The Public Health Argument makes a strong case for much of the country's population centers going back into lockdown, which will do significant harm to the economy.

Meanwhile, the political side of it is a complete and total mess at this stage, as the tin-foil hat crowd is running rampant.

[DonaldD]

So you are saying if Trump said the following, you think the Democrats would make political hay...?

• The consensus is now in - everybody, please wear face masks, especially indoors, and when you cannot consistently stay more than 6 feet apart from others.  Although there were conflicting views on this in the past, that is no longer the case. If everybody was to wear masks consistently, we will reduce infection rates significantly.
• Keep a safe distance from others - this generally means stay at least 6 feet apart from those outside your 'bubble', especially when indoors.  And remember, wearing masks in conjunction with keeping distance will allow us to get the infection rates under control more quickly, and allow us to ramp up our economy more quickly.
• Especially in areas where the infection rates are not under control, avoid large gatherings, especially indoors.
• Listen to your local health authorities; each region/city is different, with different challenges. 
• This virus is a very serious issue - maybe the biggest challenge of our generation - we need to get it under control, and if we work together, and be mindful of and care for other people, we will get through this together.

i don't see how the Democrats could possibly get more political mileage out of that, than out of what already comes out of his mouth every day - especially since NOT making these points will unfortunately lead to many people ignoring or even contesting the efforts to get the pandemic under control, leading to more infections and deaths closer to the date of the election.

What's better, getting a few "I told you so"s from a few disgruntled Democrats in July, or hundreds of daily deaths and 10,000 new daily infections in November?

[Wayward Son]

Stuart Stevens, Republican Political Consultant, Senior Strategist for Mitt Romney's Presidential campaign:

I spent decades working to elect Republicans, including Mr. Romney and four other presidential candidates, and I am here to bear reluctant witness that Mr. Trump didn’t hijack the Republican Party. He is the logical conclusion of what the party became over the past 50 or so years, a natural product of the seeds of race-baiting, self-deception and anger that now dominate it. Hold Donald Trump up to a mirror and that bulging, scowling orange face is today’s Republican Party.

I saw the warning signs but ignored them and chose to believe what I wanted to believe: The party wasn’t just a white grievance party; there was still a big tent; the others guys were worse. Many of us in the party saw this dark side and told ourselves it was a recessive gene. We were wrong. It turned out to be the dominant gene.

What is most telling is that the Republican Party actively embraced, supported, defended and now enthusiastically identifies with a man who eagerly exploits the nation’s racial tensions. In our system, political parties should serve a circuit breaker function. The Republican Party never pulled the switch...

How did this happen? How do you abandon deeply held beliefs about character, personal responsibility, foreign policy and the national debt in a matter of months? You don’t. The obvious answer is those beliefs weren’t deeply held. What others and I thought were bedrock values turned out to be mere marketing slogans easily replaced. I feel like the guy working for Bernie Madoff who thought they were actually beating the market.

Mr. Trump has served a useful purpose by exposing the deep flaws of a major American political party. Like a heavy truck driven over a bridge on the edge of failure, he has made it impossible to ignore the long-developing fault lines of the Republican Party. A party rooted in decency and values does not embrace the anger that Mr. Trump peddles as patriotism.

[msquared]

I agree with that. Who is the real RINO?  Me or the Trumpites?

[Wayward Son]

One exchange was recorded after Barry heard her her brother talk about separating migrant children from their parents at the border.

Said Barry: “All he wants to do is appeal to his base. He has no principles. None. None. And his base, I mean my God, if you were a religious person, you want to help people. Not do this.”

She continued: “His g*d****ed tweet and lying, oh my God. I’m talking too freely, but you know. The change of stories. The lack of preparation. The lying. Holy sh*t.”

At one point Barry said to her niece: “It’s the phoniness of it all. It’s the phoniness and this cruelty. Donald is cruel.”

President Trump’s sister, Maryanne Trump Barry, recorded without  her knowledge.

[wmLambert]

...A party rooted in decency and values does not embrace the anger that Mr. Trump peddles as patriotism.

[/quote]

This is the root of the anti-Trump push. Trump responds to anger, he doesn't create it. He is not racist, but they say he is. How would you respond? Trump constantly talks about how great the county is, and how great our future can be. Nothing dark. That darkness is entirely from the Left. Trump also does not feed into anger. He is always conciliatory, but refuses to accept pure disinformation presented as fake news. When that happens, he calls them out. The liars on the other side project that as anger. It is not. When a reporter on the Left lies repeatedly and knows he is lying, Trump will point out that reporter's personal bias and give that person a self-evident description or name that is so appropriate it sticks with the miscreant. Just desserts. Not dark. Not cruel. Just effective.

