Comments

Trump the blustering bully vs. Sessions — 75 Comments

1. He probably wants Sessions out so he can make a recess appointment.

   So Tiffany Trump or someone takes over and uses her authority to fire Mueller.

   Lost in the drama is the rather extraordinary development that the President believes Sessions should have broken the law (my not recusing himself). Talk about a swamp.

2. I can’t see this as anything other than Trump trying to pressure Sessions into resigning. Surely Trump has a replacement in the wings, right? No, I don’t see any reason to assume that to be the case either…

   Even if Trump already has his ‘new guy’ ready, I think it likely he’ll lose confidence in Sessions’ replacement even faster than he has with Sessions.

   Plus, what if Congress refuses to approve Sessions’ replacement?

   Trump’s instincts on the issues are arguably defensible but it’s increasingly looking like he’s promoted himself into “a position of incompetence”…

   Despite his reported resistance, I expect Sessions to eventually resign. Regardless of the pro & cons of Trump’s dissatisfaction, how can Sessions continue to effectively serve a President who has lost confidence in him?

3. Manju, it would be interesting to hear how Sessions would have broken the law by not recusing himself. It would also be interesting to see if you would apply your logic to the incumbents of the previous administration. Pick an issue from many possibilities. Finally, is Mueller breaking the law by not recusing himself? He has blatant conflicts of interest swirling around his relationship with Comey for starters. Then, if we are going to extend the law as you apparently are, we could address the practice of an “independent” counsel filling his team with donors to the opposition candidate. Has to be a conflict; if not an ethical violation of his trust and mandate.

   Back to Neo. I wish I knew what Trump is doing. At least I think I wish that; maybe not. Maybe if I knew, it would scare the hell out of me. Dana Perino reportedly said today that she thinks this Trump-Sessions thing might, emphasis might, all be theater. She bases it on the closeness of the two over a lengthy span. I respect Perino but, I don’t know if she has hard information to justify her reach. Then, you would have to ask, “to what purpose?”. Too sophisticated for me if it is true.

4. Where’s your legitimation, law? In a democracy legitimation comes from the people. The American people voted for me. The majority wanted me. I won. By huge numbers. There’s nothing else you need to know. Go away, law. If you are against me you are against America.

5. “I can’t say I’m very disappointed in Trump, because I expected this sort of thing from him.” – Neo

   One’s disappointment or surprise in all this depends on what they assumed motivates trump.

   If one believed that trump really was principled, looking out for the little guy, wanting to take on DC and “drain the swamp”, put “America First!”, then there is much to be disappointed and surprised at.

   If one believed his character that of a narcissist of sorts, who would chameleon like change what he advocates just to “Win!”, without any solid core beliefs other than to obtain what he sees as respect, loyalty (fealty?), and adulation, then no surprise at all.

   But, still disappointed, as one hoped for better.

   And, perhaps one is / should be still concerned of the risk ahead.

6. “Dana Perino reportedly said today that she thinks this Trump-Sessions thing might, emphasis might, all be theater. “ – Oldflyer

   I fleetingly thought that might be at play here, but it seems too harsh on Sessions to be true.

   Who’d want to be on the receiving end of that, even if it were for pursuing some goal one agreed with?

   It surely makes Sessions look weak too, no?

   With all the leaks, then what if word got out, as likely the case, this was all an act?

7. Big Maq, when will you quit judging Trump by what is said about him, and what he says in return; and judge him on what he is doing?

   Given the opposition arrayed against him, including apparently more than a few in his own party, he has accomplished a good bit of what he ran on.

   Oh, I know, “but, gee it’s been six months already, and he hasn’t fixed everything.”

   I think everyone but the most die hard supporter is worried about his inability to rise above the slander and abuse, and his inclination to fire back with no filter. Then again, I have never experienced, nor witnessed anyone in a firestorm such as he has faced from day one.

   Besides, we know only what is in the public domain; and much of that comes through hostile leaks. We have no idea what has transpired between the President and his Attorney General in private. Despite concerns, I reserve final judgement on this, as on every other controversy, until I know something definitive. Admittedly, that may never come to pass.

   Anyway, your comments about his character are nearly, not quite, on a par with those of Pelosi, Schumer, and Maxine Waters.

8. Sessions should be fired one one issue alone; civil asset forfeiture, AKA “Cops Stealing Stuff”. Yes, CRIMINALS should lose the fruits of their crimes. CIVIL forfeiture doesn’t allege that any crime has taken place; it’s just legal theft.

   Sessions supports it; therefore, Sessions has to go.

   Sessions also wants to take a hardline approach to pot legalization by the various states. Since Federal drug laws are prima facie unconstitutional, the Feds don’t have a leg to stand on, but Sessions wants to push ahead. Sessions needs to be fired.

9. Zat:

   We are a republic and have a Constitution. Democracies typically lead to mob rule, not that some would mind….

