Showing posts with label Jeff Van Drew. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jeff Van Drew. Show all posts

Monday, December 16, 2019

Why Is A 73 yr old. "President" Taking Precious Time To Mock 16 y/o Greta Thunberg?


Image may contain: 1 person, closeup

Greta Thunberg has a Mensa level IQ which propels her grasp of climate science and energizes her climate protests. Trump is a moron tyrant and  bully who'd rather take time from his supposedly busy schedule to attack assorted perceived enemies via tweets. This time he picked on the wrong person.

 It was pretty well a no -brainer that once Dotard got nixed for TIME's person of the year he would go off on  Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old climate  activist who's featured prominently in the news the past 2 months.   Traitor Trump, the most monstrous narcissist buffoon ever to occupy the Oval Office, couldn't take it so he had to mock the girl (diagnosed on the autism spectrum) with his infernal sideways putdowns.  Thus, Trump tweeted last Thursday:

 Greta must work on her Anger Management problem, then go to a good old fashioned movie with a friend.  Chill Greta, Chill!”

Of course, here we see Trump projecting his own psychological failings on Thunberg.  She isn't the one with the "anger management" issues, it's him. She doesn't pitch incessant tirades in an oval office, hurling half eaten sandwiches across the room at fretful aides, nor go on tweet attacks - starting at 3 a.m.  

 But it appears Greta, for some reason, seems to be really making Trump upset but without meaning to.   I mean she isn't posting images of his orange orangutan face on her instagram, nor is she calling him an ignorant pestilence who knows next to nothing about climate change. So it has to be: a) that she has an I.Q. at least six standard deviations in excess of his on the Bell curve, and b) she got named the person of the year and he didn't.    What's a mentally afflicted, malignant narcissist bully to do? Well,  strike out at the one who's one upped him in intelligence, and in prominence - at least for this TIME cover.

So it's no mystery that when Ms. Thunberg was named TIME’s person of the year, an honor Trump reportedly wanted,  he careened off the mental rails once more. Hence, did what he always seems to do when he perceives someone has stolen his thunder, edged him out of public attention: taken to  Twitter while on the crapper, and hurled verbal taunts at the object of his ire.  Thus,  he lashed out by accusing the person upsetting him (Greta) of the very things he’s  guilty of: uncontrolled anger episodes - so frequent that his aides have lost count. (One reported they exceed his lies, totalling 13, 400 -odd, since entering the WH.)

But a $64 question emerges here for both Trump's defenders, and his bilious, brainless base who believe the orange maggot walks on water.  (Like the woman at one of his Pennsylvania rallies who burbled in one CNN interview:  "He is just so fantastic, how can those Democrats do this to such fine man?")  The question:  How does the putative leader of the nation and free world - with at least a dozen issues of critical import pending (including a new China trade and tariff deal) -  find the time to fire off putdowns at a 16 year old girl? Priorities anyone? Anyone?

Perhaps Dotard Donnie was roused to fury because Thunberg doesn't fit the mold (in Trump's misshapen excuse for a mind)  of how girls are supposed to act. She isn’t trying to be a contestant in one of his beauty pageants.  Nor would she ever have allowed Trump  and  (now deceased) pal Jeffrey Epstein to enlist her in their salacious schemes. She’s too busy trying to get world leaders like him to do something about the climate crisis. She’s too occupied by giving speeches at places like the UN – where Trump was laughed at, when he gave a speech in 2018, and Thunberg was met with respect, despite slamming the entire body for “misleading” the public with inadequate emission-reduction pledges

Meanwhile, Trump, detested as the most odious "leader" on the planet, was roundly mocked by his peers at the NATO summit in London.  The mutt was so humiliated that he turned tail and bolted the next morning - instead of attending the final conference.  But this is Trump,  a coward at heart. He can't take any level of pushback at all, but always believes he's entitled to "punch back", especially when confronted by powerful women - say like Nancy Pelosi.  Thus, his recent puerile remarks to a reporter about her teeth, i.e. that "because Nancy's teeth were falling out of her mouth, and she didn't have time to think!"