Kamala Harris says that what comes out of Trump's mouth is meant to distract. No. What she did against Kavanaugh was meant to distract. What Trump does is let in the sunlight and expose the corruption of his detractors. The stink comes from their own reaction to the sun. Then projection: "It's not me - it's him exposing me that's the problem!"

[wmLambert]

...A party rooted in decency and values does not embrace the anger that Mr. Trump peddles as patriotism.

This is the root of the anti-Trump push. Trump responds to anger, he doesn't create it. He is not racist, but they say he is. How would you respond? Trump constantly talks about how great the county is, and how great our future can be. Nothing dark. That darkness is entirely from the Left. Trump also does not feed into anger. He is always conciliatory, but refuses to accept pure disinformation presented as fake news. When that happens, he calls them out. The liars on the other side project that as anger. It is not. When a reporter on the Left lies repeatedly and knows he is lying, Trump will point out that reporter's personal bias and give that person a self-evident description or name that is so appropriate it sticks with the miscreant. Just desserts. Not dark. Not cruel. Just effective.

Kamala Harris says that what comes out of Trump's mouth is meant to distract. No. What she did against Kavanaugh was meant to distract. What Trump does is let in the sunlight and expose the corruption of his detractors. The stink comes from their own reaction to the sun. Then projection: "It's not me - it's him exposing me that's the problem!"

[wmLambert]

So, Ed Rendell, former Dem Governor and curreent head DNC says Trump is almost as old as Biden, but in most worst shape. Really? Trump's medical exams come back glowing, and Biden's are hidden. Biden's senility shows up when he loses his train of thought and can't remember things. His morality has always shown up in his consistent plagiarism.

[NobleHunter]

Trump's morality comes up in his consistent inability to stay faithful to his wives.

[wmLambert]

Trump's morality comes up in his consistent inability to stay faithful to his wives.

Wrong again. His former wives all support him and call him a "good man." You are exiled from the "Me Too Movement."

[NobleHunter]

So he didn't cheat on all of his wives? If they forgive him that speaks to their character, not his.

[yossarian22c]

Trump's morality comes up in his consistent inability to stay faithful to his wives.

Wrong again. His former wives all support him and call him a "good man." You are exiled from the "Me Too Movement."

His first wife called him a rapist until she signed a divorce settlement and NDA. Is Trump a "good man" or is she just contractually obligated to say that?

[msquared]

And we all know how much Trump loves his NDA's.  I wonder if all of his kids have signed one?

[Wayward Son]

Trump's morality comes up in his consistent inability to stay faithful to his wives.

Wrong again. His former wives all support him and call him a "good man." You are exiled from the "Me Too Movement."

Perhaps you should review his sexual exploits, Lambert.  How Marla Maples bragged that Donald gave her "The Best Sex I Ever Had!" when she was his mistress.  How he bragged to a People reporter how he had three other girlfriends a the time.  How he bragged how great his life was while he was cheating with Marla. How Karen McDougal was paid $150,000 by a good friend of Trump's for a story about their affair that was never printed.  How Stormy Daniels was $130,000 to keep quiet about their sex.  How he walked into the Miss Teen America's dressing room while the children were changing.  How 19 women have accused him of sexual harassment.

Need I go on?

But, I guess, since he's a man, and he's rich, and they all throw themselves at him and let you do anything, even grab them by the p**sy, it's OK.  I mean, you wouldn't mind if your minister did these things, would you?  It's only human nature.  Any guy would do it if he could.  Heck, even you would do it given the opportunity, right?

And since neither of his ex-wives complain, why should we?  It's none of our business.  He's only the President of the United States of America.  He only represents you to the world.

He's just as moral as you are, isn't he?

[Wayward Son]

Getting back to the subject, a few GOP ex-congressmen have come out for Biden.

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.)
Sens. John Warner (R-Va.)
Gordon Humphrey (R-N.H.)
Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.)
Rep. Steve Bartlett (R-Texas)
Tom Coleman (R-Mo.)
Bob Inglis (R-S.C.)
Chris Shays (R-Conn.)
Alan Steelman (R-Texas)
Jim Walsh (R-N.Y.)

It's starting to look like the GOP consists solely of RINOs.

