Jersey Girl wrote:I wasn't sure where to put this comment, so lobbing it on here. I just got done watching a lengthy press briefing by Sean Spicer. In it, he says (paraphrasing here) the executive order regarding travel/immigration was vetted through the DOJ, so the reason Yates was dismissed was because her dept. had full awareness of the executive order, signed off on it, and then she claimed she couldn't support it because she wasn't sure if it was constitutionally sound.
He said that the executive order was fully vetted through DHS, NSC and DOJ prior to signing/implementation.
Did he explain exactly what he means by "fully vetted?" Did he say who signed off on it in each of those departments?
This document was thrown together in a matter of days. Vetting this from a legal and constitutional standpoint would have taken considerable research and analysis. Color me skeptical.
I mean, should we review all the flat out lies we've had to sor through in the last couple weeks?
It's today's press conference. I can watch it again later, it took a long time to view it. I wanted to try to get a handle on what they're saying/putting out there, how they're explaining things instead of taking everything at face value from what I see in the media.
I'm just telling you what he said. Don't shoot the messenger.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Here's an example. The White House recruited some congressional staffers to help with some of these issues without telling their bosses. The staffers had to sign an NDA, which prevented them from telling their bosses. Does that mean that Congress fully vetted the resulting executive order?
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
Chap wrote: I'd say, given the record of Spicer and the people he works for, that this claim may require independent confirmation before one considers accepting it as true.
How do you do that?
Some reliable and responsible officials in the Department of Justice, and so on, saying "Yes, we were shown a draft of the Executive Order on <date> and had a discussion with the President's representatives on <date>. We advised that it needed to be modified in <specify respects>. In the order as published our advice was broadly <accepted/ignored>".
Absent that, the safest course given the record of mendacity on the Trump side of things, is to assume that Spicer is probably lying as he has before.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Sorry If I sounded critical if you, Jersey Girl. That wasn't my intent. I get that you are throwing another data point on the pile.
Oh, and I think a transcript will be posted on whitehouse.gov
Last edited by Guest on Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
I'm not going to argue anything out with you. I'm home sick today and decided to see what Spicer had to say via the press conference. I don't see anyone here (maybe I missed it) who is looking at what the White House is actually putting out. I'm trying to see who is putting out what, not just the media.
Because I study it out from all sides, youtube videos and crap, and I've been doing it since I was 7 years old and I'm the only one who knows just how evil you guys are.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
I'm not going to argue anything out with you. I'm home sick today and decided to see what Spicer had to say via the press conference. I don't see anyone here (maybe I missed it) who is looking at what the White House is actually putting out. I'm trying to see who is putting out what, not just the media.
Because I study it out from all sides, youtube videos and crap, and I've been doing it since I was 7 years old and I'm the only one who knows just how evil you guys are.
And I'm just pointing out what I think needs to be done to fully vet the press secretary. I suspect the vetting process is underway in newsrooms around the world.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
Quite often there is something to be said on both sides of a question.
But sometimes what can be said in favor of one side is pretty negligible in comparison of what can be said from the other side.
I am sorry to hear, Jersey Girl, that you are off sick today. Please don't feel obliged to use up a great deal of your energy in trying to find reasons to give Spicer the benefit of the doubt. I think you will find it is a thankless, and ultimately counterproductive task.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
EAllusion wrote:Trump just fired Yates. On the one hand, you were expecting it, but on the other her position is tasked with some vital government functions that either now can't be done or probably just became a lot more complicated until a lackey replacement is found. And Democrats should be fighting Sessions with every tool in their box for as long as they can.
If you were a terrorist bent on attacking the United States, now probably would be a good time. The AG office is empty, America is a powder-keg, and the current admin is an organizational mess. Islamophobic actions in America are the best possible recruiting tool for jihadi terrorists and an attack right now would probably produce a counter-punch of intense Islamophobia.
26:30 forward he discusses interagency review/process
Thanks, but I'll wait for the transcript. It's easier for me to focus on what was actually said.
Kevin Graham wrote:
EAllusion wrote:Trump just fired Yates. On the one hand, you were expecting it, but on the other her position is tasked with some vital government functions that either now can't be done or probably just became a lot more complicated until a lackey replacement is found. And Democrats should be fighting Sessions with every tool in their box for as long as they can.
If you were a terrorist bent on attacking the United States, now probably would be a good time. The AG office is empty, America is a powder-keg, and the current admin is an organizational mess. Islamophobic actions in America are the best possible recruiting tool for jihadi terrorists and an attack right now would probably produce a counter-punch of intense Islamophobia.
So, let's hope the peace is kept.
Ok. The lackey replacement was found.
Was Yates wrong not to have simply resigned?
I don't think so. Part of the AG's job is to use her independent judgment.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
