Of course. And governments change with time and revolutions. But People don't change , at no perceptible rate anyway. We all want the same things and we are all susceptible, collectively, not necessarily individually, to demagogues, and without realizing it in real time. I really don't think this is true. But I should allow for the widened meaning of the term "Liberal". Personally, I oppose the broadening of a word's definition to the point the word loses its usefulness. It's a losing battle.
Yeah, it's almost like they think the Cold War is over and we won and we don't really have any reasons to be enemies with Russia or something. Some of them even claim we share common interests in things like confronting terrorism. Shocking. I mean, if we don't have Russia to be our enemy, how are we going to justify these massive increases in the defense budget? These Trump morons need to also think about the ramifications of their statements. If we begin to publicly question the wisdom of the Bush/Obama/Clinton endless war policy, those yokels in flyover country might not be quite so eager to send their sons and daughters to get killed or get arms and legs blown off "defending our freedoms" and "making the world safe for democracy". We're not going to be able to start WW III with transsexuals alone.
I don't "love" Obama, I was rather critical of him. Trump's Congress, however, has opened my eyes to how very much more difficult it is to lead than to oppose. And now, Trump has helped me recognize how difficult Obama's job was. I have new found appreciation for Obama, despite his, after the fact, obvious flaws and failures. I have a hard time seeing Trump as either a Democrat or Republican. He's been described as a populist. He seems, however, to be a person devoid of ideology all together; someone who had no interest in government or making anyone's, other than his own, life better, but nevertheless someone to whom the idea of becoming President had an irresistible appeal. His apparent need for attention and admiration would explain his incautious leap into national politics without full consideration of how this might lead to his private financial dealings being exposed to public scrutiny. This incaution, I would guess, is yet another symptom of his mental disorder, and evidence of its seriousness. What I think I might find charming and disarming in someone, other than my President, is Mr. Trump's openness and seeming naivety. It is what one would expect in a young child, and, indeed, one I might find delightful in an adult dinner companion willing to pick up the check. Our President's Lawyers and staff, we are told, are discussing openly how to discredit the reputation of Mr. Mueller. In other words, a political approach to legal obstruction of justice is being sought by circuitous route. Fair enough. Any political strategist, however, would hold cards such as these very close to the chest, because the the idea, barring something of germane and very damaging substance to come out, is rather childish, illogical, absurd and humorous. Yet, if done surreptitiously, might be effective. Not the case with Mr. Trump however, who is liable to undercut the most able strategist with a tweet worthy of a junior high slumber party. Once a simple-minded strategy, devoid of any thrust to the jugular, as is apparently being considered, becomes widespread public knowledge, even Mr. Mueller will be laughing. He is laughing; I'm sure of that..
I agree re: your sentiments of obama. I think a lot of republicans defend trump only because he ran as a republican - though for a long time he was a supporter of the Democratic Party.
Your quote of my remarks that you deemed "Speculation" was a part of my, apparently failed, at least in your case, attempt at satire and flippant whimsy. When you quote me without the accompanying satire, you do me a disservice. I was so pleased with myself when I penned those remarks on the suitability of the Trump White House as material for Broadway, that i piggishly failed to recognize how my cleverness might be received among the unwashed masses. __________________ P.S. Are you related to Donald Trump -- perhaps his unacknowledged Identical Twin Brother. It hasn't escaped me that your style is that of the junior high TWEET; short, sweet, and of an unmistakable aroma, as if blanketing a junkyard of nuance with a thin veneer of manure.
yeah sure =-- real critical.... you even defended his targeting conservatives with the IRS. this phony I am not a loyal partisan without every not following the party line is written for whose benefit?
Whomever is pardoned by Trump (or his successor) including himself, loses their fifth amendment rights from the pardon date on. These people might escape the first time around through the miracle of the pardon. But there will be a second inning where if any of them are asked extremely difficult questions on anything they were not originally charged for, it is nearly impossible not to incriminate yourself when you have no fifth to fall back on. Therefore, the strategy for Trump and confidants is, counter intuitively, to have it all come out at once, so that there is nothing left for future possible questions to get them in trouble in the absence of a reneged fifth. Their reputation will be ruined forever. No one will touch anyone associated with the Trump administration with a ten-foot pole from then on. But it beats jail. At this point, they are playing no-limit Hold'Em, and they went all in.
this is interesting.. why would a person not be able to plead the fifth if there are other things they have not been pardoned for? If they are pardoned for any actions they ever took... then I suppose they would have no reason to plead the 5th. If not... then the 5th would likely be a good option if someone may be at risk for crimes not pardoned.
How a Presidential Pardon Could Backfire http://time.com/4868418/donald-trump-presidential-pardons-backfire/