That was after Pelosi was seen answering the reporter's question, then moved her mouth slightly and took a sip of water. But her teeth did not appear out of place and her speech was not interrupted.  But see this is the nature of Trump,  who despite being 73 years of age chronologically is barely 13 mentally.  So his behavior and words match,  often resorting to jabs about people's appearance.   One of the most outrageous episodes is when he mocked a disabled reporter, and Rep. Maxine Waters was compelled to bring the image to the House to convince the gathered Reeps who even then believed their golden (errr....orange) boy could do no wrong.
Rep. Waters brings photo of Trump mocking disabled reporter to House floor

 Thus, strong women, disabled reporters, and legions of the defenseless have all become Trump targets because the arguably most powerful man on Earth is the psychological equivalent of a 13 year old with a perpetual chip on his  shoulder.  That chip flies off at the slightest hint of challenge, or if Trump sizes up an individual as ripe for twitter predation out of some imagined transgression.

By contrast,  Greta Thunberg-  like the majority of girls growing up in the digital age  -   has been cyberbullied before .  By Trump himself, who, after her celebrated speech before the UN General Assembly 2 months ago, sarcastically tweeted, “She seems like a very happy young girl looking forward to a bright and wonderful future. So nice to see!”


Both times Trump has tweeted about her, Thunberg’s responses have been jocular, and sarcastic in kind. This week, she changed her Twitter bio to: “A teenager working on her anger management problem. Currently chilling and watching a good old fashioned movie with a friend.”
In her handling of being cyberbullied by the president of the United States, at age 16, Thunberg has become an inspiration for girls two times over – first as a climate activist, then as a social media ninja.
But that doesn’t mean that Trump’s cyberbullying of Thunberg is any less despicable, or dangerous. What it says to girls all over the world is: no matter what you do, no matter how much you achieve, powerful bullies with XY chromosomes can and will try to cut you down.  But the funniest aspect is how the deranged Trumpie nitwits have tried to redeem the loss of the TIME cover prestige by photo-shopping Trump's visage on Greta's.  Hey maybe Trump aspires to having XX chromosomes

Image result for Trumpies put Trump image on TIME Person of Year cover
While we may howl with derisive laughter at this pathetic move,  the underlying message is depressing and not without potentially dire consequences. It’s a message that has contributed to a precipitous rise in the suicide rate among girls, in efforts to diminish girls' own identities. This has contributed to rising anxiety and depression among girls and young women, not just in the U.S. but the UK. It’s a message that Trump’s wife, Melania, is supposed to be combatting, with her "Be Best"  campaign against cyberbullying.  But it's too bad her bullying scrutiny is too limited, failing to target the biggest bully of all: Trump. 
Nonetheless, Melania, recall, whined about son Barron being singled out by Prof.  Pamela Karlan  during the House Judiciary hearings.  Joy Reid on her MSNBC show Saturday morning put things in perspective:

"Keep in mind this kind of cyberbullying is exactly the kind  that Melania Trump is supposed to be against. Remember the outrage over the mere mention of her son Barron's name during the impeachment hearing? Well, the White House says this is totally different though because her son is not an activist'."

But this is more disingenuous,  false equivalence. Prof. Karlan did not single out Barron for personal attack only mere nominal mention to point out the limits of Trump's aspirations to monarchy.  Thus,while Trump can name his son "Barron" he can't appoint him as a Baron.  Big deal    It waperfect pun-type illustration to clarify the limits of the presidency. Trumpie crybabies need to get over it.  There is no negative aspect there, though it's doubtful Trump's dumb base can see it.
But leave it to them to come up with the specious argument that even  a pun-wise bare mention of the first son's name is verboten, given he's not an "activist".  But it's ok to mock and take sarcastic shots at a teen girl who does something besides play video games all day long, act as an "influencer" for goofy junk products, or keep the nose buried in tiny screens. 

Greta is at least  trying to get fellow humans to get off their butts and work to preserve the planet for future generations.

Meanwhile, Trump lavished his praise on fellow turncoat, House Dem Jeff Van Drew - who announced he plans to vote against impeachment and cross over to join the bad guys, i.e. Repukes. This after Trump "personally wooed himaccording to a CBS News report this morning.  So yet another POS out to show he lacks any moral compass as he joins the most lawless political party in U.S. history.   

Wednesday, September 25, 2019

Don't Be Misled By Overthinking (Or Indignant) Pundits Or Faux- Outraged 'Pukes ) - Donnie Dotard Brought This On Himself

Image may contain: 1 person


"He wants a foreign government to provide him with information which he can use to target a political appointee. They key thing is you don't need a quid pro quo for it to be an impeachable offense. But we have one here, in the face of this transcript.  We have it in the other information we've seen, most notably in how the administration went about withholding the aid that Ukraine was depending on.  