[DonaldD]

Former chairman of the Republican National Committee Michael Steele is joining the Lincoln Project.

Former chairman of the Republican National Committee Michael Steele is joining the Lincoln Project, a group of Republicans working to prevent President Donald Trump's re-election.

"I get my role as a former national chairman. I get it, but I'm an American. I get my role as a former party leader. I'm still an American," Steele told Wallace, adding, "And these things matter to me more than aligning myself with a party that has clearly decided it would rather be sycophantic than principled."

Let's repeat that - the former Chairman of the RNC supports the election of Joe Biden.

[Fenring]

Not sure why that comes as a surprise, since in 2016 the entire RNC was fighting against Trump getting elected. That anyone in the party ever supported him was only a fallback position due to lack of choice once he had won.

[DonaldD]

There is a huge difference between opposing Trump as a candidate, opposing him getting elected during the general election, and actively supporting the opposing party's candidates in the general election.  I would argue that the number of Republicans in the latter two groups was vanishingly small in 2016.

Or can you point to other situations where so many high ranking members of one party actively campaigned for the other party's candidate?  Especially members of that party who, within the current term, had been hired by the candidate that they now oppose?

[rightleft22]

Not sure why that comes as a surprise, since in 2016 the entire RNC was fighting against Trump getting elected. That anyone in the party ever supported him was only a fallback position due to lack of choice once he had won.

Begs the question of integrity.
I can't help wonder how Trump became the best the GOP could do, Trump as a Leader, and Trump as what he represents with regards to conservatism? I wonder if many of those who 'just fell in line' due to lack of choice or whatever have lost sight of the future they hope to work towards. I can't help but wonder if the GOP has lost sight of who and what they are. It is no surprise to me that something like Qanon is starting to take hold in the GOP when its leaderships act's so irresponsibly in their response to such movements.

I don't recognize this new conservatism of the GOP

[msquared]

Neither do I or many of my conservative relatives who are disgusted with what Trump has done to the GOP.  The Party has left me and become the Party of Trump.  I would call him the RINO now.

[TheDrake]

Not sure why that comes as a surprise, since in 2016 the entire RNC was fighting against Trump getting elected. That anyone in the party ever supported him was only a fallback position due to lack of choice once he had won.

Except I don't remember Steele endorsing Hillary. There's definitely a change here, though it is debatable how much or how important. They mostly fell in line as soon as Trump won the nomination, not the general. Of course, I think a lot of that was due to a belief that they could control and coach him - letting him be figurehead and getting their policies enacted. Also a fear of "lib" judges.

[TheDeamon]

Neither do I or many of my conservative relatives who are disgusted with what Trump has done to the GOP.  The Party has left me and become the Party of Trump.  I would call him the RINO now.

Eh, I'm remembering 2014 and Mitch McConnell in particular talking about destroying the Tea Party. Where even he was talking about "Scorched earth" against his own side. So in a number of respects, I'm inclined to suspect this is a continuation of a fight that has been ongoing within the GOP since 2010.... Which incidentally was when Michael Steele was party chair, and while he "naturally" backed the Tea Party back then... I doubt any of the Republicans of the time thought it was going to last as long as it did.

[rightleft22]

Neither do I or many of my conservative relatives who are disgusted with what Trump has done to the GOP.  The Party has left me and become the Party of Trump.  I would call him the RINO now.

Eh, I'm remembering 2014 and Mitch McConnell in particular talking about destroying the Tea Party. Where even he was talking about "Scorched earth" against his own side. So in a number of respects, I'm inclined to suspect this is a continuation of a fight that has been ongoing within the GOP since 2010.

I remember hearing something about that as well and if true I can only conclude that Mcconnell has failed and that the tea party has become even more embedded. How else could you explain tea party part 2 - Qanon?

To be fair I also don't recolonize the new far left as being liberal - The difference being the debate between the various factions within the DNC is still ongoing and visible.

[DonaldD]

Trump's Republican/conservative bona fides:

• Opposes free trade/supports protectionism - check
• Supports family values - so long as 'family values' means cheating on one's wives, paying for hookers, multiple divorces, abusing authority to ogle naked young women... check
• Supports larger deficits and increasing debt - check
• Disregards constitution - check
• The refusal to accept responsibility for actions taken - check
• Fear of confronting Russia, antagonism towards allies - check
• Identity politics (well, OK) - check
• Moral relativism - check
• Support of concentration camps - check
• etc...