10. Grasping at straws and smokin that dope.

11. Trump is a bully, a blowhard, and a jerk. That is the price we pay to get oil and gas flowing, conservative judges, border security, military spending, ending transgender social engineering in the military, and tax cuts for business. A well behaved, traditional president would have been a RINO and sell out.

    I will vote for Trump again, warts and all.

12. Thank you, om. I wish more people understood this fundamental fact.

13. Neo, check out the article about this subject on theconservativetreehouse.com, “Trump’s ‘Disappointment….” Makes a strong case that Sessions’ problem is being too timid to confront the corruption at DOJ, one manifestation of which is the Special Council charade. He cannot work with Sessions in private because of leaks and the innuendo and hysterics of the MSM. Very glad I discovered your Blog. High quality.

14. I originally thought Trump wants Sessions to resign. Still do. The idea that it does nothing for Trump is not entirely true.

    Depends on what things Trump wants. And maybe it’s about who Sessions is aligned with — other power players. Maybe Trump has some people in mind he wants farther way from him.

    It’s more speculation I admit.

15. Speculate all you want because that is all we can do. The cards are dealt and the hand will have to be played out, it’s that simple.

    I have no idea how this will work out but I am pleased with actual accomplishments so far and frustrated with all the extra noise Trump generates with his tweets. I kind of think we are in some sort of a historical playoff between two teams, Dems and Repubs and maybe we are watching something really significant.

    I am not going to speculate any further about what should happen or could happen but I am going to watch to see what does happen. I might suggest others pop up some pop corn, open a beer and lean back and watch with your eyes wide open or buckle up kids we are in for a ride.

16. I don’t think Trump puts nearly as much thought into his actions as you do.

17. I have this wild idea that Trump knows it’s already over, and he’s purposely distancing himself from his most loyal supporter to give him plausible deniability as it all unravels. The disarray is very apparent. The Sec. of State is taking a leave of absence at home. Communications guy resigns. There’s yelling matches between cabinet officials and members of Trump’s inner guard.

    Trump has figured out that they are not going to quit until he either resigns or is impeached. He will be forced to grant amnesty to members of his family before this is over. The only way the Sessions kerfuffle makes sense is that Trump is giving him an early out before it blows up. His attack on Sessions is his way of saving him.

18. I think Trump is winging it like he has done most of his life.

    I don’t think Trump is stupid anymore than I think he has an off-the-chart IQ as he has claimed

    He’s got a toolkit of moves which have worked before. I doubt they work as well at the POTUS level.

    We are living in that gap.

19. “The question now is what he thinks he stands to gain by his continual public taunting of Jeff Sessions. The obvious answer–“Sessions’ resignation”–doesn’t make much sense because that wouldn’t actually solve any of Trump’s problems” – Neo

    That seems to be the million dollar question.

    Jim at 8:28pm is on to something, IMO. When I’ve watched Sessions testify, he did seem somewhat scatterbrained and not at all dominating.

    Trump is very much into the alpha male, and Session’s style doesn’t exude much confidence that he can tame the beast that is the DOJ.

    That may be unfair. In private, in actual practice he may strike fear into his opponents, and be making real changes to his department.

    It may all be optics. President Trump may just not like Session’s style. Image is everything anymore. Part of the reason why a reality TV celebrity won the presidency.

20. But, but, but Flight 93! Hillary is still not the president, Neal Gorsuch is still on the Supreme Court, and well Donald is still …., have to laugh. 🙂

21. Ken Mitchell:

    Well, YOU may think civil forfeiture is why Sessions needs to be fired. I may even think it, because I disagree with Sessions on that topic, too.

    But guess what? His boss doesn’t disagree with him. Have you seen a quote from Trump where he mentions Sessions’ stand on civil forfeiture as a reason he should go? I haven’t. Have you heard even a peep of criticism from Trump about Sessions’ stand on civil forfeiture? I bet you haven’t.

    You know why that might be? Because Trump appears to agree with Sessions.

    Nice try, but no cigar.

22. An interesting bit on Bret Baier’s show today. He showed videos of Dem Senators attacking Sessions during his AG confirmation hearings. Then contrasted them with the same Senators praising Sessions as AG. It certainly shows the hypocrisy of the Dems and that they will take any position that is anti-Trump. But would Trump and Sessions be doing this purposely? To what end?

    Maybe it as The Other Chuck opines. A way to insulate Sessions.

    IMO, what Trump should do to blow the Russian probe sky high is to sick Sessions’ DOJ on Fusion GPS, the oppo research outfit that was the instigator of the Trump “dossier.” I believe the answers are to be found there. To all appearances, it was the Democrats who were colluding with Russia to destroy Trump through Fusion GPS.

