ChrisWeigant.com

Comey Out!

[ Posted Tuesday, May 9th, 2017 – 16:37 PDT ]

I had an article all ready to go today, and then I took a quick peek at the news. Which caused me to go back and start all over again. Because James Comey, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, has just been fired. Obviously, I'm not going to have any in-depth analysis, since this happened less than an hour ago (as I write this).

My snap judgment is my reaction to the stated reason from the Trump White House for Comey's firing: Comey improperly influenced the presidential election by his actions 11 days before people voted. His letter to Congress announcing he was reopening the investigation into Clinton's emails is now, for some unfathomable reason, a firing offense.

My reaction: BWAH HAH hah hah hah hah! Ha! Snicker, snicker....

Seriously?!? That's what Sean Spicer expects us all to believe? Oh, it is to laugh. Trump woke up this morning and realized a miscarriage of justice had put him in the White House, and found the steely resolve to immediately rectify the situation by firing the person responsible? Yeah, right. Tell me another funny story!

What makes this so impossible to take at face value? Just last week, Trump was still berating Comey for not pushing the Clinton email investigation even further. Comey testified before Congress last week, and stuck by his claim that he did the right thing in both the Clinton email investigation (where Comey dropped a bombshell into the presidential race 11 days out) and in the Trump/Russia investigation (where Comey didn't utter a single peep until after the election). Comey even said he'd do the same thing if he had it all to do over again. But some of what he said in his testimony was so inaccurate that F.B.I. personnel apparently revolted.

A letter was sent by Comey's underling pointing out that the F.B.I. couldn't as a whole stand behind Comey's testimony, Jeff Sessions chimed in with his own distrust of Comey, and Comey was out "immediately," according to Spicer.

Not a word of Comey perhaps getting too close to some uncomfortable revelations on Trump's ties to Russia, though. Not a single word. Nah, that wasn't why Comey was fired -- pay no attention to the man with the Slavic accent behind the curtain! Precisely how dumb does Sean Spicer really think we all are?

Donald Trump will have the opportunity to name a replacement to head the F.B.I. Whomever he selects is going to be in for some very pointed questions, however. The foremost: What will become of the Trump/Russia investigation? At this point, the only acceptable answer would have to be that the incoming director immediately and entirely recuse him- or herself from this investigation. Otherwise the charges of political influence over a continuing investigation will be absolutely inevitable.

Stepping back a bit, it appears we're in for another week of political whiplash. Yesterday, the biggest story was Sally Yates testifying before a Senate committee that Trump really should have fired Michael Flynn 18 days before he did. As one politico pointed out, Nixon had an 18-minute gap in his tapes, Flynn had an 18-day gap as National Security Advisor. But now the story shifts to Trump firing Comey seemingly at the drop of a hat. If you don't brace yourself, the whiplash is simply stunning. "Why did you not fire this guy earlier? has now become: "Why did you fire this other guy now?"

Granted, it's not exactly a "Saturday Night Massacre" (to dredge up another Nixon comparison). Unless some other folks are also fired in the next few hours, we probably won't be referring to the "Tuesday Afternoon Massacre" any time soon. Still, the firing of the chief law enforcement officer in the country is going to send some mighty big shockwaves through the F.B.I., the Justice Department, and the Trump White House.

For the time being, we're all waiting to see if another shoe is going to drop in any way. Comey's out, but that certainly isn't going to be the last chapter in this story. My humble guess at this early juncture is that there's a lot more to come.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

100 Comments on “Comey Out!”

  1. [1] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Program Note:

    I promise, the article I had written for today will run later on, most likely on Thursday.

    Ironically, the subject was "comedy and politics." But that was before Sean Spicer tried his hand at stand-up comedy...

    Heh.

    -CW

  2. [2] 
    TheStig wrote:

    My first reaction:

    Is Comey Trump's John Dean?

  3. [3] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    My first reaction:

    What is it really that we should be paying attention to? Trump usually drops these sort of media-go-crazy bombs anytime he wants us to be distracted from something that could truly hurt him.

    OR is this simply what everyone thinks it is: Trump trying to keep those who are investigating his Russian ties from getting to talk.