The question is actually why more Republicans aren't yet actively campaigning against him.

[TheDeamon]

Neither do I or many of my conservative relatives who are disgusted with what Trump has done to the GOP.  The Party has left me and become the Party of Trump.  I would call him the RINO now.

Eh, I'm remembering 2014 and Mitch McConnell in particular talking about destroying the Tea Party. Where even he was talking about "Scorched earth" against his own side. So in a number of respects, I'm inclined to suspect this is a continuation of a fight that has been ongoing within the GOP since 2010.

I remember hearing something about that as well and if true I can only conclude that Mcconnell has failed and that the tea party has become even more embedded. How else could you explain tea party part 2 - Qanon?

You should, a lot of us in 2016 said that Trump's becoming the Republican Presidential nominee in 2016 was a direct consequence of what the Republicans did in 2014, it was in essence, "the Tea Party's revenge" even as they had multiple legitimate "Tea Party candidates" in the race at the time, enough of them were simply so enraged with the GOP at that point that they threw their support behind the least politically palatable option on the table at the time--Donald Trump.

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/politics/hamby-midterms/

After two straight election cycles in which Republicans fumbled winnable Senate races by nominating flawed conservative candidates, McConnell vowed early this year to beat back tea party-backed candidates and their supporters wherever they surfaced.

"I think we are going to crush them everywhere," he said in March.

The test that mattered most would take place in his own backyard.

It should also be noted that the Democrats should beware of the consequences they're bringing down upon themselves after their own actions this year. I think they're going to have a reckoning of their own with their political base in the years to come.

[yossarian22c]

It should also be noted that the Democrats should beware of the consequences they're bringing down upon themselves after their own actions this year. I think they're going to have a reckoning of their own with their political base in the years to come.

Potentially. Depends on if they get through more voting and primary method reforms put in. Democrats are somewhat shielded from the extreme base in California with the open primary, top two general. In the most liberal districts you end up with D vs. D in the general and then the more extreme candidate loses. In other places the situation is different.

I think the QANON republican candidate in GA shows we need to be pushing for reforms that have a moderating influence on the candidates nation wide. In some ways you may not get to vote for someone who agrees completely with you but if I were in a conservative state I would rather be able to vote for Susan Collins over Ted Cruz vs just casting a vote against Cruz and having him represent me anyway. Just like conservatives in the North East would probably rather have reps like Joe Manchin instead of AOC.

I don't know if the California system is the best, but I really believe we need to look at eliminating/reducing the influence of primaries and the primary electorate. Approval voting, ranked choice voting and open primaries are all ways to reduce having the 25% of the most die hard base (those that show up at primaries for each side) dominate the political landscape for everyone.

[Wayward Son]

I think we can add former Michigan governor Rick Snyder to the list.

President Trump’s answer to people who oppose or disagree with them is to be verbally abusive. In other words, he is a bully.

A great leader treats people with respect even when they present different opinions...

In addition, President Trump lacks a moral compass. He ignores the truth.

Facts and science matter. Good decisions should be based on facts and supported by sound scientific theory whenever possible.

President Trump also has demonstrated that he does not fully appreciate public policy matters, including public health, the economy and foreign relations, nor does he seem to want to learn.

While we have had a strong economy during his term, it reminds me of the old expression that it is better to be lucky than smart. Some regulatory reforms have been helpful. But his tax reform was a failure. It didn’t have real long-term value, enriched large corporations and violated the basic principles of good tax reform to be simple, fair, and efficient. In the foreign policy area, there have been some good agreements, but overall, our nation is no longer respected as a leader on world affairs.

You know you're in trouble when your friends talk about you like this.

[yossarian22c]

You know you're in trouble when your friends talk about you like this.

You misspoke, Rick isn't Trump's friend. Two reasons:

1) Speaking out against Trump isn't "loyal" and that's a requirement for being near Trump.
2) But more importantly Trump doesn't have friends.

[TheDrake]

Doesn't seem like Rick's PAC is doing anything for Biden, even though he managed to plug it in the article denouncing Trump.

[Wayward Son]

And then we have the DHS assistant secretary of counterterrorism and threat prevention Elizabeth Neumann, a lifelong Republican who quit her position after over two years working for the Trump Administration.

Neumann saw the diffuse nature of right-wing extremist violence as a particular challenge. "It was hard for the counterterrorism community to put their finger on it, in large part because the movement is more of a movement than a group or an organization," she says.