23. Mr. Frank: Amen.

24. Sessions was not as strong in his confirm. hearing as I’d hoped, but What The Hey, he’s before fellow Senators, buddies, who allegedly respect one another.
    His recusal from the largely phony “Russia” issue was weak, however, and entirely unnecessary. Sessions has not rung any bells at DOJ yet, has he? But it takes time to map the landscape, best done before acting, a lesson Trump needs to learn. Koskinen remains head of IRS despite Mnuchin being his boss.
    On the whole, I agree strongly with Old Flyer above.

25. Sessions came through as the first senator to endorse Trump. That and Sessions’ strong stance on immigration earned him the slot as AG.

    Otherwise I’m not that knowledgeable about Sessions.

    I’m guessing he saw Trump’s downsides and felt he had done enough that he didn’t have to get involved in some messy business as Trump’s fixer.

26. Matt_SE:

    LOL.

27. I voted for djt. I did not close my eyes to his many character flaws. I cringe when I read his twitter rants. But as others have noted, some of his actions have produced results I favor. This charade with Sessions is unnecessary, ugly, and counterproductive.

    Undisciplined and vengeful do not serve him well. And anyone who claims djt is a genius, including djt, is a fool. He is a cunning and devious SOB. Maybe that is necessary but it is not pleasant to watch. Thankfully in flyover country its summer gardening, dog walks, and watermelon on the porch as the sun goes down or during a thunderstorm.

28. Developing story everywhere except MsM is that Debby Wasserman Schultz ‘ s IT guy was arrested trying to flee the country after FBI found a bunch of damaged hard drives at his former residence. He was kept on her payroll until last week. He knew all her secrets. Blackmail?

29. Sessions did more to cripple the new administration than anyone else when he recused himself almost the moment he was confirmed.

    I think Trump would like him to resign- it really is that simple. I don’t think this would be good for the Trump Administration, but Trump obviously thinks it is, so who am I to argue?

    While I like Jeff Sessions, I thought right from the start that appointing him was a mistake because he is 70 years old and being put in charge of an organization that is, without a doubt, full of Trump opponents who won’t hesitate to use their position to undermine the administration at every turn. And then Trump compounded the mistake by appointing Rosenstein, a Democrat, as the Deputy AG. Just a clusterfuck.

30. Sessions did more to cripple the new administration than anyone else when he recused himself almost the moment he was confirmed.

    Yancey Ward: But how could Sessions, Trump or anyone else know that for certain at the time?

    I assumed Sessions was being extra-cautious to assure the world the Trump DOJ was going to be on the up-and-up.

31. Manju, it would be interesting to hear how Sessions would have broken the law by not recusing himself.

    Oldflyer,

    Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions insists his recusal from any investigation into Russian collusion in last year’s election was simple: It’s the law…

    “I recused myself not because of any asserted wrongdoing on my part during the campaign,” Sessions said. “But because a Department of Justice regulation, 28 CFR 45.2, required it.”

    “That regulation states, in effect, that department employees should not participate in investigations of a campaign if they have served as a campaign advisor,” said Sessions.

    http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-sessions-cites-department-of-justice-1497381828-htmlstory.html

32. “Given the opposition arrayed against him, including apparently more than a few in his own party, he has accomplished a good bit of what he ran on.” – Oldflyer

    NO, he hasn’t achieved much of what he promised.

    EVERY POTUS has an array of opposition.

    The question is, is what he is doing moving his (promised) agenda forward.

    The answer is barely, and most of his obstacles are from his own hand.

33. Manju/Oldflyer:

    C. DOJ-Specific Conflict of Interest Regulation: No DOJ employee may participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution, or who would be directly affected by the outcome. 28 CFR 45.2

    Political relationship means a close identification with an elected official, candidate, political party or campaign organization arising from service as a principal advisor or official; personal relationship means a close and substantial connection of the type normally viewed as likely to induce partiality.

    D. Impartiality in Performing Official Duties

    1. An employee may not participate in a particular matter involving specific parties affecting the financial interests of a member of his household, or when a person with whom he has a covered relationship is, or represents a party.

    2. A covered relationship includes one involving:

    a. Someone with whom he has or seeks a business relationship;
    b. A member of the employee’s household;
    c. A relative with whom the employee has a close relationship;
    d. A present or prospective employer of a spouse, parent or child; and
    e. An organization in which the employee serves or has served in the past year as an employee, attorney or active participant.

    3. The employee may disqualify himself or he may be authorized in writing to participate in the matter if the interest of the Department outweighs the appearance of a conflict. The determination should be based on: a) the nature of the relationship; b) the effect of the resolution of the matter on the financial interest; c) the nature and importance of the employee’s role; d) the sensitivity of the matter; and e) the difficulty of reassigning it.

34. “He’s got a toolkit of moves which have worked before. I doubt they work as well at the POTUS level.

    We are living in that gap.” – huxley

    Probably close to the truth, with narcissism thrown in, with a lifetime of nobody (except maybe his father) who could say no to him, and enough money / lawyers and connections to cover any consequences.