  4. [4] 
    altohone wrote:

    Hey CW

    Typo alert
    "Still, the firing of the chief law enforcement officer in the country is going to send some might big shockwaves through the F.B.I., the Justice Department, and the Trump White House."

    "mighty"

    As for the news, did anybody have Comey on day 112 in the pool?
    How many firings does this make?

    But seriously, maybe Comey will finally spill some interesting tidbits.
    Hell hath no fury like an FBI Director scorned.

    Though, he'll probably go back through the revolving door to hang with the bankster gang instead of rocking the boat.
    Another big payday has a strange effect on "public servants".

    BTW, are you going to rejoin the debates here again some day?
    That was always my favorite part of this place.

    A

  5. [5] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @CW,

    My reaction: BWAH HAH hah hah hah hah! Ha! Snicker, snicker....

    yeah, i thought pretty much the same thing about that pretext for firing comey. if the administration couldn't give the real reason for the firing, at the very least they could have come up with something plausible!

    JL

  6. [6] 
    altohone wrote:
  7. [7] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    TheStig [2] -

    PBS NewsHour got an impressive interview -- they went on the air as the news was breaking, and by 20 minutes in to the show, they were phone-interviewing John Dean himself. That's some quick footwork by a behind-the-scenes producer!

    altohone [4] -

    Mighty obliged (as the cowboys say). Fixed...

    As for my absence, I'm ready for a marathon of back-comment-answering! I'll post previous days' comments here as I make them, and see how far back I can go...

    In the Ann Landers tradition (or was that Dear Abby?), I have given myself 30 lashes with a wet noodle for my lack of participation, as I have no real excuse this time...

    nypoet22 [5] -

    My thoughts exactly. We really need Seth and Amy back to do a segment of REALLY?!? (on SNL's Weekend Update, of course).

    OK, I'm diving into the wayback machine to answer some previous comments... more in a moment...

    -CW

  8. [8] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:
  9. [9] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Wow. Comey fucks over Grandma Nixon and the Orange One still fires him! How can anybody trust this guy? Putin is lucky he has that golden showers vid.

  10. [10] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    OK, skipped back to last Monday.

    But I pose an interesting question, in case anyone wants to go back and answer it:

    What would you ask Obama now, if you got 5 minutes with him backstage before one of these speeches?

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2017/05/01/how-obama-could-end-criticism-of-his-wall-street-speech/#comment-99517

    Hey, look at that URL's end -- we're almost at our 100,000th comment! Who will get the honor?

    Heh.

    -CW

  11. [11] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    "The FBI is one of our Nation’s most cherished and respected institutions" - President Cheeto

    Yeah. The institution housed in the J Edgar Hoover Building. Comey got what he deserved, but he hasn't dishonored the FBI. He fit right in.

  12. [12] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    "I love the smell of bananas in the evening; smells like ... a banana republic."

    If that isn't the best summation of the Trump administration, then I'm sure I don't know what is.

    The column that follows can be found here:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/spy-games-are-the-new-normal_us_59128655e4b0e3bb894d5bcb

  13. [13] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Chris [10],

    Why didn't you reschedule the marijuana?

    Worst case scenario is that Trump undoes it and makes himself more unpopular.

  14. [14] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Well, after Monday's slings and arrows, looks like I scored pretty well with a three-dot Tuesday...

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2017/05/02/three-dot-tuesday-3/#comment-99523

    :-)

    -CW

  15. [15] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    For those currently commenting:

    John From Censornati [9] -

    Can Trump actually fire Putin? I thought it was the other way around...

    Heh.

    JFC [11] -

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2013/05/13/the-irs-scandal-and-hoovers-brutalist-legacy/

    Read the last two paragraphs. Brutalism, indeed.

    Guess they won't be naming the new building after Comey....

    LizM [12] -

    You're right - that's one helluva quote!

    Which reminds me... where is Michale???

    JFC [13] -

    Read my whole comment. Great minds think alike, and all of that...

    :-)

    OK, on to last Wednesday!