That lack of official group cohesion reminded Neumann of the threat posed by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). She watched domestic extremists use the same tactics as the terrorist group.

"They borrowed from ISIS's playbook and they learned how to radicalize people online," she says...

But unlike the urgent interagency response to ISIS, Neumann says there was no clear effort to combat violent extremists on the right.

"If you had a very clear voice at the top, from the president, from other senior leaders in the Republican Party, denouncing this and warning conservatives — warning Republicans — that these groups are trying to recruit you based on things that might sound like a typical conservative belief, but behind it is this insidious, ugly, evil thing, if we had more clear voices talking about it — it would somewhat inoculate people from that recruitment and that radicalization," she says. "But instead, we have the opposite effect. We have the president not only pretty much refusing to condemn, but throwing fuel on the fire, creating opportunities for more recruitment through his rhetoric..."

She says they had already been working on a strategy to combat domestic extremism for a year and a half before the El Paso shooting, and they presented it at the White House...

The White House seemed to support the strategy — but under one condition.

"They just asked for it to be couched in terms of 'preventing violence' and not 'domestic terrorism.' And my sense was they were doing that pragmatically," she says. "They seem to understand that for whatever reason, if we use the term 'domestic terrorism' or we talk about the white supremacist language, that seems to derail things at the White House."

When Trump finally started using the term "domestic extremism" himself in the summer of 2020, it was in reference to the violence and looting that occurred during the protests across the country against police brutality targeting Black Americans, which the president attributed to "antifa." For Neumann, this was an obvious red herring. She says that the numbers don't bear out the idea that left-wing violence is as much of a problem as right-wing violence, and arrests during the summer's protests demonstrate that.

"If you look at the people that have been arrested for that, by and large, I mean, it's the boogaloo movement or it's an association with QAnon. It's the right side of the spectrum. It is not antifa." She's unequivocal about this: "The threat of domestic terrorism is not from antifa. It is from these right-wing movements..."

She's also concerned that people who served as "guardrails" around the president have left the administration. Those "adults in the room," she says, took the heat from the White House in order to allow people like her to keep carrying out their work. This fear is what prompted her to speak publicly, while many other senior administration officials have declined to do so.

"I am really concerned that in a second term, he will not have the ability to make wise decisions because there are no officials surrounding him anymore that have the experience and the gravitas to be able to tell him, 'No, you cannot do this, this is illegal.' Or: 'If you do this, it is likely that this other nation-state will respond in a drastic way that will lead us to war.' That's what's at stake here," she says.

Interesting interview, well worth checking out.

The Administration's response?  "This sounds more like a case of this former disgruntled employee being ineffective at their job..."  Of course, what else would you expect them to say?

[cherrypoptart]

The thread title says "speak out about Trump", not "speak out against Trump", so I think this qualifies.

Trump has bin Laden's support, the support of bin Laden's niece anyway.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/osama-bin-laden-niece-claims-152632251.html

"Ms bin Ladin, who lives in Switzerland, said she’s always been “an American by heart” and would be putting her support behind Mr Trump for the 2020 presidential election.

In the interview, she called the upcoming election the most important in a generation.

“I have been a supporter of President Trump since he announced he was running in the early days in 2015. I have watched from afar and I admire this man’s resolve,” she said. “He must be reelected ... It’s vital for the future of not only America, but western civilization as a whole.”

“You look at all the terrorist attacks that have happened in Europe over the past 19 years. They have completely shaken us to the core ... [Radical Islam] has completely infiltrated our society,” Ms bin Ladin added. “In the US it’s very worrying that the left has aligned itself completely with the people who share that ideology.”

Ms bin Ladin has been an outspoken supporter of Mr Trump, at a time when the president has faced criticism from European countries."

Fascinating...

[DonaldD]

It's not so surprising - she had spent years supporting her mother, a Swiss national, divorcing bin Laden's half-brother. That probably gives one a pretty unique outlook on violent Islam and its relationship with the USA - so much so that she seems to be a QAnon follower.  It's almost predictable that she's not exactly rational.

[wmLambert]

I think we can add former Michigan governor Rick Snyder to the list.

President Trump’s answer to people who oppose or disagree with them is to be verbally abusive. In other words, he is a bully.

A great leader treats people with respect even when they present different opinions...

In addition, President Trump lacks a moral compass. He ignores the truth.

Facts and science matter. Good decisions should be based on facts and supported by sound scientific theory whenever possible.

