One of my Trump-era media pet peeves is when Trump belittles or insults someone and it's described with words like "sparred" or "feud" even though the other person didn't do anything. https://t.co/MLf18cUIOt
— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) October 1, 2018
If that Kavanaugh dude is distracting everybody by being an aggressive misogynist, Donny Dollhands is more than ready to up the ante…
As a reporter, This is terrible! Women are taxpayers and voters. This is not helping the Republican Party with women in less than six weeks at the polls. https://t.co/4c0L5BHegd
— AprilDRyan (@AprilDRyan) October 1, 2018
Opinions differ:
It’s a mistake to frame Donald Trump’s disrespectful comment to @CeciliaVega as a sexist incident. It’s broader than that: the president does not understand the value of the free press. Male or female, he sees reporters doing their jobs as pests, at best, or worse, as the enemy.
— Olivia Nuzzi (@Olivianuzzi) October 1, 2018
If she believes his motives were sexist, I would be interested to hear her thoughts and assessment. But I believe it’s her call, whether or not this ought to be framed that way. For now, I see this most objectively as an incident involving Trump‘s disregard of the free press.
— Olivia Nuzzi (@Olivianuzzi) October 1, 2018
A news conference means you get to ask whatever question you want to ask. #FirstAmendment
— Cecilia Vega (@CeciliaVega) October 1, 2018
… except, of course, on the fact that Donald Trump is a dick.
Trump: I consider the media part of the Democratic party. pic.twitter.com/nq5P7peqKe
— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) October 1, 2018
smike
Trump: I consider the media part of the Democratic party. pic.twitter.com/nq5P7peqKe
Yeah, the media wholly owned by those rich leftists.
Villago Delenda Est
The vermin of the Village need a purge as badly as the GOP does.
Major Major Major Major
@smike: at least he didn’t say democrat party.
John Revolta
Trump ain’t shit. I grew up with Mayor Daley the First. THOSE were some press conferences.
“There are crooked people in all walks of life. There are even crooked reporters, and I could spit on a few from here.”
hervevillechaizelounge
@Villago Delenda Est:
It’s crazy to me that Carlos Slim is a major NYT shareholder; if I owned shares of a company that sucked up to a despot who called my people rapists I’d be raising a ruckus at every single shareholder meeting.
Slightly OT: I’m confused about Bernie Sander’s demands for a separate perjury investigation into Kavanaugh; isn’t the current FBI investigation going to cover his perjurious statements? Is BS just grandstanding?
I know investigating every rape Kavanaugh’s background is going to be labor intensive (especially with a seven day time limit) but it seems to me his lies are irreparably entwined with his sexual misconduct.
hervevillechaizelounge
Correction: “every rape IN Kavanaugh’s background.”
My kingdom for an edit button!
hells littlest angel
@Major Major Major Major: Actually, he did. He never passes up an opportunity to be a shit-head.
sukabi
I’m confused by April Ryan’s tweet…she should be thrilled that trump is being his usual self, the more women he alienates from the Republican party prior to the election the better. The worst case scenario would for him to fake being a caring human.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@sukabi:
He’s not that good an actor.
opiejeanne
@sukabi: That was my reaction too.
I can’t sleep. I’m in a hotel, really a glorified motel, and the room above has someone who is DOING SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT, walking back and forth, sounds like moving furniture, the floor squeaks every time they walk across it as if they’re a really large person, and why the fuck won’t they go to bed and go to sleep? I mean, what the hell people? You check into a hotel to stay up all night? They aren’t having sex, they aren’t dancing, what is there to do in a room that small?
low-tech cyclist
@opiejeanne: That really sucks. Hope you get *some* sleep before the night is out.
I vote for ‘both.’ Trump’s belittling her as a woman *and* is showing his disdain for the free press.
Shalimar
@hervevillechaizelounge: They FBI will apparently not be investigating his credibility re: drinking claims. How they can continue that stance when many people voluntarily contact them to give statements, i have no clue
raven
@opiejeanne: That happened to us in a condo we rented on Edisto Island last year. Exactly as you describe except we decided they were painting.
OzarkHillbilly
In “Questions I’d Like to Hear a Reporter Ask”: “Mr.President, have you always been a complete pansy? Or did you only become one after getting your ass handed to you by a 10 yr old girl when you were in the 7th grade?”
Patricia Kayden
@opiejeanne: I’m in a hotel too and what appears to be children in the room above were noisy for a long time. Thankfully, they stopped all that noisiness around 11 pm when I went to bed. I was considering calling the manager on them.
Hope your problem is resolved.
opiejeanne
@low-tech cyclist: Yes, why not both.
