Failing Trump administration. Sad!


#3891

He’s already screwed.


#3892

…“almost childish”?

How about, “totally childish”.


#3893

Almost childish as in not-yet-a child? Let’s go with infantile!


#3894

Here is the problem, Congress can and should act as check on many things. We are witnessing it tonight with respect to immigration and the dumb wall. Even on things like tariffs and treaties, Congress has a lot more constitutional power than it has exercised over the last 50 years.

But in areas of foreign affairs and defense there is precious little the Congress can do. As Sen. Rubio said tonight on the Newshour. "We could cut funding off for Syria mission to get the troops out of there, but there is nothing Congress can do to force him to KEEP troops in Syria. They can’t make Trump continue to have joint exercise with South Korea, or even keep any troops there. If Trump, wants to declare Russia an ally, and send them the position of all our submarine forces, copies of all our war plans, and even the nuclear launch codes, Congress is powerless to stop him. The only remedy is impeachment.

There is one thing, I’ve been hoping Congress can do and that is pass a law require Congressional act of war before the President can use nuclear weapons, or in response to nuclear attack. I’d sleep a bit better if they did that.


#3895

#3896

That would be pretty extraordinary. The current launch protocols are a cold war design directly intended to put our total immediate nuclear launch power in the hands of the President, not a committee or any oversight group, or other “adults” in the chain of command.


#3897

I wonder how far down our current chain of command we’d have to go to find the first adult.


#3898

You are correct. The idea sort of kinda of made some sense in the world of MAD, when the Russian had enough warheads to takeout all our land based ICBM and our SLBM missile were much shorter range. But now a days Ohio Class submarine can parked outside bases in Honolulu, or Bangor Maine, and hit virtually every target in Russia. They also could do the same in pretty anywhere in the Indian, or Atlantic Ocean and much of the Pacific.

History has shown the false alarm, from bad sensor or human errors are much more likely to create a crisis than anything else. I have no issues with tying any President (much less this nutcases) hands and preventing him from launching nuclear warheads until we actually have reports of nuclear warhead have exploded in the US.

Even if the Russian succeed in taking out 1/2 or 3/4 of our warheads. They won’t win a nuclear war.

Or to think of a more plausible scenario one or two nuclear weapon explodes in the US. I want a debate among both the Congress and the White House who we attack and with what weapons.


#3899

Yeah, it made more sense in the Cold War, but even then it’s purpose was retaliatory. It was more a matter of technology and response time that they put in it the hands of the POTUS.

If NORAD saw a full scale launch from Russia or China, there would be plenty of time to notify the Executive and respond accordingly without giving said Executive a free hand to just launch for no reason at all with no failsafe.


#3900

Acting AG Whitaker accused of something that isn’t REALLY awful, but I’m sure it would have been quite a scandal in days gone by. He claimed he was smarter than he really was.


#3901

As far as I’m concerned that should be grounds for immediate termination. Shouldn’t the standards for the US Attorney General be higher than this?


#3902

In a normal presidency? Yup. With Trump? He’s a paragon of virtue.


#3903

For fuck’s sake, CNN, stop being such pussies. Say the President LIED to the troops. Misleads? Fuck off, CNN.


#3904

I’m not sure if you are kidding or not here.

We’re talking about his claim that he was an academic all American in college, right?


#3905

Not kidding. I don’t think we should be ok with our attorney general lying to pad his resume. This is an easily disprovable fact. If he’ll lie about something like this multiple times, why should we trust him on anything else?


#3906

That’s totally reasonable, but I’m curious if that feeling is consistently held.

Do you hold Joe Biden to the same standard? He made much more significant lies about his academic credentials, and he became vice president of the United States.


#3907

I doubt the politician exists that hasn’t lied on their way to whatever position they currently occupy. So while disappointing, I expect it from anyone in politics but would prefer that AG be held to a higher standard. I know it’s not going to ever happen but it’d be nice.


#3908

Biden spent most of his career as an elected official, not an appointed one. We’re also talking about an attorney here. Someone you’re supposed to be able to trust to a greater extent.

Having said that, while I am fully against this practice of padding or just outright lying on a resume, it’s a fairly common practice mostly because the way we hire in this country is pretty screwed up to begin with. It’s not worth spending time on in this case.

If they say they had a degree or passed the bar and didn’t… well that would be different.


#3909

Joe Biden was elected directly by the people, he was not appointed. It isn’t the exact same thing. Not to shy away from your point that we should hold all of our government officials to high standards, but the people voted for Biden, nobody voted for Whitaker.


#3910

So you don’t hold him to the same standard, and it’s ok for him to have lied.

Does that make sense to you?

Hey, Trump was elected too, so i guess it doesn’t matter that he lies about everything.

You are gonna have a real hard time when you choose not to be guided by a consistent set of moral and ethical principles.