Join the Schiffettes for covfefe in the SCIF as they await Comeys return from behind the curtains...Trump cont.

[MicrowaveSpy]

Will get link to previous thread

Scientists are answering the call to arms and running for Congress.

I imagine that most are Democrats, but some Republicans who don't deny science would be nice.

www.iflscience.com/editors-blog/scientists-are-running-for-congress-because-the-future-hangs-in-the-balance/

Still can't figure out if the ATC thing will have to go thru Congress or if Scrotus can start privatization via EO. I don't think he can but then again Reagan fired the lot of them on the spot during the ATC strike so who knows!

I really don't think he'll get this through Congress if legislation is needed

That last tweet has fucked me right off

I just don't get it... I get horrific anxiety just before I send an email which has my Head Of Department or MD copied in. How can he blythely press 'tweet' on such inflammatory and frankly offensive stuff, knowing the world and powerful heads of states both supportive and combative will see it.

What the fuck has happened

I 'think' it requires Congressional approval, Across.

Hello all. I still haven't finished reading the last thread. Could anyone give me a summary of the latest goings on?

What I know so far:

1. covfefe, and 45's lame attempt to make it look deliberate
2. Leaving the Paris accord, and making a lame attempt to make it look like a reality show with suspenseful build up.
3. Kushner is a person of interest.
4. Is Comey giving evidence on Thursday?
5. I have added Macron to my list of swoon idols, since the handshake, the body swerve, the trolling with 'Make the World Great Again' and giving Putin a piece of his mind.
6. Communications director (Mike somebody) resigned, but I don't really know why (apart from working for a batshit administration)

Have I missed anything else? How does everyone else get the time to read / contribute to the thread? Are you all bots / techies, working in an underground facility like in Homeland?

lawfareblog.com/does-trump-want-lose-eo-battle-court-or-donald-mcgahn-simply-ineffectual-or-worse
From Feb:

The clearly foreseeable consequence of the roll-out combined with Trump’s tweets is to weaken the case for the legality of the EO in court. Why might Trump want to do that? Assuming that he is acting with knowledge and purpose (an assumption I question below), the only reason I can think of is that Trump is setting the scene to blame judges after an attack that has any conceivable connection to immigration. If Trump loses in court he credibly will say to the American people that he tried and failed to create tighter immigration controls. This will deflect blame for the attack. And it will also help Trump to enhance his power after the attack. After a bad terrorist attack at home, politicians are always under intense pressure to loosen legal constraints. (This was even true for near-misses, such as the failed Underwear bomber, which caused the Obama administration to loosen constraints on its counterterrorism policies in many ways.) Courts feel these pressures, and those pressures will be significantly heightened, and any countervailing tendency to guard against executive overreaction diminished, if courts are widely seen to be responsible for an actual terrorist attack. More broadly, the usual security panic after a bad attack will be enhanced quite a lot—in courts and in Congress—if before the attack legal and judicial constraints are seen to block safety. If Trump assumes that there will be a bad terrorist attack on his watch, blaming judges now will deflect blame and enhance his power more than usual after the next attack.

I am quite disturbed by just how efficient the Trump internet machine is (cf post upthread about bot wars). Both the WashPo and Telegraph articles on how Trump deliberately took Khan's words out of context and passed them off as meaning something totally different from what he (Khan) actually said are followed by hundreds upon hundreds of comments from Trumpers saying "no, Trump told it how it was..."

I'm losing track of who's giving evidence when!

OK, just checked and James Comey, former FBI director, on Thursday.
Possibly Mike Rogers, current NSA director on Wednesday. (NSA are the equivalent of GCHQ.)

Mis-spent middle-age, Beryl. I'm stuck lying down a lot, so it's 'tinternet or actually tackle my reading stack.

But I have the attention span of a gnat, so Proper Books are difficult.

Isn't it great not that the bots created last week found something to do so quickly? hedgehog

How does everyone else get the time to read / contribute to the thread? Are you all bots / techies, working in an underground facility like in Homeland?

There's a really long stretch of pavement without much dog poo or many trip hazards on my walk to work where I can usually crack through a page or two.... Ten minutes when DS2 is faffing in the shower at bedtime... Pockets of time, basically, plus swathes of evening when I am only half watching telly. Subtitled foreign telly is more challenging to MN through, so I save that for weekends.

Press briefing with Sarah.

Trump not bothered about tweets

Oh - and Trump isn't picking a fight with Khan

She's struggling with the Khan question

Trump doesn't care what people call it.

So it's a ban.

This is fascinating.

That was a very frustrating experience watching that presser.

No BBC question.

She wasn't there very long. Someone said "you can stay longer"

She's got the 'folksy' down pat, she thinks, but she's using up her capital.

It's disappointing she didn't take anything from the British Press. I presume they were there.

Where's Sean

Caroline O.‏ @RVAwonk 4m4 minutes ago
More
Sarah Huckabee Sanders: Twitter allows POTUS to communicate directly w/ the people.

5 secs later: Stop paying so much attn to his tweets.

You missed out the 'Look guys'.

If Trump assumes that there will be a bad terrorist attack on his watch, blaming judges now will deflect blame and enhance his power more than usual after the next attack.

So an attack would suit Trump and his cronies' agenda/s rather well.

Hasn't there been that clip from MSNBC saying they thought he was trying to provoke an attack?

thehill.com/homenews/media/336292-msnbc-anchor-is-trump-trying-to-provoke-a-domestic-terrorist-attack