President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

He’s not going to bow down.

 

I imagine Conyers wants to go out on his own terms. He's 88. He doesn't have much left to give the party. The party doesn't have anything to give him. 52 years in the House. He isn't prepared for such a sudden life change, but it will happen. Give him the weekend to wrap his head around it. Otherwise, Pelosi starts getting questions on Monday. I figure Pelosi and Schumer will collaborate because it would look terrible if they looked like they were playing favorites. Stripping Conyers and Franken of committee assignments would be the logical next step.

Throw in that the next question would be to McConnell asking him if he would give Moore any committee assignment if he wins.

 

Happy Thanksgiving to all y’all in this little dysfunctional community within a community.

 

I started this replying on the Gawker thread, but it morphed into something more.

I'm seriously surprised a real newspaper hasn't been dinged like Gawker has. I doubt there are many newsrooms with anyone who can "recall that time back in the day when we really dodged a bullet thanks to an editor who spoke up. He wasn't even the one editing it. And wouldn't have mentioned it if he knew how excited the publisher was about it."

I think about that scene in All The President's Men when Bradlee and the other section heads are in the conference room and someone mentions their concern about Watergate to Bradlee.
Scott, Foreign Editor: It's a dangerous story for this paper.
Ben Bradlee: How dangerous?
Scott, Foreign Editor: Well, it's not that we're using nameless sources that bothers me. Or that everything we print, the White House denies. Or that no other papers are reprinting our stuff.
Howard Simons: What then?
Scott, Foreign Editor: Look, there are two thousand reporters in this town, are there five on Watergate? When did the Washington Post suddenly get the monopoly on wisdom? Why would the Republicans do it? McGovern's self-destructed just like Humphrey, Muskie, the bunch of them. I don't believe this story. It doesn't make sense.

We've all been there. Someone has something good. The editor is invested and throws resources at it. People are excited and talking about national awards. Does anyone speak up and say - I just don't see the story? News orgs need those types of people almost more than people looking for big game to hunt.
Trump has been in office for a year and not only is the news cycle shorter, but items become digested as fact much quicker as well. I am surprised that after the flurry of leaks early this year, it's been pretty quiet with the exception of a few dribs and drabs. I figured investigative teams at the WashPo and NYT were doing deep dives (who knows maybe we will see a big project launched soon to qualify for the Pulitzers) or everyone is waiting for Mueller's report - but given the rousing and calamitous overture of the Trump administration, I figured we would be getting more than staffers speaking out of turn, e-mails showing friction between members of the administration and tweet re-caps.

 

Death? He’s been in politics for more than half a fucking century. How long has he been planning “his own terms”?

 

People can stay in denial about the inevitable right up to the end. I also think Conyers does not resign but will just retire rather than face a primary. He has survived his wife Monica, who was a Detroit Councilwoman, going to federal prison. The Detroit papers called her Mon-Con. He can stick it out until 2018.

 

Neither is that other serial pervert in federal office ... you know - the one you voted for ....

 

Let's see. Just in the past week we've had the net neutrality story, the ATT-Time Warner story, Trump endorsing Moore, and Conyers, Franken and Barton. To some extent, the press isn't running deep dives because big stories keep happening right out in the open. For a deep dive, there's the Vanity Fair story about Trump giving away Israeli secrets to the Russians because he's a simpleton. That's in three days. I'd like to think nothing will break today, but I kinda doubt it.

 

This post makes almost no sense.

 

This isn’t very different than Harvey Weinstein’s pledge to go after the NRA after the publication of the Times article.

These liberals believe — and, with some merit based on the Bill Clinton episode —that as long as they champion liberal causes, their own personal behavior is irrelevant.