And no, they’re still doing something, pacing the floor, moving stuff. I’m not sure what to tell the front desk: Ask them to go to bed?
opiejeanne
@raven: When we were first married we lived in a little apartment near the college, while David finished the last quarter of school. The apartment above us was usually quiet, but one night there were noises upstairs that sounded like a heavy piece of furniture was being dragged back and forth across the floor above.
Finally, David went up and knocked on the door. The woman upstairs was using a sewing machine. That was in 1970. I don’t think any of my sewing machines ever made that much racket.
raven
@opiejeanne: WHOO HOO!
opiejeanne
@Patricia Kayden: No. It’s now 2:38 am. They’ve been making noise since 8:00pm. There are a bunch of firefighters staying here tonight, but I don’t think that’s who’s upstairs. those guys looked like they were ready to collapse. I’ve got the fan running which usually helps with the noise but it ain’t working this time.
We’re in Kettleman City. The best thing about it is that there is an In’n’Out. The town is mostly a wide spot on the I-5.
opiejeanne
@raven: Uh, what?
raven
@opiejeanne: Crazy seamstresses! My bride’s older machine rattles the whole house from upstairs!
opiejeanne
There are rental trucks in the parking lot with US DOT on the sides.
Next door to this Best Western there is a very large charging center for Teslas. When we pulled in there were three of them in the stalls. There’s a building next to it with the big T logo on top, with tables and vending machines. Probably has wifi as well. I wanted to check it out but David has a cold and just wanted to go to bed. He’s slept through the noise, but he’s able to sleep through very noisy events.
Right outside our room there’s a charging station with a Nissan soaking up the electricity. The roof of this palace is covered with solar panels. Good move.
I’m not going to be worth a damn when he wakes up.
opiejeanne
@raven: Aha. I had a very old machine years ago that Mom bought when she got married. So, from 1947. It didn’t zigzag, just straight stitch and I produced a lot of clothing on it once I got the hang of it. It was not very noisy, or maybe it would be if I were trying to sleep downstairs from it.
I have a nice Husqvarna now that does everything I want it to, but I don’t sew now as much as I used to, even before I started my costume business. I bought it when I discovered that the one I bought in the 80s wasn’t working and I was working on costumes for a convention. I was going to get it fixed and then thought, what the hell, it never worked the way it should have, and bought one of the basic Husqvarnas. It’s the first machine I’ve seen since Mom’s that makes good buttonholes. That’s kind of a big deal if you’re making shirts.
I’m rambling. Maybe I can sleep now.
OzarkHillbilly
@opiejeanne: Sullivan MO is moving into the 21st century. The Wal-Mart is putting in a charging station. Now if only it’s populace would move into the 21st century too….
raven
@opiejeanne: There is also a big UPS hub there.
raven
@OzarkHillbilly: How’s it hangin? I got to the neuro this morning for a skull check.
raven
go to
opiejeanne
@raven: I don’t think we’ve seen a UPS truck any time we’ve been here. We saw one probably about 70 miles back, maybe he was heading here.
raven
@opiejeanne: It’s funny, the google earth view shows UPS trucks right up from the Telsa charging station.
satby
@John Revolta: no comparison. Daley could run a functional government.
raven
@satby: Yea Trump doesn’t yell “get off the stage you fucking kike”.
raven
yet
OzarkHillbilly
@raven: Good luck. I hate vertigo. The shoulder hurts. (Surprise surprise surprise! in my best Gomer Pyle voice)
Went to pick up my meat birds from the processor yesterday. My wife insisted on coming along to help. She also insisted on bringing the dogs. I warned her about Percy trying to bolt as soon as she’d open the door. She didn’t quite get how strong he is. Took her down in the parking lot, wrenched her back badly. So now I’m taking care of her. She’s even taking my drugs.
satby
@raven: I’m betting when he does it’ll be the n word, not the k one.
MagdaInBlack
Great. Now they’ll be falling all over themselves to prove how they’re not.
Sloane Ranger
Asked this in the thread below but it seems dead so I’m re-posting here.
In the last thread it was stated by someone that Merrick Garland’s nomination had expired.
My question is, is it explicitly stated somewhere in the Constitution, Law or Senate rules that a nomination expires after a set period of time or upon the inauguration of a new President or is this a custom and practice that has existed since the beginning of the Republic?
Am British and would genuinely like to know the answer.
OzarkHillbilly
@Sloane Ranger: I think it expired when Gorsuch was confirmed to the seat.
raven
@OzarkHillbilly: It turns out it is probably not vertigo which explains why the exercises didn’t work. I’m seeing double when I look to the side and there is dizziness with that so I just assumed.
raven
@OzarkHillbilly: Dang, those critters can be dangerous!
