A message from the “resistance” in the WH

  • Thread starter Thread starter HCTC
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dr_Meinheimer said:
What work are they doing?

And I know people who dislike Trump are hopeful but what makes anyone think this person is actually real?
Click to expand...
The New York Times says the person is real. I do not subscribe to the Trump doctrine that all mainstream media is untrustworthy. In this case, the risk of exposure of a plot within the NYT to manufacture this story is too great. They would not take it, even if they wanted to. And the good work was described in the first few posts in this thread.
 
ucfengr said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
Then the person can no longer continue to do the good work he or she is doing.
Click to expand...
How is it good to have a secret cabal working from within to overthrow the legitimately elected President of a democratic republic?
Click to expand...
“Overthow” is a gross exaggeration. These people are supporters of Trump, otherwise they would not have been working inside the administration in the first place. They don’t want to overthrow him. The just want to keep him from doing crazy things.
LeafByNiggle said:
That would be counter-productive.
Click to expand...
But it would be honest…and how things are supposed to be done.
Click to expand...
Sometimes secrecy is better.
F_Marturana said:
The author is a White House appointee. Not an elected official. The author also fears for their job.
Click to expand...
So the person is a coward unwilling to risk anything for his/her convictions…
Click to expand...
It would not be a personal risk. To come forward would be to end the possibility of doing the work they are doing. That is the best way to serve those convictions.
 
I agree, this is not a good thing. Whether it is a Democrat president or a Republican president, this is not how things should be done.

If the President gives an illegal order, he should be told no straight up. None of this Yes Sir, then disobeying behind his back.

If he gives a stupid order (not illegal), do it and let the press and Congress know or quit. It is their job to counter the President via notification to the public and/or laws.
 
I’m not sure that’s the best way.

It’s like an abused wife staying with her husband in order to protect the kids. There are usually better ways to protect the kids.
 
sallybutler said:
Does Trump have Democrats working for him? I thought they were all Republicans.
Click to expand...
Not everybody in the White House is a political appointee. Most are career civil servants.
sallybutler said:
I agree, this is not a good thing. Whether it is a Democrat president or a Republican president, this is not how things should be done.

If the President gives an illegal order, he should be told no straight up. None of this Yes Sir, then disobeying behind his back.

If he gives a stupid order (not illegal), do it and let the press and Congress know or quit. It is their job to counter the President via notification to the public and/or laws.
Click to expand...
I wish I could like this more than once.
 
F_Marturana said:
I’m not sure that’s the best way.

It’s like an abused wife staying with her husband in order to protect the kids. There are usually better ways to protect the kids.
Click to expand...
In that case she can run away with the kids to protect them. But in this case what is being protected is the entire population of the US. We can’t all “run away” from Trump. Apparently these people very briefly considered a more direct approach using the 25th amendment, but decided they could manage things without doing that.
 
Until the person identifies themself, assuming they exist, and gets very specific with evidence of their claims, they’re going to be tossed aside and not given much credence except by those who don’t like the president or see him as fit for office.

And frankly the discussion of some anonymous mole working in the shadows does more damage to the party not in powee in my opinion, because you have people who would not normally be his supporters saying “this is bad for the country, bad for the White House, and this isn’t how things should be done.” Once you start hearing that, you know you’ve gone too far in your desire to see someone removed from office. The same people who support it are the same people who support violent overthrows and coups because the ends justify the means in their minds. Should I be surprised to find those people on this website, is the question.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
This “one” hopes that person stays as long as possible.
Click to expand...
Since the traitor seems to think he knows better than the president when it comes to policy, does he want to persecute the Little Sisters again? Does he want to increase the welfare rolls? Does he want to reverse the Mexico City Policy? Does he want to reinstate WOTUS and other onerous regulations? Does he want to keep Kavanagh off the SC? What Trump policies does he want to change? Does he want a war with Russia or NoKo? Is he bound and determined that China always has near-trillion trade surpluses against our own manufacturers and laborers? Is he for open borders?

What terrible policies did the turncoat prevent? Did he prevent any or is he just a whiner as well as a traitor and coward?
 
I wonder what the advance sales of Woodward’s tome look like. Since the purported stoolie virtually quotes Woodward, but doesn’t take 488 pages to do it, it’s possibly just a phony favorable press release for the Woodward book. Everything about it just screams “phony”.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Does he want to reverse the Mexico City Policy?
Click to expand...
Funny thing – you know who the Circuit Court judge who upheld the Bush administration’s implementation of the Mexico City policy was?

The oft-reviled (here at CAF) Sonia Sotomayor.
 
Well, despite her being pro-abortion, she at least knew the law. Who, by the way, sued Bush to keep him from implementing it?
 
I’d have concerns about any Administration that seemed so congenitally unstable. Even reading about Johnson’s erratic behavior sends shivers up my spine. Let’s move this out of the partisan realm for even a moment.
 
The case was Center for Reproductive Law and Policy v. Bush. You can look up the particulars if you want. I feel like you’re trying to lead me down some path. Not sure what it is, not sure I want to go there.
 
Looks like there were two suits against Bush trying to keep him from implementing the Mexico City policy. Planned Parenthood was the plaintiff in one. The other was by some outfit called DKT International Fund. Ginsburg apparently wrote a dissent in that one that would have denied Bush the right to do it.

I’m no legal scholar, though, so some lawyer on here might challenge what I just said.

Hmm your latest post suggest there might have been three of those suits.
 
That much seems likely. We will probably spent years trying to figure out who this person is, just as we did with Deep Throat. My guess would be someone in Cabinet, so very likely someone hand picked by Trump himself. If there’s one of evident flaw with Trump, it is that he had a tendency to surround himself with people who may not have his best interests at heart.
 
niceatheist said:
My guess would be someone in Cabinet, so very likely someone hand picked by Trump himself.
Click to expand...
Maybe someone who’s either been let go (like Tillerson) or who feels that he’s lost influence and wants to strike back at those he thinks wronged him from within the shadows…doesn’t sound like a very admirable chap to me…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top