President Trump also has demonstrated that he does not fully appreciate public policy matters, including public health, the economy and foreign relations, nor does he seem to want to learn.

While we have had a strong economy during his term, it reminds me of the old expression that it is better to be lucky than smart. Some regulatory reforms have been helpful. But his tax reform was a failure. It didn’t have real long-term value, enriched large corporations and violated the basic principles of good tax reform to be simple, fair, and efficient. In the foreign policy area, there have been some good agreements, but overall, our nation is no longer respected as a leader on world affairs.

You know you're in trouble when your friends talk about you like this.

Actually not. The downside to Trump in 2016 was his lack of history, and the fear that his long-term friendship with the Left would result in his not following his election promises. Once he proved that he was true to his pledges, his popularity was cemented in gold. Ric Snyder (my former givernor) was barely GOP and much more connected to the swamp.

Never-Trumpers, in general, are those who owe their wealth and power to managing the system. When the populism Trump espoused stopped their little money-grubbing, they would stand behind Hitler to get their power back. The real GOP does not miss them, and actually sees their distance as a plus.

[Wayward Son]

The real GOP does not miss them, and actually sees their distance as a plus.

The question is, though, that once you've gotten rid of all these "non-real" GOP leaders and those that respect them, will you have enough of a GOP left to win the election--or an election?

[wmLambert]

The real GOP does not miss them, and actually sees their distance as a plus.

The question is, though, that once you've gotten rid of all these "non-real" GOP leaders and those that respect them, will you have enough of a GOP left to win the election--or an election?

Sure looks like it. In general, Trump supporters are solid and deep. They recognize the panic from the Never-Trumpers and Dems, who are dependent upon their penetration of the system, and that they see Trump supporters as a menace to their power. The swamp consists of both Democrats and Never-Trumpers, and they are not supporters to count on.

Who would want to? Trump's metrics before Coronavirus defined him as the most successful President of all time, right after Obama breaking every record as the vey worst in history. Those two facts are the motivators of Pelosi's and Schumer's intransigence. They see the next Trump term as the end of all their aspirations. The clock is running out and if ever the end justifies the means, it is now.

Five years from now, Trump will leave office with the judiciary firmly in Constitutional hands, and a legacy of success the Left can never rationalize away. They see the end of their party's long run of being in charge with their ability to sabotage the economy to hurt their opposition. If the educational system can be repaired from the John Dewey designed ravages, we may regain the greatness the Founders envisioned, but was taken away from us.

[yossarian22c]

And now it's Michael Cohen.

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/07/910550523/trump-fired-a-faux-bama-michael-cohen-alleges-in-tell-all-memoir

Over Disloyal's 400-plus pages, Cohen rips through accounts of dozens of incidents, ranging from Trump allegedly cheating mom-and-pop vendors for services rendered at Trump properties to incidents of the president making racist remarks to his own involvement in trying to make a deal for a Trump Tower in Moscow.
...
According to Cohen, Trump told his former lawyer that Black and Latino voters were "too stupid" to vote for him, and said that any country run by Black leaders was a "sh**hole." On another occasion, after the death of South African President Nelson Mandela, Cohen says that Trump told him that apartheid-era South Africa had been "beautiful," and that Mandela had "f***** the whole country up."

Cohen also goes in deep on what he describes as the president's idolization of Russian President Vladimir Putin, whom Cohen says Trump reveres because of his immense personal wealth and his immersive control of his country. "An entire society and civilization bent to the will of a single man was how Trump viewed the ideal historical form of government," Cohen writes. "With him as the man in charge, of course."

[rightleft22]

Cohen rips through accounts of dozens of incidents, ranging from Trump allegedly cheating mom-and-pop vendors for services rendered at Trump properties to incidents

This was well known long before Trump decided to become a politician. For reasons I don't understand during his complain his supporters seemed to think that made him a 'good' business man at the same time arguing that they could Trust Trump to be loyal to them.  Odd contradiction in my opinion.

[yossarian22c]

Cohen rips through accounts of dozens of incidents, ranging from Trump allegedly cheating mom-and-pop vendors for services rendered at Trump properties to incidents

This was well known long before Trump decided to become a politician. For reasons I don't understand during his complain his supporters seemed to think that made him a 'good' business man at the same time arguing that they could Trust Trump to be loyal to them.  Odd contradiction in my opinion.