Tony Jay
@Sloane Ranger:
I asked the same question a couple of weeks ago. NotMax was pretty firm that it was covered by the 12th Amendment. Pity.
Sloane Ranger
@OzarkHillbilly: Ah, so people are nominated to fill a specific vacancy and not just to a seat on the court. That makes sense. So, hypothetically, if 2 vacancies came up at the same time, would the President have to say that they were nominating A to fill B’s seat and C to fill D’s?
Patricia Kayden
@MagdaInBlack: More than they already have?
Immanentize
@raven: What do you think they will find in there??
Seriously, hope all is OK
Sloane Ranger
@Tony Jay: Thanks. Going away now to read the 12th Amendment.
OzarkHillbilly
@Sloane Ranger: That exact scenario came up when W was President:
hueyplong
One take on Trump’s comment about the media being part of the Democratic party is that even Trump acknowledges that Fox News, Breitbart and Sinclair are not real media.
Immanentize
@Sloane Ranger:
The nominations of a president, if not acted upon, ‘expire’ at the end of a Congress. It is really not a question of a new president but a new Congress. A sitting president can re-nominate if they are still in office or, in the Garland case, Hillary could have re-nominate d him. The thinking is that the advice and consent function has to be accomplished by one set of Senators. That is why there is a recess appointment provision in the Constitution.
OzarkHillbilly
@raven: Curiouser and curiouser….
opiejeanne
We gave up, called the desk and she swore to us that the room above is empty. The noise mysteriously stopped but it was 3:40 and we were both awake so we’re back on the road now.
The room in question has a do not disturb tag on the door. The only thing I can think of is they’re running a hot bed operation with a 200 pound hooker.
MagdaInBlack
@Patricia Kayden:
Hard to imagine, right?
Sloane Ranger
@Tony Jay: Just read the 12th Amendment. It deals with the procedure for electing the President and VP. There is no mention about what happens to outstanding nominations by the outgoing President.
OzarkHillbilly
@Immanentize: Mitch McConnell would disagree with you.
Tony Jay
@Sloane Ranger:
I find that if you replace all the naughty words with the names of stations on the London Underground it makes the whole read go quicker.
OzarkHillbilly
New AM thread.
Sloane Ranger
@OzarkHillbilly: @Immanentize:
Ok, what I’m getting at is, is all this actually written down somewhere or just the way people have always understood things to work because they’ve always been done that way?
What I’m getting at is that in English law if something is not specifically forbidden, it’s allowed.
Tony Jay
@Sloane Ranger:
Really? I just took it on faith that the legal eagles knew what they were talking about, and that there was actual language in the Amendment stating that any nomination directed to a specific sitting of Congress could not be taken up by a later sitting of Congress without the original nomination being, as it were, re-addressed and resent.
Wouldn’t it be hilarious if the specific circumstances of the Garland Nomination came back to bite the Republicans? I don’t know if anything like that had ever happened before. The Senate not just rejecting a nomination, or blocking, burying, delaying, or otherwise denying one, but actually point blank ignoring the fact that it existed. They’re all independent and sovereign branches of Government, why shouldn’t a later Senate be able to pick up a nomination that an earlier Senate had – unaccountably and obviously totally by accident – dropped down the back of the couch? They have a Constitutional responsibility to Advise and Consent to these things, don’t they?
Immanentize
@Sloane Ranger: I think it was discussed in Marbury v. Madison, our first real Supreme Court case in which they exercise the power to review executive action. I will look it up and get back to all later. I know my answer is correct, I’ll find the citation.
Tony Jay
OTOH, if the Garland Nomination was specifically noted to be aimed at filling Scalia’s seat, would it still count after Gorsuch was shoved into it? I know OzarkHillbilly quoted the moves around Bush the Lesser’s nomination of Roberts, but that was necessitated by the difference between a normal SC seat and the post of Chief Justice wasn’t it? Is there any specific division of the other seats or are they all just ‘Supreme Court Justice’ seats?
Like you I’m curious if there is any specific, iron-clad language that cover this situation or if it’s all Tradition and Precedent.
OzarkHillbilly
@Sloane Ranger:
Not a constitutional scholar so I don’t really know.
In general the purpose of the Constitution was to define the powers of the Federal Govt and the limits there on. Since the very beginning the powers have been expanding and the limits shrinking in some ways and vice a versa in others. The coequal branches were never really all that equal (the judicial branch is entirely dependent on the executive branch to enforce it’s decrees). In the beginning the legislative branch was more powerful in practice than the executive but those roles have reversed to a large extent in the last 100 years or so (I would say starting with FDR) as the politics have changed.