35. Like you I am not surprised by Trump’s public attack on his own attorney general, other than the usual surprise about how clumsy and short-sighted he is for having been such a successful businessman. These suggestions some are making that this is all some clever calculation on Trump’s part make me laugh. People believe what they want to believe, so delusion is in ample supply these days.

    I’m not sure if Sessions should have recused himself. Yes, the law suggests that he should, but with Democrats circling like wolves and unabashedly willing to flout the law whenever it suits them, this might have been a good time to take a generous interpretation of the recusal guidelines. That said, I don’t feel sorry for either Trump or Sessions. I always respected Sessions but he betrayed conservatives when he rejected the conservative nominee, Ted Cruz, to endorse and help elect a non-conservative with a known history of behaving like a jackass. I think it’s possible he did so in exchange for the promise of being made attorney general, so this is what he gets. I get why Trump’s upset about the special prosecutor and why he’s frustrated by Sessions’ recusal but it’s just hard to feel much sympathy for a bully who cheapens the presidency by bellowing about “loyalty.”

36. Let it all crash down, it matters not. Everything built by humans will wash away as the foundations erode and collapse anyways.

    Earthquakes, take a look at their frequency now.

37. Trum should have seriously considered a partnership with Putin disclosing what the governments of the world know about technology and future risks. It would have been more productive overall, even if it stoked the flames of Trum’s previous allies, friends, and loyalists like HRC.

38. Trum was supposed to be this Art of the Deal grand mofo of a master manipulator. Except he can’t seem to appoint cabinet level officers that are worth anything.

    This cognitive dissonance is really upsetting to normal humans that don’t have more than 1 cpu core. If you have more than 1 cpu core, cognitive dissonance isn’t more tolerable, since you can hold 2 mutually exclusive ideas at once.

    With 6 or 8 cores, you can hold exactly that many too. Trum may max out even that many cores though. There’s 4d chess. The wall. HRC would be in jail if Trum was President. So he must not be President, Bush II is still PResident right, as Demoncrats often attested to under Hussein’s botched economic progress.

    OldTexan Says:
    July 26th, 2017 at 9:29 pm
    Speculate all you want because that is all we can do. The cards are dealt and the hand will have to be played out, it’s that simple.

    Some of us already predicted what the odds were if Trum tried to drain the DC swamp of Deep State and Leftist alliance conspiracy boys.

    It was never going to be as simple as “I win” or “Not Tired of Winning Yet” or “Trum is going to fire them all”.

    It would have been better if Trum fired them all and replaced the entirety of the cabinet, Deep State, and DC patronage system with his clan loyalists. But he didn’t do that, precisely because he doesn’t have that many clan loyalists.

39. Oh, I know, “but, gee it’s been six months already, and he hasn’t fixed everything.”

    I think everyone but the most die hard supporter is worried about his inability to rise above the slander and abuse, and his inclination to fire back with no filter. Then again, I have never experienced, nor witnessed anyone in a firestorm such as he has faced from day one.

    Why does this passage sound exactly like what the Leftists said about Hussein’s first year in power summarized as “give him more time, he has to fix the stuff all you Republicans and Bush II broke”.

40. Big Maq:

    “EVERY POTUS has an array of opposition.”

    Right. And every volcano is Krakatoa.

41. The ones who were talking about the Left’s evil in 2007, was ignored by people. Now those same people are talking about an array of opposition and krakatoa.

    Volcano eruptions are only a surprise when people think it is safe.

42. Ed Bonderenka cites that part of the DOJ reg that Sessions should have given due cognizance to before his recusal:
    “or he may be authorized in writing to participate in the matter if the interest of the Department outweighs the appearance of a conflict. The determination should be based on: a) the nature of the relationship; b) the effect of the resolution of the matter on the financial interest; c) the nature and importance of the employee’s role; d) the sensitivity of the matter; and e) the difficulty of reassigning it.”
    Sessions’ very few (2?) Russian contacts during the campaign and before taking office were of chickenshit significance and worthy of recusal ONLY in the eyes of the pernicious Democratic opposition, who have suddenly, after Obama, discovered that Russia is not our friend..

43. Frog, As I looked at it, it seemed that the only person to permit him to not recuse would be Trump himself.
    🙂
    In the light of the precedence of all the Democrat recusals, Sessions should have carried on.
    But he’s not a Dem, so he didn’t get the free pass.

44. @CapnRusty – Not a good analogy.

    The fact that there is an array of opposition is not the problem – there always is, for EVERY POTUS.

    Is trump dealing with it effectively?

    How much of the intensity of trump’s “array of opposition” is a response by his own behavior?