A lot of things are known about Trump but then are denied at times. Just like the reports of Trump calling fallen or captured soldiers losers and suckers, he said pretty much the same thing about McCain during the campaign. People on this board have somehow twisted that to mean that Trump respects the military more and it makes him the greatest CIC. The cult of Trump is scary. I put odds of him winning the second term at slightly better than 538, so at about 40%. If he wins I put the odds at better than 50% he going to go Putin style and start rearranging things to hold onto power longer, past the two term limit. If he wins this time, the Republican party that hasn't already bought him completely either will or disappear. So it will be the Trump party and the opposition party, the only thing that would remain to be seen is if our institutions and rule of law can hold on for 4 more years of Trump to prevent him from becoming a Putin like ruler in America. 

[yossarian22c]

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/09/910992023/justice-dept-intervenes-to-take-over-trumps-defense-in-defamation-lawsuit

The U.S. Justice Dept. Tuesday moved to assume responsibility for defending President Trump in a defamation lawsuit brought by a woman who says Trump raped her in the 1990s.

E. Jean Carroll filed suit in New York state court last year after Trump, answering reporters' questions, denied knowing her and accused her of lying.
...
In an unusual five-page filing in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Justice Dept. argued that Trump's remarks were made in the performance of his official duties as president and that therefore government attorneys should assume Trump's defense from his private lawyers.

The filing asked the court to designate the United States, rather than Trump, as the defendant in Carroll's defamation suit and to move the case from state to federal court. Federal officials are generally immune from charges of defamation. If the DoJ's filing is successful it would effectively bring Carroll's case to an end.

Calling women liars is now part of his official duties and justice is becoming his private law firm. Nothing wrong with this at all  .

[Wayward Son]

As Electoral Vote.com quipped on September 9, 2020, under the header "The Justice Department Confirms It Is Indeed Trump's Personal Legal Team:"

The DoJ's justification for this is that when Trump made the allegedly defamatory statements, he was acting in his official capacity as President of the United States. Riiiight. If so, that would mean "E. Jean Carroll is a liar" and "E. Jean Carroll is not Donald Trump's 'type'" are the official policy of the United States government.

[rightleft22]

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/09/910992023/justice-dept-intervenes-to-take-over-trumps-defense-in-defamation-lawsuit

The U.S. Justice Dept. Tuesday moved to assume responsibility for defending President Trump in a defamation lawsuit brought by a woman who says Trump raped her in the 1990s.

E. Jean Carroll filed suit in New York state court last year after Trump, answering reporters' questions, denied knowing her and accused her of lying.
...
In an unusual five-page filing in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Justice Dept. argued that Trump's remarks were made in the performance of his official duties as president and that therefore government attorneys should assume Trump's defense from his private lawyers.

The filing asked the court to designate the United States, rather than Trump, as the defendant in Carroll's defamation suit and to move the case from state to federal court. Federal officials are generally immune from charges of defamation. If the DoJ's filing is successful it would effectively bring Carroll's case to an end.

Calling women liars is now part of his official duties and justice is becoming his private law firm. Nothing wrong with this at all  .

Waiting to see how Trump followers spin this.  Will the real conservatives please stand up

[TheDeamon]

Waiting to see how Trump followers spin this.  Will the real conservatives please stand up

Well, if it's good enough for members of Congress in the past, it should be good enough for Trump to use as well?

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/08/trump-defamation-lawsuit-jean-carroll-410504

Tuohey did not elaborate, but another filing by DOJ lawyers pointed to five cases where defamation suits against federal officials have been handled as suits against the government.

“Numerous courts have recognized that elected officials act within the scope of their office or employment when speaking with the press, including with respect to personal matters, and have therefore approved the substitution of the United States in defamation actions,” the Justice Department attorneys wrote.

They cited a suit filed last year alleging that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Debra Haaland (D-N.M.) libeled students from a Catholic high school in Kentucky who got into a confrontation with a Native American activist at the Lincoln Memorial. The Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that a judge was correct to shut down the case.

That suit involved no allegations of personal misconduct by Warren or Haaland, but Justice Department attorneys also pointed to a 2006 D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that accepted arguments from lawyers for former Rep. Cass Ballenger (R-N.C.) that a press interview he gave about his separation from his wife was within the scope of his official duties.

Pretty bad when Politico is more balanced in its reporting than NPR.

[TheDrake]

Waiting to see how Trump followers spin this.  Will the real conservatives please stand up

Well, if it's good enough for members of Congress in the past, it should be good enough for Trump to use as well?