In that context you see this president being willing to trade our national security - because that aid was being sent to Ukraine to stop Russia's aggression - so risking our national security to force a foreign government to retaliate against one of his political opponents.  It is hard to think of a more serious abuse of his office than that." - Former DOJ spokesperson Matt Miller this morning.

"Trump announced he'd be releasing this very controversial transcript of this July phone call with the Ukrainian president. Where there is no explicit quid pro quo, 'we'll give ya the money if ya investigate Biden' . Of course, we already know the context of the phone call because Trump is the one that told us.

It is important we see the transcript but it is not the whole story by any means. We also don't know if we can trust any document produced by the White House, frankly.  I mean it's terrible to say that, but true.  You gotta keep in mind this is a White House that used the levers of power to lean on a bunch of weather forecasters - at the National Weather Service in Birmingham - to retroactively lie about where a hurricane was going.  And then sharpied a map in front of us as if we wouldn't notice. 

I don't know if the transcript is going to be sharpied up by the president before it's released to the public. But it soon became obvious that a transcript released by the White House would not be enough." -  Chris Hayes, last night, on 'All In'.

"I don't care if I just serve one term in congress, so long as I do my job with the constitution foremost on my mind and the rule of law. So if I have to I will retire, and go on my way recognizing I did the right thing." Rep Dean Phillips, MN, yesterday - in answer to a question concerning political penalties.

We need to thank Chris Hayes for basically nailing all the salient issues leading up to Pelosi's impeachment inquiry announcement yesterday,  in his opening  on 'All In' last night. Also indicating clearly why we can't trust a mere transcript and need to get all the ancillary information as well, which includes the full whistle blower complaint - in writing and preferably from the 'horse's' mouth in a public hearing.  Former Watergate Senate investigator Elizabeth Holzman went even further and said we also need to get the tapes of Trump's phone conversation with the Ukrainian president FROM THE UKRAINE, as well as transcripts of it. If for no other reason than to confirm what the White House provides is on the level. Personally, I wouldn't trust any thing Trump or his cabal of vipers offers. 

Make no mistake there will be many pundits - unlike Chris Hayes-  asserting this is a "dangerous step" for the Dems.  For example, former DOJ "unitary executive" inventor John Yoo, e.g.

Beware of Impeaching Trump. It Could Hurt the Presidency.

 

Yoo is  the same derelict miscreant who once defined the "unitary presidency", effectively ceding unlimited powers to the executive branch. He also invoked this balderdash to try to provide legal cover for the torture of  Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib as well as Bush Jr. approving CIA renditions of dozens of Muslims.  So you need to look at the source. No surprise if he could have done all that he'd skate over the fact that the office of the presidency has already been befouled by the pestilence named Trump. Hence, that only a high grade "colonic" will  remove the accumulated  toxic waste.  That colonic is none other than impeachment.  The error Yoo makes is conflating the office with the madman and human garbage now occupying it - who merits no sanctuary or protection.  But if one advocates a "unitary" executive, then a conflation is inevitable.


Meanwhile, true to form,, Reepo House Minority leader Kevin McCarthy belched like the brash imbecile he is that:  "I realize that 2016 did not turn out the way Nancy Pelosi wanted but she cannot just change the law".   But she isn't "changing the law"!  She is using it as the Founders intended against a lawless rogue president which McCarthy would see if he wasn't so intent on sucking Dotard's  orange ass every damned minute. Methinks this ignorant jackass needs to go back to school and take Government 101 all over again! 

Other talking heads who know less history than even Trump will also  bark that it may "tear the country apart" as if it wasn't already, and also lose the election next year. Of course, as I noted earlier the Founders already had this debate at the Constitutional Convention, on whether it was better to have a rogue, lawless president voted out, or use impeachment. The majority - including James Madison  - decided on the latter. It was simply too big a risk to allow a chief executive scofflaw to possibly continue if a majority of the population became bamboozled about his motives.  