45. “The fact that there is an array of opposition is not the problem — there always is, for EVERY POTUS.”- Big Maq

    You actually believe this? That the volume of the opposition is irrelevant? That the criticism of Obama by Fox News, WSJ editorial page, Washington Times is equivalent to the often Fake News of the NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times, Chicago Tribune, Reuters, AP, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC,…..

    That is a big problem.

    You need to have your reality meter calibrated.

46. What if it *IS* theater? I don’t usually follow Rush, but this was linked elsewhere & it’s intriguing to consider some Trumpian-Machiavellian manipulation:

    https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2017/07/26/whats-really-going-on-with-sessions/

47. @Colocomment:
    I just blogged this morning:
    “In the right book, this would end with an announcement of a large bust of leakers/spies who were indicted because Trump and Sessions had engaged in a charade to make them feel confident in exposing themselves somehow.

    In reality, it’s probably just petulance, stress, poor management technique.”

48. Ed,
    Seems recusal is an involuntary voluntary act.
    You are right, though, that only Trump could have granted the exemption in the required writing.
    I think increasingly that Trump is getting poor counsel, being quite unaware of the hideous pot of laws and regs in DC that apply even unto himself and his Cabinet. I suspect his COS, Priebus, as the primary culprit.

49. I don’t disagree that the regulation requires Sessions to recuse himself from any investigation into the campaign, but nothing else. I think he is still in a position to order Mueller not to go beyond the investigation of possible collusion with Russians during the campaign. And if he doesn’t, Congress should.

    There’s nothing, however, that prevents Sessions from investigating anything about Hillary, and he should do so immediately.

    I agree with Brian E., that Trump is into alpha-maleness, which Sessions certainly doesn’t have. That being said, Trump is an a**hole. I said that all throughout the campaign, and I haven’t changed my opinion yet.

    Mr. Frank and parker (much as I hate to agree with him because he welshed on his campaign bet) are 100% right. If putting up with an a**hole is the price I have to pay for actually getting conservative goals accomplished — and exposing the GOP Congresscritters who are cowardly, lying POS — that’s a price I’m willing to pay.

50. Good comments!

    I do think Trump is capable of being clever and perhaps borderline Machiavellian. But not a 3D chess player. On a couple of occasions I have heard from persons who have had long and close relationships with Trump, who have claimed that the obnoxious bullying Trump is a front. Not the real Trump. Those claims could be BS, but I think not.

    I think Trump understands better than most that 1) You have to get people’s attention, and 2) Increasingly perception is the reality. Hence the obnoxious bully.

    To the specific point of Trump bullying Sessions, I think you need to look at the big picture. Trump comes from a place where speed and aggressiveness goes a long way and is even maybe the norm. Sessions has been a senator for ages. Can you comprehend the disparity between the two? My guess is that Trump is trying to light a fire under his AG. And why is Rosenstein still in office???

    Thanks Frog for the info. I can’t believe that the [expletive] criminal Koskinen is still the head of the IRS. Maybe Trump needs to light a fire under Sec. Manuchin too.

51. Manju et al: I trust Andy McCarthy’s judgment on this and he argues that recusal wasn’t necessary because we still don’t have a criminal investigation:

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.nationalreview.com/article/449914/attorney-general-jeff-sessions-recusal-russia-investigation-donald-trump-james-comey-wall-street-journal&ved=0ahUKEwjP2drCvqrVAhUGPz4KHe7QAOIQqUMIYzAK&usg=AFQjCNE74ZNMf8iKjvb7pnYLh0Yq8Djb4w

    That said, Session’s recusal does not justify Trump’s rants.

52. I am astounded by this behaviour by President Trump towards AG Sessions and find it inexplicable.

    The explanation must go deeper than merely that President Trump is an exceptional but flawed human being – which by itself would explain a momentary lashing out – but this is something different. He’s waging a campaign. His course is deliberate, calculated and continuing almost daily.

    Moreover, this undermining of such an accomplished and principled key ally as his AG is occurring in the face of public support of AG Sessions by many experienced pundits who wish the President only well generally.

    I just don’t understand it at all.

    I am reminded of the most important and useful lesson that I took away from my Army Reserve officer training and applied in business – which was that a true leader never dresses down a subordinate publicly.

    One can and must correct a misbehaving/underperforming subordinate whenever necessary – but one must take them aside to do so.

    Publicly humiliating a subordinate only undermines the authority of both as it paints one as weak and vulnerable and the other as a bully. It is an iron rule of leadership in both the military and the business world.

    AG sessions already has a big enough brief herding a department full of lawyers without undermining him and giving encouragement to his and Trump’s common foes.

    In so many ways Trump has proven himself a man of courage and a true leader and yet he does this to Sessions and then gets up again each day and consciously repeats it. Inexplicable to me.

53. “That the criticism of Obama by Fox News, WSJ editorial page, Washington Times is equivalent to the often Fake News of the NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times, Chicago Tribune, Reuters, AP, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC,…..” – Brian E

    Look, if you are merely counting media outlets, well, great for you, but

    a) there are MANY more “outlets”, with significant more representation for conservative views, and
    b) the relevant issue seems to be the intensity.
    .