We have always depended on norms being followed until they aren’t. Right now we are finding out just how dependent we were on those norms. I expect a rash of laws codifying those norms as soon as trump is gone.
Ken
@opiejeanne:
Well, she’s not going to scream “The phantom of 305 is back! Someone is going to die!” That cuts down on repeat business.
Ceci n est pas mon nym
@opiejeanne: Dang. You had the beginnings of a pretty good ghost story going, but the “Do Not Disturb” sign kind of spoils it.
Unless the sign has been hanging there, untouched, for 10 years. Since It Happened.
Wayne
I was just told but have not verified that the White House transcript of the press conference changes what was said by Rump regarding the Cecilia Vega exchange.
Ceci n est pas mon nym
@Ceci n est pas mon nym: Ken got there first.
Sloane Ranger
@Immanentize: Thanks. I’d be interested to find out.
It might not be fair to Judge Garland, but what I was thinking is, if there is nothing in writing preventing them from doing so, if the Democrats take the Senate and there is still a vacancy, Schumer (or whoever) could quietly approach Trump and say that they were going to open hearings on appointing Garland to the open seat. After Trump stops biting the the furniture and screaming not fair, Schumer quietly points out that it’s a new century out there and the Republicans have shown the way. Why be held to prisoner to old traditions and norms? The seat needs to be filled and there is an outstanding nomination and nothing preventing them from processing it in the normal way (albeit somewhat late). He then pauses and adds, of course, Mr President, you could nominate Garland yourself.
Trump tells him to go play with himself and gets the WH lawyers on it. They find out that there is actually nothing in writing on this and, faced with the prospect of having to litigate it through the courts, Trump decides to save face and do what Schumer suggested.
Of course, this all depends on what Immanentize finds out after reviewing Marbury V Madison.
Ken
@Ceci n est pas mon nym: Milliseconds only count in competitive swimming and blog post commenting.
SiubhanDuinne
@Major Major Major Major:
But he did. Josh transcribed it wrong, but on the tape it’s very clear.
SFAW
After we settle the important question re: whether Merrick Garland can somehow be voted onto the SCOTUS by a (hopefully) Democrat Senate, can we also have substantive debates regarding how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? And whether that optical-illusion-picture thingy shows an old woman or a young girl/woman? And whether Fred Wilpon, or Jeff Wilpon, has been more destructive of the Mets’ fortunes?
Ken
I’d love to hear the phone call from the low-level flunky who draws the short straw. “Judge Kavanaugh? This is Bob in the West Wing. The President is withdrawing your nomination. No, it’s not the allegations. He saw a chart where you got more Twitter mentions last week than he did, and, well…”
Anne Laurie
@SiubhanDuinne:
TBH, I think Josh just couldn’t bear to give Trump the misframing. (Or he didn’t want to get hammered by a hundred readers who didn’t listen to the clip before slamming *him* for it!)
Sloane Ranger
@SFAW: You may think it’s a waste of time but I think it’s got legs, at least as far as trolling is concerned (subject to what Immanentize comes back with).
SFAW
@Sloane Ranger:
You want to troll this joint, you’d best run it by DougJ first.
And, actually, I don’t think it’s a waste of time.
I know it is.
Tony Jay
@SFAW:
She’s pretty clearly talking about a future Democratic Senate trolling the Pustule in the White House.
Also it would send a clear message regarding the breaking of norms. As in – “If Republican Senates think they can just ignore nominations made by Democratic Presidents then all they’re doing is putting a gun in the hand of any future Democratic Senate when a Supreme Court seat becomes open under a Republican President, because we’re putting on record that we consider that nomination still open, and we will give the candidate a fair hearing, before we consider any of yours.”
Or, you know, given it’s an open thread you could talk angels or baseball. I hear some people around here like that.
chopper
@Ceci n est pas mon nym:
could be the ghost of a 200 pound hooker…
SFAW
@Tony Jay:
If you say so. And, for what it’s worth, I was pretty clearly not talking about anything other than the waste of time — sometimes referred to a “circle jerk” — bandying useless things about in this place. Big-Endian or Little-Endian? — now THAT is an important discussion. At least as important as whether Garland’s going to get “nominated” by Schumer (or whomever).
You might also consider lightening up, Francis.
Tony Jay
@SFAW:
Really? That’s not how anyone could reasonably parse your comment about “trolling this place” but whatever floats your boat.
brantl
She should sue him, for slander.
Immanentize
@Sloane Ranger: I’m just leaving this here — it is the easiest answer. Senate Rule XXXI (6):
There are good constitutional reasons why this is so — well, at least why presidential nominations cannot survive the end of a Congress (which is every two years) A Session is each year now a days. And there are almost no 30 day recesses but for the end of the year recess.