    -CW

  16. [16] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:
  17. [17] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Personal note for Kick -

    Not sure why last Friday's comment spam filter flagged you. Your comments have been restored, and I'll be keeping a closer watch on things to make sure this doesn't happen again. My apologies, it's the software....

    -CW

  18. [18] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    I think Michale is just taking a much needed break from all of this and tending to matters closer to home.

    Which is what I need to do, as well but, I'm finding it hard to make a clean break, as they say ...

  19. [19] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    OK, back up to last Thursday:

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2017/05/04/paul-ryan-then-and-now/#comment-99531

    MST3K... woo hoo!

    -CW

  20. [20] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Some of the most interesting comments tonight came from Republicans.

    Sen. Jeff Flake said he couldn't come up with any rationale for this at all.

    Brett Baier mused: if, as Trump says in Comey's 'termination' letter, Comey told him 3 times that he wasn't under investigation, wouldn't that have been a huge breach of ethics on Comey's part?

    Conservative David Frum suggested that the GOP should absolutely name a special prosecutor, reasoning that if they don't, the Russia investigation would overshadow everything else to the point of distraction, and impede their ability to pass their agenda. "Get it off the table," he said.

  21. [21] 
    Mopshell wrote:

    It took three letters to fire Comey. Presumably this was so that no one person had to take full responsibility (or credit if you're anti-Comey).

    One letter wa a 3-page memo from Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein (who has been in the job 2 weeks). One letter was from AG Sessions who gave no reasons but just referred to the DAG's enclosed memo. The third was signed by Trump but clearly written by someone else who knows what a sentence should look like. The third letter also gave no reasons and just referred to the two enclosed letters. It also strangely ended with:

    "I wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors."

    which sounds more like a form letter off an internet site called howtofireyouremployees.com

  22. [22] 
    Mopshell wrote:

    My snap judgment is my reaction to the stated reason from the Trump White House for Comey's firing: Comey improperly influenced the presidential election by his actions 11 days before people voted. His letter to Congress announcing he was reopening the investigation into Clinton's emails is now, for some unfathomable reason, a firing offense.

    As you rightly point out CW, Spicer's explanation is a nonsense and does not tally with the content of the three letters mentioned in [21]. The only letter to give any reasons was Rosenstein's memo and he only gave the 10/28 incident one short paragraph on page 2. He begins the paragraph with this sentence:

    Concerning his letter to Congress on October 28, 2016, the Director cast his decision as a choice whether he would "speak" of the FBI's decision to investigate the newly-discovered email messages or "conceal" it.

    If Rosenstein wrote this memo (because it reads like something from an office minion) he should've known that Comey's October 2016 letter was not written to Congress; it only addressed members of one House committee, the Oversight Committee.

    The paragraph ends with these three sentences which reveal a greater concern for Comey's use of the word "conceal" in last week's hearing rather than the actual contents of the Comey letter.

    "Conceal" is a loaded term that misstates the issue. When federal agents and prosecutors quietly open a criminal investigation, we are not concealing anything; we are simply following the longstanding policy that we refrain from publicizing any non-public information. In that context, silence is not concealment.

    Everything else in the memo is either a generalization about the FBI and DoJ or references Comey's public announcement on July 5, 2016. What bothers Rosenstein most about the latter is that Comey had the cheek to say anything publicly at all because that was the role of the DoJ AG not the FBI Director. He opines that Comey broke with tradition by making the announcement himself and says, on the final page:

    We should reject the departure and return to the traditions.

    So you see, Spicer was hopelessly wrong in the explanation he gave to the press.

  23. [23] 
    Mopshell wrote:

    About the only thing accurate in the following sentence is the first two words.

    His letter to Congress announcing he was reopening the investigation into Clinton's emails is now, for some unfathomable reason, a firing offense.

    Firstly, you make the same mistake that Rosenstein does: Comey's October 2016 letter was not written to Congress; it only addressed members of one House committee, the Oversight Committee.

    This is extremely important from a legal point of view. A letter to Congress doesn't carry the same strictures that a letter to the Oversight Committee does. Committees have distinct guidelines and rules, some of which are specifically aligned with laws they must observe.