    Were you old enough to vote in 2000?

    Seems to me that GWB had an “array of opposition” to deal with. Didn’t seem to let down but briefly for 9/11. Iraq War? Katrina?

    Unfortunately, the fallout from 9/11 occupied most of his two terms, but he still managed to get things done (not all that I agree with, but that is a different question).

    Were we spinning around in how GWB was ticked off by one of his cabinet members, or how he was hurt that the press was unfair to him, or how he was openly threatening Congressional members, or declaring the press an enemy of the US?

    What seems different this time is the nature, the intensity.
    .

    We escalated by choosing trump.

    His nomination, and then election says that all the things we said we didn’t like about the character of the dem leaders past and present, didn’t matter one wit. It was all a facade.

    Heck, even adhering to a core set of principles or policies no longer mattered, since we had no way of knowing if there really would be any follow through, since the man had a long history of dem positions, and financial support for them, and frequently flip flopped during the campaign.

    “We” openly wanted a “fighter”, even as early as the primaries, and the rest didn’t really matter.

    Any surprise that we see the other side “fighting” too?

    Or, did we think they’d be door mats and acquiesce?

    NO! They upped THEIR game, THEIR intensity.
    .

    I happen to think the left and msm have been over the top, and it has been working against them.

    BUT, they are learning, and have 3+ more years to hone their attacks.

    I don’t think trump will learn anything, especially not if he ignores his advisers, if he keeps getting cheered on by the same folks who have been cheering (no feedback loop), and if he maintains his sole focus on appealing to his “base” (no growth in support).

54. “Trump comes from a place where speed and aggressiveness goes a long way and is even maybe the norm.” – TommyJay

    Would argue this is the mode for most businesses today.

    BUT, there is a difference between being aggressive or assertive, and being a bully.

    There are many ways to “light a fire under the AG” before one gets to the option of having to do so publicly.

    Doing it this way says more about trump’s weak management skills, as it makes him seem afraid to deal with issues personally, man to man.

55. To Big Maq,

    I don’t think Trump attacks on Sessions are necessarily smart at all. (Not that I’d know a priori.) I just tend to think that he has already exhausted most or all of those “many ways” and was left with “having to do so publicly.”

    It does make him look weak, but guess what! The evidence is that he IS weak now. I’d guess that he thinks this is his best shot at rectifying the problem. It may turn out to be stupid &/or counterproductive.

56. “What seems different this time is the nature, the intensity.”- Big Maq

    What is different this time is the result of 8 years of Obama. The democrats are bringing a gun to a knife fight.

    They took lessons from the Agitator in Chief. History is accelerating. We’ve gone from wondering whether civil unions might be a path for homosexuals to create legal relationships in 2008 to defending the sanctity of the shower.

    So yes, what the left is doing is different in weight and volume.

57. By the way, I voted in 2000. 😕

58. We’ve gone from wondering whether civil unions might be a path for homosexuals to create legal relationships in 2008 to defending the sanctity of the shower.

    After you defeat the Left, what are you going to do about the immortal entity that has existed for 6000+ years, Lucifer?

59. TommyJay Says:
    July 27th, 2017 at 7:53 pm

    How is Trum weak, when his backers are still Not Getting Tired of Winning, as they so often write down for us to read.

60. @Brian E – you know, “our” side has a pov, but is missing what the other side sees.

    You may think it is just the left being the left, but they truly do see this as an escalation.
    .

    Just came across this today, and it seems timely… Read this entire article, but here is an interesting quote…
    .

    “All of that made former First Lady Michelle Obama’s memorable line about going high when the other side goes low seem dangerously naive. Trump belittled, humiliated, threatened, and smeared his opponents (and sometimes his supporters) nearly every day since the beginning of his candidacy for president. His opponents appealed to precedent, to norms, to comity, and to decency. Today, Trump sits in the White House.”
    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/mccain-goes-high/535218/
    .

    They actually think they went “high” at all the low attacks against obama (e.g. birtherism – headed by who, btw?).

    Of course WE, don’t see it that way.

    BUT, how many of us see nothing wrong in what trump is doing – some cheering it on, in fact?
    .

    AND, notice how similar the theme is to what we hear on the right – it is “dangerously naive” – implication being, “Since the right does this, why should we (the left) be playing by the Marquis of Queensbury rules?”
    .

    Also, notice the implication of hypocrisy at how the regular GOP candidates stood for one way of behavior, but trump still got elected.

    What do you think that says about their pov on what we’ve selected?
    .

    Now, one article does not make proof of it all, but as I’ve been saying here for a while, folks need to get outside the “conservative” media bubble to get an understanding of what is happening on the left.