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/08/trump-defamation-lawsuit-jean-carroll-410504

Tuohey did not elaborate, but another filing by DOJ lawyers pointed to five cases where defamation suits against federal officials have been handled as suits against the government.

“Numerous courts have recognized that elected officials act within the scope of their office or employment when speaking with the press, including with respect to personal matters, and have therefore approved the substitution of the United States in defamation actions,” the Justice Department attorneys wrote.

They cited a suit filed last year alleging that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Debra Haaland (D-N.M.) libeled students from a Catholic high school in Kentucky who got into a confrontation with a Native American activist at the Lincoln Memorial. The Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that a judge was correct to shut down the case.

That suit involved no allegations of personal misconduct by Warren or Haaland, but Justice Department attorneys also pointed to a 2006 D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that accepted arguments from lawyers for former Rep. Cass Ballenger (R-N.C.) that a press interview he gave about his separation from his wife was within the scope of his official duties.

Pretty bad when Politico is more balanced in its reporting than NPR.

Two wrongs always make a right! You want to complain about those people doing that, be my guest. I'll be happy to entertain the possibility. But there is a big difference between Warren making a political statement, and Trump making a statement about something that happened before he was ever in public office.

[yossarian22c]

Now it's a whistle blower from DHS.

A Department of Homeland Security official said in a whistleblower complaint that the head of DHS told him to stop reporting on the Russian threat to the U.S. election because it "made President Trump look bad."

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/09/911188416/whistleblower-alleges-dhs-tried-to-alter-intelligence-to-match-trumps-claims

[TheDeamon]

Two wrongs always make a right! You want to complain about those people doing that, be my guest. I'll be happy to entertain the possibility. But there is a big difference between Warren making a political statement, and Trump making a statement about something that happened before he was ever in public office.

Ah, but the suit being brought against Trump involves the statement he made while in office, during a press conference as PotUS.

So there is a large helping of recursion going on in regards to that.

[DonaldD]

former CIA Director John Brennan tweets:

John O. Brennan
@JohnBrennan

In his comments to Bob Woodward, Donald Trump reveals what an absolute abomination he is.

If he had a conscience or a soul, he would resign.

Tragically for us, he has neither.

[Wayward Son]

Pretty bad when Politico is more balanced in its reporting than NPR.

Sometimes there is a fine line between official business and personal business.  I won't argue about the cases you cited, but I do ask whether you feel that this case is not over that line.

Would you have been comfortable if President Clinton had the Department of Justice defending him in the Monica Lewenski case?  The incidents for that occurred while he was in office and in the White House itself, which is arguably far more justified than Donald's case.

And if you truly believe Donald's case is far away from the line, where would you draw it?  When Donald lied to the banks (or to the IRS) about the value of his properties?  When he refused to pay contractors for work they had done for him?  Should the Trump University case have been handled by Bill Barr?  Or are you of the opinion that the Presidency is the law, and any accusations for past or present misdeeds are attacks against our country and democracy itself?

I think it is fairly clear that his conflict with E. Jean Carroll is purely a personal matter, not one that involves our country.  And he should handle it personally, not using the resources of the United States government, resources that you and I pay for.

[DonaldD]

... and resources that E. Jean Carroll pays for as well...

Personally, I don't have a strong opinion about this case.  It is, however, just so typical that Barr, Trump's personal lawyer, would direct the justice department to defend Trump that even innocuous actions must now be second-guessed.

[TheDeamon]

Pretty bad when Politico is more balanced in its reporting than NPR.

Sometimes there is a fine line between official business and personal business.  I won't argue about the cases you cited, but I do ask whether you feel that this case is not over that line.

I think it's tacky, in bad taste, and a long list of other things. But it is legally permissible, so completely up Trump's alley to do.

Don't like it? Get the relevant laws changed.

[rightleft22]

Pretty bad when Politico is more balanced in its reporting than NPR.

Sometimes there is a fine line between official business and personal business.  I won't argue about the cases you cited, but I do ask whether you feel that this case is not over that line.

I think it's tacky, in bad taste, and a long list of other things. But it is legally permissible, so completely up Trump's alley to do.

Don't like it? Get the relevant laws changed.

It smells. Using tax dollars to defend a president in a suit dealing with a issue that allegedly occurred before he was elected but because he said something about it while president can be defended by the DOJ should have the GOP up in arms. Or would have had for any other President.  Maybe not illegal but a bad precedent one with at troubling slippery slope