Solid, Bill. But I wish we could have a discussion about "norms" sometime. It seems to me this is one of those words the left uses to obfuscate and distract, not only to promote Trump hatred, but also to alter people's perception of the country's history and traditional values.
There are norms (putting on underwear, bathing regularly, wearing clothes in public, shaking people's hands and being courteous, being grateful, etc.), but until Trump was elected I didn't know they included illegal immigration, deference to violent criminals, believing the press, celebrating Pride Month instead of Christmas and funding leftist causes through the Treasury and above all, falling in line with the "interagency consensus." That one can get you impeached!
I agree with all the assertions here, but may I suggest that there is signicant circumstantial evidence the Gaetz nomination turned out exactly as Trump (or more likely his new chief of staff) intended.
First, let's review where we are: 1) Gaetz is out of Congress and no longer in a position to make trouble for the thin Republican majority in the House; 2) the allegations against Gaetz have received intense national publicity and to the extent he had any credibility left with anyone but his blind followers he's lost it; 3) Gaetz and his blind followers are thrilled that Trump nominated him and are even more enthralled with Trump than they were before; 4) we have credible and conservative nominee for AG; and 5) some of the heat has been taken off of Trump's other controversial nominees because of the furor over Gaetz. From Trump's perspective, what's not to like?
My evidence that it was planned: 1) Trump sent solid and serious (perhaps excellent) nominees for DAG and ADAG to the Senate who were not Gaetz men before he nominated Gaetz; 2) although Trump promised to put major political capital behind the Gaetz nomination, he never did; 3) when Gaetz withdrew Trump did not have the normal hizzy fit he has when he doesn't get his way; 4) the Blondi nomination was made within hours of Gaetz; 5) finally the above, it all works out so well for Trump.
This is a very canny analysis and I agree with basically all of it except for the idea that this is what The Donald had in mind all along. I don't think he thinks that far ahead (four dimensional chess as it's called by his followers). And even if he planned it this way, I have my misgivings. Being an old-fashioned coot and a simple-minded sort, I think the person to nominate for Attorney General is the person best qualified to be Attorney General.
The Democrats are truly truly awful. They sicken me. Stopping the relentless drive of the leftist project is the major I care about. I wish we had leadership that was not only principled but disciplined and smart. We need a Grant, and Eisenhower for this battle. I don't think we have that and I doubt this administration will succeed in what it is setting out to do. It's opponents are both wicked and relentless. We have won a battle. That's all.
Solid, Bill. But I wish we could have a discussion about "norms" sometime. It seems to me this is one of those words the left uses to obfuscate and distract, not only to promote Trump hatred, but also to alter people's perception of the country's history and traditional values.
There are norms (putting on underwear, bathing regularly, wearing clothes in public, shaking people's hands and being courteous, being grateful, etc.), but until Trump was elected I didn't know they included illegal immigration, deference to violent criminals, believing the press, celebrating Pride Month instead of Christmas and funding leftist causes through the Treasury and above all, falling in line with the "interagency consensus." That one can get you impeached!
I agree with all the assertions here, but may I suggest that there is signicant circumstantial evidence the Gaetz nomination turned out exactly as Trump (or more likely his new chief of staff) intended.
First, let's review where we are: 1) Gaetz is out of Congress and no longer in a position to make trouble for the thin Republican majority in the House; 2) the allegations against Gaetz have received intense national publicity and to the extent he had any credibility left with anyone but his blind followers he's lost it; 3) Gaetz and his blind followers are thrilled that Trump nominated him and are even more enthralled with Trump than they were before; 4) we have credible and conservative nominee for AG; and 5) some of the heat has been taken off of Trump's other controversial nominees because of the furor over Gaetz. From Trump's perspective, what's not to like?
My evidence that it was planned: 1) Trump sent solid and serious (perhaps excellent) nominees for DAG and ADAG to the Senate who were not Gaetz men before he nominated Gaetz; 2) although Trump promised to put major political capital behind the Gaetz nomination, he never did; 3) when Gaetz withdrew Trump did not have the normal hizzy fit he has when he doesn't get his way; 4) the Blondi nomination was made within hours of Gaetz; 5) finally the above, it all works out so well for Trump.
This is a very canny analysis and I agree with basically all of it except for the idea that this is what The Donald had in mind all along. I don't think he thinks that far ahead (four dimensional chess as it's called by his followers). And even if he planned it this way, I have my misgivings. Being an old-fashioned coot and a simple-minded sort, I think the person to nominate for Attorney General is the person best qualified to be Attorney General.
The Democrats are truly truly awful. They sicken me. Stopping the relentless drive of the leftist project is the major I care about. I wish we had leadership that was not only principled but disciplined and smart. We need a Grant, and Eisenhower for this battle. I don't think we have that and I doubt this administration will succeed in what it is setting out to do. It's opponents are both wicked and relentless. We have won a battle. That's all.