    One of those rules is that all communication from any of the 17 Intelligence agencies is to be treated with strict confidentiality and cannot be revealed publicly without the specific consent of the agency involved. This rule ties in with the Espionage Act.

    Therefore, when Comey sent his letter to the House Oversight Committee members, he could reasonably expect every one of them to abide by committee rules regarding confidentiality.

    Furthermore, it cannot be stated often enough that it was NOT Comey who released the contents of his letter to the press. That illegal act was committed by Jason Chaffetz who is now in trouble for ethics violations. Like Michele Bachmann before him, his ethical problems are the most likely explanation for his announcement that he will not be running for re-election in 2018.

    Then there is this all-too-often-repeated misconception:

    ...announcing he was reopening the investigation into Clinton's emails

    Comey never said this; his letter never said this. In fact his letter opened with this sentence:

    In previous congressional testimony,
    I referred to the fact that the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) had completed its investigation of former Secretary Clinton's personal email server.

    To state the bleedin' obvious, this sentence does not mean "The FBI is reopening the investigation into Clinton's emails."

    It was Jason Chaffetz who concocted this lie. Comey denied it and his letter (now public thanks to Chaffetz) clearly confirmed his denial but the US media, as is their wont, preferred to go with the lie. It was more dramatic.

    But there is no excuse for perpetuating the lie. Not only is that wrong in itself, but falsely blaming Comey also has the effect of giving the real culprit a pass. That is, frankly, unjust.

  24. [24] 
    michale wrote:

    I think Michale is just taking a much needed break from all of this and tending to matters closer to home.

    Partially correct...

    I am taking a much needed break from all this.. But not because of tending matters at home but more so because of what this place has become..

    Principles have gone and all that is left is Party talking points..

    Do ya'all know what a "principle" is?? It's a value we adhere to that defines who we are and what we are about.. We adhere to these values, these principles, even when it's politically inconvenient to do so..

    ESPECIALLY when it's inconvenient to do so.. Because if we DON'T adhere to our principles, when we DON'T adhere to our values... They lose their relevance.. They become nothing...

    GODWIN was a principle... But that principle was tossed out simply because of Party bigotry when it suddenly became an inconvenient impediment to Party hysteria...

    Being against rape and sexual assault is a principle.. But that principle is tossed out when it becomes an inconvenient impediment to Party loyalty..

    This latest deal with Comey is another perfect example..

    Up until yesterday, Comey was Satan incarnate.. He was the cause of ALL the Democrats' problems and was wished all sorts of ill by Democrats & most Weigantians alike....

    Trump fires Comey and ALL of the sudden, Comey is the Dims bestest buddy, a consummate professional, a just and honourable warrior vanquished by the Hitler-esque evil President Trump...

    DEMOCRATS ONCE BLAMED COMEY; NOW THEY'RE DEFENDING HIM
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TRUMP_COMEY_DEMOCRATS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-05-10-04-43-02

    I simply don't recognize Weigantia anymore..

    Principles and values and facts and reality used to rule the day...

    Now it's all about "truth"..

    Whose truth?? Why the ONLY truth that matters around here...

    The truth of the Left Wingery... No other truth is allowed and certainly no FACTS are allowed...

    I said it before and I'll say it again.. ANY forum where "TRUMP IS HITLER" is a legitimate point of discussion is simply not a forum that I see myself being a part of...

    That's MY principle...

  25. [25] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Mopshell - 21,22,23

    Excellent reporting! It's an interesting little maze of legal intrigue.

    My impression is the Trump Administration has just created a very dangerous loose cannon. Am I wrong on that? Is Comey in a legal dungeon that he can't reasonably expect to break out of?

    Put another way, if Comey were to decide he must cooperate with "authorities" concerning hypothetical illegal actions by Trump and/or the Trump Administration, which authorities should he cooperate with? That does seem a problem in the Trump Era. A problem that might be best addressed by a few leaks to the right people in the 4th Estate?

    Comey isn't really an FBI man. He's a lawyer. Some lines from the Wolf Hall miniseries came to mind last night:

    Anne Boleyn: "...those who've been made, can be unmade."

    Thomas Cromwell (lawyer): "I entirely agree."