    We (dangerously, imho) assume too much and generalize too much, and are led by the nose by a handful of “conservative” pundits that have shown us they are willing to change on a dime to stay in front of a large audience, and stoking up emotions for the sake of ratings.
    .

    The intensity (and count, if you must worry about that, but am willing to consider a reasonable measure of relative percentage from a good source, as right now I’d say it is probably in a better place vs 15-20 years ago, given the growth of “conservative” media, and the proliferation of choice via the internet) is a direct response to this escalation.
    .

    Really, how the left is talking to themselves about the right is remarkably similar in some ways to how we talk to ourselves about the left.

    Strangely (or not), it seems that what each says about the other becomes more the reality as time goes on, as each recedes to pure blue vs red arguments – surprising how that works, no?

61. Big Maq: I rather think most commenters here would grant most of your points, e.g. Trump is quite aggressive, though not necessarily the equivalence you seem to argue.

    For instance, Trump and followers talk trash while the left is waging full-on riots and a Sanders volunteer attempted multiple assassinations of Republican congress members.

    Of course conservatives have their blind spots, but Jonathan, a liberal psychologist, conducted experiments showing conservatives understand their liberal counterparts better than visa-versa.

62. Jonathan Haidt.

63. Big Maq,

    I think Huxley answered your concerns, but here is an example of the rhetoric of the left in the article you cited:

    The Senate was about to vote on legislation that might result in tens of millions of people losing their health insurance…..Along with Senators Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins, he denied the Republicans the bare majority they needed for a partial repeal that would have lead to 16 million fewer people being insured…..that last minute rescue of the Affordable Care Act and millions of people who benefit from it would have been unnecessary had McCain simply not cast a yes vote days earlier.

    Now the exact provision they are referencing is repealing the individual mandate.

    Requiring people to buy insurance may be the right thing to do. But characterizing it as a rescue of the Affordable Care Act is turning logic on its head.

    If liberals were intellectually honest, they would make that case, that free riders impose costs on all of us. Individuals need to take responsibility for their own health care and purchase insurance. It’s the right thing to do.

    But that is not the argument they make.

    The divide between conservative/liberal worldviews was tackled by George Lakoff where he describes the conservative mind by the Strict Father model and the liberal mind by the Nurturant Parent model.

    http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/467716.html

    Two world views. Cut to the core, Self-dependence or Societal-dependence.

64. @huxley – would love it if “most commenters here would grant” most of my points.

    I just don’t see that, especially given the cheering that has been going on for some time by many for trump and this stuff.

    Though, I do see a bit of a turn, in context of Sessions’ treatment.
    .

    Nobody here is condoning how SOME (an important point) on the left are getting out of hand, going well beyond rhetoric and verging on / partaking in criminal behavior.

    Not saying a mentally ill individual who happens to have supported a dem candidate’s campaign is proof that all the left support this person’s atrocity. (We may have been lucky no nut case on “our” side has campaigned – oh wait, wasn’t there something about a nut case going to some pizza joint in DC?).

    NOR, is it that trump’s behavior is equivalent to all that, nor justifies all that.

    BrianE listed off a number of msm outlets. It is THEIR reaction this is in context of.
    .

    The premise most seem to have is that the intense reaction we are seeing by the msm is all ONLY about opposition to “conservatives”.

    My argument is that it is more about trump and what he represents, what he does, and how he goes about it.

    If we wanted a man just for the purpose of “fighting” itself, we have succeeded.

    If it was for implementing anything conservative, well, that didn’t seem of prime importance in the primaries, and carried over into the election.

    Many of us ignored, excused, or downplayed all the downside about trump, on things we wouldn’t ever let a dem candidate get away with.

    A plurality wanted a shortcut, as they thought we needed someone who is going to fight / bully his way through.
    .

    We are finding out the consequences of picking someone who had / has questionable character, questionable attachment to our principles, questionable motivation, and questionable ability to deliver or even simply make our case.

    Seems many of us intuitively knew / know this. This is, in good part, why there were those of us who said “We’ll see” after the surprise results.

65. “The divide between conservative/liberal worldviews … the conservative mind by the Strict Father model and the liberal mind by the Nurturant Parent model.
    …
    Two world views. Cut to the core, Self-dependence or Societal-dependence.” – Brian E

    Do you cleanly fall on the Self-dependence side, or the Societal-dependence side?

    The world is not cleanly divided up like you cite.

    Fact is, there is a large population who vary in their vote and can be persuaded.

    But, if we insist on treating and talking to folks on the “other” side like there is this rigid line and presume they all behave monolithically, we will lose elections consistently.

66. “… (trump’s) whiny, weepy and self-pitying. He throws himself, sobbing, on the body politic. He’s a drama queen.
    …
    Meanwhile the whole world is watching, a world that contains predators. How could they not be seeing this weakness, confusion and chaos and thinking it’s a good time to cause some trouble?“ – Peggy Noonan
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-is-woody-allen-without-the-humor-1501193193

    ^^^THIS is what we need to worry about.