Trump himself, predictably, called the whole announcement by Pelosi "garbage", neglecting the fact it wouldn't have been needed if this human garbage called Trump were not sitting in the White House and defiling the office of the presidency each and every day, with his lies, extortion, bribes, graft and threats - like a Mafia Don.  Besides we're still a long way from actual impeachment given Pelosi did not present articles of impeachment - as I believed she ought to have (they'v been 'hiding'  in plain sight especially after the latest Trump atrocity in preventing his DNI Maguire from allowing a whistle blower to deliver his report to congress).  So all we really have right now is the announcement of an "impeachment inquiry".  But hey, given Pelosi has been postponing this step for 9 1/2 months at least it's a start.
Some pundits expressed a degree of shock at the turn of events but they shouldn't have because this was a basic no brainer especially after the overgrown, bombastic  man baby spat in the Dems face with his total stonewalling, preventing any testimony of cabinet members - as well as those no longer in the WH.  Add on the latest, brazen bribery of the Ukrainian president and you have a case par excellence for impeachment. .  As FOX's own judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano  informed  anchor Shepherd Smith yesterday afternoon, Trump basically openly admitted to committing bribery which is an impeachable offense.   To jog memories, recall this all began when Trump pressured the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, in a July phone call to investigate the son of Joe Biden, the former vice-president and the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination to compete for the White House in the 2020 presidential election.


Indeed, Judge Napolitano noted the Founders ranked  bribery right up there with treason - which crime Trump is also likely guilty of. Napolitano was referring to the fact that Trump sought the help of a foreign country (Ukraine)  to gain leverage to destroy his potential political opponent - Joe Biden. And worse, he used the withholding of over $450m in already taxpayer- allocated foreign aid as an extortion tool.  

 As Napolitano put it, in historical time "beheading was the punishment" - though he would "hesitate to prescribe such for Trump". Well, I wouldn't. But I would hang him first, or maybe electrocute him- as he insisted ought to be done to Joe Biden. .  Anyway, impeachment will do so long as the Dems carry it through and not cop out when crunch time comes as it surely will.  
As Nancy Pelosi put it:

The actions taken to date by the president have seriously violated the constitution.  The president must be held accountable. No one is above the law."

Adding,

This is a national security issue.  And we cannot let him think that this is a casual thing.


She vowed to move ahead “expeditiously”.  Well, I hope so and that means having the articles of impeachment filed at least two months before the Iowa caucuses next year.
In her official announcement, Pelosi noted that the chairs of six key House committees already involved in investigating Trump and his administration would make recommendations to the House judiciary committee, which has the authority to handle impeachment. Their reports would help form articles of impeachment brought against the Dotard.
Trump definitely has convinced himself he's above it all, by blowing past every norm, every guardrail and flouted and dishonored his constitutional oath. He's done it not only to enrich himself  but to create a criminal syndicate accountable to no one but himself - capturing the DOJ,  the Pentagon, and now even the intel community (as the recent whistleblower revelation shows)

Launching an impeachment inquiry does not necessarily mean that the House will vote to charge the president with “high crimes and misdemeanors”, though that is the likely outcome of such a process. If the House does charge the president, the articles of impeachment would then be sent to the Senate, which is controlled by Republicans who rarely break with Trump. 
Trump has openly admitted that he discussed Biden on a call with Zelenskiy but has denied any suggestion of a “quid pro quo”, even as it was reported that he ordered his staff to withhold nearly $400m in aid to Ukraine days before his call with Zelenskiy.
Maguire is due to testify on Thursday, his deadline for turning over the whistleblower complaint to CongressThe allegations came to light after a whistleblower working in US intelligence filed a formal complaint reportedly related to the phone call. The acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, refused to release the details of the complaint.
Later in the afternoon, the Senate, in a rare act of bipartisanship, unanimously approved a resolution calling for the DNI to turn over the whistleblower complaint to Congress.
As might be expected, not all Democrats support impeachment. Congressman Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey said an impeachment inquiry would distract from Democrats’ legislative priorities and deepen the political divides in the country.  This is a joke, of course, given there are no legislative priorities more critical now than holding the lawless brigand in the White House to account. Fail to do that, normalize his obscene behavior, and worse create a precedent for an even more malignant occupant in the future  and we won't have a country.

This latest Trump atrocity triggering the impeachment process has many wringing their hands on whether the American people will get behind it. They damned well better if they want to have a representative democracy as opposed to living under an autocracy. And as Elizabeth Holtzman explained yesterday, we don't need all of our countrymen to buy in,  just a basic majority - say  51 percent.  I am betting (and hoping) there are at least that proportion of aware and intelligent citizens left in our nation.   Those who can read Matt Miller's quote at the very top of this post, nod their heads and agree: "Of course he needs to be impeached!" 

Even a few Republicans who finally grasp they have to now put country over party.

To read the obviously truncated/ edited version of the Trump phone call transcript go to the link from the WaPo below:

Rough transcript released by White House