  26. [26] 
    TheStig wrote:

    CNN Reports grand jury subpoenas issued in FBI's Russia investigation.

    Rather than refer to the Comey firing with some tired version ending in "gate" can we break fresh ground and dub this:

    The Cockholster Affair?

    That spelling ought to keep the FCC nannies at bay.
    If they should ask, just tell 'em it's a reference to the 18 century's 5th Earl of Cockholster and that the "h" is silent. FCC is a political hack appointment, no one there will bother to look it up.

  27. [27] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @michale,

    glad everything is alright - your strings of eleven straight comments have been missed - well, at least by me they have.

    Up until yesterday, Comey was Satan incarnate.. He was the cause of ALL the Democrats' problems and was wished all sorts of ill by Democrats & most Weigantians alike....

    comey was never the cause of hillary's problems - those wounds were self-inflicted. and at the time quite a few of us here (at least liz, myslef and one or two others) emphasized that comey was completely above-board in his actions, irrespective of the impact it may have had on the election. we've been pretty consistent on that.

    I said it before and I'll say it again.. ANY forum where "TRUMP IS HITLER" is a legitimate point of discussion is simply not a forum that I see myself being a part of...

    that's patently ridiculous, and unfortunate. first of all, nobody here said that, and nobody else even thought we had said that. when prompted, both kick and myself did clarify that wasn't what we had meant.

    to my knowledge, the ONLY thing trump and hitler have in common is the same distinctive style of rhetoric, which may tie in to donald's apparent fascination with the book 'my new order' in the 1990's, as reported by his first wife ivana in vanity fair.

    the publishers of said book saw sufficient similarities in the two men's rhetoric to put donald on the cover for the re-print, as well as include a three-page written comparison of their speaking styles. however, nobody here intended to imply any other similarities, just those that are factually supported. four of the most obvious similarities, from the book's description:

    They repeat themselves constantly, saying the same things over and over again.
    They never admit they have made a mistake nor do they ever take anything back.
    To any criticism, they respond by insults and name calling.
    They use a low form of language, with simple sentences even a person with the lowest level of education or with no education at all can understand.

    here is a web blog with a few more specific, academic comparisons, along with an explanation of the type of outrage such comparisons inevitably bring:

    https://thedilettantesdilemma.com/2017/01/22/some-rhetorical-similarities-in-trump-and-hitler-speeches/

    the godwin principle was formulated to prevent people from using references to hitler or the nazis on topics to which they had no inherent relevance. this comparison may be limited, but an elected leader of a powerful nation using this rhetorical style is not irrelevant. it certainly wasn't my intention, but if that's all it took to induce your silence, it's a good bet that some here would have gone full godwin ages ago.

    JL

  28. [28] 
    michale wrote:

    comey was never the cause of hillary's problems - those wounds were self-inflicted.

    Yes, that's what any REASONABLE person would say and think....

    And yet, when Comey was vilified left and right by Democrats and most Weigantians, such vilification went largely unchallenged.. Yes, you and Liz and Altohone and Don, gave token challenges to such claims..

    But, by and large, the consensus was amongst the Left AND the majority of Weigantians, that Comey was a bad bad person and was responsible for NOT-45's loss..

    UNTIL such time as Trump fired Comey.. THEN he was the Left Wingery's hero...

    And, I am constrained to point out, such blatant hypocrisy *ALSO* went unchallenged..

    that's patently ridiculous, and unfortunate. first of all, nobody here said that, and nobody else even thought we had said that. when prompted, both kick and myself did clarify that wasn't what we had meant.

    ONLY after I pointed out how ridiculous ya'all were for making the claim...

    Irregardless of that, even ya'all's backpedaling STILL felt the comparison was valid..

    Unless Trump has ordered the brutal slaughter of 6 million innocent men, women and children, there is absolutely NO CAUSE or reason to even MENTION Hitler in the same breath as Trump..

    NONE..

    Put another way...

    "Obama has two arms and two legs, JUST like William Gacy or Ted Bundy or Hitler.. But I am, in NO WAY, comparing Obama and Hitler, Gacy or Bundy"

    That is patently ridiculous and the denial ranks right up there with NOT-45s claim that she takes full responsibility for her devastating loss..