    Any coincidence the Norks just launched another missile, after having a few in recent weeks?

67. Big Maq,

    Do you know who George Lakoff is? Based on your comment I would suggest you don’t.

    You should read the link, which is a chapter from Lakoff’s book “Moral Politics”.

    That’s right up your alley.

68. @huxley — would love it if “most commenters here would grant” most of my points.

    I just don’t see that, especially given the cheering that has been going on for some time by many for trump and this stuff

    Big Maq: For the record I don’t think you read the rest of us commenters as accurately as you think.

69. @Brian E – I didn’t know of Lakoff, but read your link.

    The context of bringing up that Atlantic article is how the left see trump as something of an escalation.

    You respond as if this is an endorsement of their position on this vote.

    No way. I’ve clearly stated elsewhere that a yay or nay vote was essentially a vote for incrementalism, as neither made fundamental changes to obamacare.

    All this focus on McCain is misdirected. The core problem was set long ago, but read those related threads if you want my response on this McCain blame game.
    .

    So, in that same vein, you chose to also bring up Lakoff and his model.

    Okay. I see now that if you thought mine was an endorsement, you might have thought there were some inconsistency, something which his model may explain.

    That assumption was just a misreading of the context.

    But, since you brought it up, in context of some of your prior arguments on this blog, it is an interesting question on where in Lakoff’s worldview model do you think you stand?
    .

    BTW, while Lakoff does disclaim the model as merely for descriptive purposes vs prescriptive purposes, too often many folks forget the latter part and behave like whatever generalizations may be true for the group is also monolithically true for each individual. This is where we get ourselves into trouble.

70. The Atlantic article was a false premise. Do You really think the left cares whether or not Trump insults Republicans?

    If they’re really such precious snowflakes, then I would say what Lakoff was describing as a technique for liberals to claim the moral high ground has at some level produced the sort of group think/dependence that we’re seeing on campuses around the country.

    When the authors get over their fainting spells at the very thought that someone has been mean to someone else, they might consider the very vulgar displays of conformity including violence, intimidation, and humiliation that those not submitting to Newspeak. When put in contrast to Trump’s bombastity, he doesn’t look so bad after all.

    I rank as an 11 out of 10 on the “I’d rather do it myself scale.” I’m very much dependent on my family, which is as it should be.

    I will take any and all offers of government largesse

71. Gosh Brian – it is NOT that the left needs to care about trump insulting Republicans.

    It is that trump is an escalation.

    It is NOT whether we think they are correct in thinking like they do, it is what they perceive.

    It is also NOT about whether they are all consistent in what they call out on bad behavior.

    trump is POTUS, after all, and has waaaay more power than some knucklehead on a college campus.

    And, it is NOT just about trump’s insults and vulgarity.
    .

    “We escalated by choosing trump.

    His nomination, and then election says that all the things we said we didn’t like about the character of the dem leaders past and present, didn’t matter one wit. It was all a facade.

    Heck, even adhering to a core set of principles or policies no longer mattered, since we had no way of knowing if there really would be any follow through, since the man had a long history of dem positions, and financial support for them, and frequently flip flopped during the campaign.

    “We” openly wanted a “fighter”, even as early as the primaries, and the rest didn’t really matter.”
    http://neoneocon.com/2017/07/26/trump-the-blustering-bully/#comment-2237115
    .

    BTW, since you brought it up, again, which of Lakoff’s worldview models do you see yourself on?

72. Big Maq,

    This has nothing to do about Trump’s behavior. This has everything to do with Trump poaching reliable Democrat voters.

    If he can consolidate his base, essentially creating a third major coalition, both the left and right will find themselves in minority status (as will Trump’s coalition).

    IMO, anyway.

    I answered your question in the previous comment.

    Lakoff’s moral preening was creating a narrative for the Dems to use to gain the high ground, given their support of abortion among other moral failures.

73. I should have said “little to do with Trump’s behavior.”

74. Ed Bonderenka Says:
    July 27th, 2017 at 2:46 pm
    @Colocomment:
    I just blogged this morning:
    “In the right book, this would end with an announcement of a large bust of leakers/spies who were indicted because Trump and Sessions had engaged in a charade to make them feel confident in exposing themselves somehow.

    In reality, it’s probably just petulance, stress, poor management technique.”
    * * *
    It will be interesting to see which of these is correct – or if there is a third scenario no one has yet suggested.

75. “This has nothing to do about Trump’s behavior. This has everything to do with Trump poaching reliable Democrat voters.” – Brian E

    We all heard the term “Reagan Democrats”, right?

    This is nothing new.

    “Poaching dem voters” or said another way, winning >50% is all what elections are about.

    That is insufficient to describe the intensity we see from the left, msm.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>