President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Republicans Are Already Preparing to Forgive Roy Moore

Great commentary here by Will Saletan.

What happened to Trump will happen to Moore. Senators, expecting his support to collapse, initially jump ship. Then, when voters prove to be indifferent, the senators crawl back on board. They frame this reversal not as a matter of partisanship, cowardice, or amorality, but as principled acceptance of the will of the voters. As to the merits of the charges, they say the election settled them.

So if you’re a conservative voter in Alabama, take heed. When Trump, Kellyanne Conway, and Gov. Kay Ivey suggest that you should set aside the allegations against Moore and elect himbased on other issues, they’re suckering you. If he wins, they’ll brandish your ballot as an affirmation of his innocence. Vote accordingly.

Notably, Saletan writes that Trump “admitted to groping women.” I’m going to email him and see if he will weigh in on that long-standing debate for us.

 

Unconditionally?

Or are you still hoping for the our-bishop-for-your-king trade?

 

From today's WaPo Daily 202:


"Conservative blogger Jen Rubin, who practiced law for two decades, raises several additional questions about Kushner: “What was the Trump team going to get in exchange for lifting sanctions against Russia? If Kushner directed Flynn to contact Russian officials, was he then looking to cover that up when he urged the president to fire (Comey)? … If Flynn’s contacts were authorized and legal, why did Trump allow him to lie to the vice president about them? … Did Kushner derive any financial benefit from contacts with Russians? Why did he meet with a Russian bank during the transition? … Did Kushner intentionally omit Russia contacts on his disclosure forms? … What connection, if any, exists between Russian officials and the Trump campaign data operation conducted by Cambridge Analytica and overseen by Kushner? … Will Trump attempt to pardon Kushner if he is indicted?”

---------------------

"Newsweek reports that, among other significant omissions, Kushner did not disclose in paperwork for the Office of Government Ethics that he led the Charles and Seryl Kushner Foundation from 2006 to 2015, during a time when the group funded an Israeli settlement then considered illegal under international law. “The failure to disclose his role in the foundation—at a time when he was being tasked with serving as the president’s Middle East peace envoy—follows a pattern of egregious omissions that would bar any other official from continuing to serve in the West Wing,” Chris Riotta reports."

 

Analysis | Is the GOP tax plan an unprecedented windfall for the wealthy? We look at 50 years of data to find out

 

We had one of our sky-is-falling discussions in my shop, after deadline the other night, wondering when (not if) it would make financial sense to stop printing our paper.

Then someone had an idea: At what point will it become politically feasible/a re-election ploy for Trump to force a newspaper to stop printing? Probably not one of the big ones ... too many people still read "failed" New York Times and the Washington Post, and there's too many lefties on the west coast.

But a newspaper with a liberal-leaning editorial page, somewhere in flyover country? A majority of Americans hate the media, especially Trump voters. And so few people read print editions anymore ...

Our consensus was that if Trump is still in office in 2020, it will happen. Send out the national guard!

 

OK, email to Saletan:

Will -
I am a reader who thought that your column about the Republicans' shifting response to the Roy Moore accusations was spot-on and the best analysis yet I've seen of it.

I am also a former sports journalist and author and currently an attorney who maintains a strong interest in how journalism is practiced and how news is covered. In particular, I have been fascinated by the media's continuing attempts to put a label to various acts of alleged sexual misconduct.

Along those lines, I noticed the following line in your column:

"But a month before the 2016 election, an audio recording was released that showed Trump privately bragging, during a 2005 taping of Access Hollywood, about groping women."

Slate was the first publication, so far as I can tell (and I have thought a lot about this) to urge that what Trump did was "admit to sexual assault." (Let’s Be Clear: Donald Trump Bragged About Sexual Assault.) If you'll recall, the initial framing of the Washington Post story was that Trump had talked lewdly about women (including married women), but not that he had admitted to or committed sexual assault.

But now you seem to have softened that a bit, going with "bragging about . . . groping women." I think that "groping" implies non-consent, though it's difficult to tell any more. I have maintained that one shouldn't write that Trump admitted to any non-consensual action - he said that women "let" him do it, which, to me, implies he at least believed consent was issued. (ex. "I let my son have a cookie.")

Word choices are, of course, deliberate. No one knows that more than me, having practiced both journalism and litigation. To this point, I frequently post at a journalism and current events discussion forum, SportsJournalists.com, where I have been making the argument - it is not an established fact that Trump "admitted to sexual assault" - for the past year-plus.

I know you are a busy man, but I wonder if you might be able to weigh in on this for us? You can email me back and I'll post the response. I feel like I'm on an island, particularly among others who typically lean left, on this issue. I would enjoy (as would the other journalists and former journalists at the site):

(1) Why you chose "groping" instead of "sexually assaulting";

(2) Whether you feel that "groping" indicates non-consent; and

(3) If so, why you believe that Trump implied non-consent even though he said that women "let" him do it.

And, since I know this seems to matter these days of an agenda behind every corner, I'm not a Trump supporter in any way, shape, or form. I voted for Hillary Clinton.
Thank you, Will. I hope to hear back from you, as I always enjoy your insight.

[Snaggletooth]
[Bumfuck], Indiana

 

A little long...

 

I'm trying to get into @Double Down 's best-of #LongForm newsletter.

 

I’m trying to keep up.

You and @typefitter are enemies.

@QYFW and @typefitter are now friends.

@QYFW and @Double Down are now enemies.

Are you and @Double Down enemies?

 

No, I'm joking. I'm making fun of the length of my own email, comparing it to the length of a long-form magazine piece.

I also don't consider @typefitter an enemy, per se. I am on the record that I would accept a sincere apology for his past actions.

 

My friend Big Circus still owes me lunch.