    It's a non-comparison comparison...

    If ya'all weren't comparing Trump to Hitler, then there is no reason to point out that they each have two arms and two legs. Oh.. forgive me. That Trump has read books by/about Hitler...

    Put still another way..

    "Trump is going to be a GREAT President because he has read books by Abraham Lincoln and has a Lincoln book on his night stand"

    Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it??? Of course it does...

    to my knowledge, the ONLY thing trump and hitler have in common is the same distinctive style of rhetoric, which may tie in to donald's apparent fascination with the book 'my new order' in the 1990's, as reported by his first wife ivana in vanity fair.

    So??

    What's the point of making such a claim if not to compare Trump to Hitler??

    They repeat themselves constantly, saying the same things over and over again.
    They never admit they have made a mistake nor do they ever take anything back.
    To any criticism, they respond by insults and name calling.
    They use a low form of language, with simple sentences even a person with the lowest level of education or with no education at all can understand.

    And that describes NOT-45 or anyone of a hundred Democrat leaders...

    WHen was the last time you compared Hitler to anyone of THOSE politicians???

    Answer.. Never..

    the godwin principle was formulated to prevent people from using references to hitler or the nazis on topics to which they had no inherent relevance.

    And having the same rhetoric flair has NO inherent relevance..

    ESPECIALLY since you have never made such a comparison to a Democrat leader..

    FDR's *ACTIONS* were much MUCH closer to Hitler's actions than Trump's "rhetorical flair" *EVER* could be...

    Has anyone here ever compared FDR to Hitler???

    Of course not.. Because FDR is a Democrat....

    The simple fact is, ya'all, by commission or omission, jumped the shark when it comes to Party hysteria...

  29. [29] 
    michale wrote:

    To put it succintly...

    Unless the goal is to equate Hitler to Trump in the eyes of the reader, there is absolutely NO RATIONAL reason to include Trump and Hitler in the same sentence...

    And if the goal *IS* to equate Trump and Hitler???

    Well, that brand of hysterical lunacy speaks for itself...

  30. [30] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Alright Michale, then let's instead point out the similarities of Trump's unstable, authoritarian style to those of nationalist strongman autocrats he apparently admires: Erdogan, Putin, Xi of China, Orban of Hungary, Duterte, LePen, apparently even Kim Jong-Un of N. Korea.

    We haven't seen this many would-be dictators since the 1930's, when He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named (henceforth HWMNBN) was rising to power, and 'nationalist populism' was better known as fascism.

    Since then, the hope and protector of World Order has been America, and its strong democratic institutions. American Democrats and supporters of democratic institutions worldwide are understandably concerned about the 'new' world order - less free, less tolerant, less altruistic, and more militaristic - that this worldwide turn to the right heralds.

    And that's even before we broach the subject of the kleptocratic corruption that seems endemic in most of these autocrats, including Trump (see: emoluments clause).

  31. [31] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @michale,

    The purpose behind the comparison was to disprove the assertion that Trump can't or doesn't read books. There's not a ton of hard evidence on that front, and his use of AH's rhetoric is the best if not only evidence available.

    JL

  32. [32] 
    michale wrote:

    Alright Michale, then let's instead point out the similarities of Trump's unstable, authoritarian style to those of nationalist strongman autocrats he apparently admires: Erdogan, Putin, Xi of China, Orban of Hungary, Duterte, LePen, apparently even Kim Jong-Un of N. Korea.

    Yes, if you can find any RELEVANT similarities, by all mans..

    But "talks like" or "reads the same book" or "sounds like" are VERY subjective and not really relevant...

    It is simply ridiculous and hysterical to compare a freely, fairly and legally elected President to Hitler or any of those other scumbags you mentioned...

    And the ONLY reason ya'all WANT to make that comparison and the only reason that no one else questions such a comparison is because Trump has an -R after his name...

    FDR has more in common with Hitler than Trump does..

    But no one here will condemn FDR because FDR has a -D after his name...

    When you claim Trump is going to be another Hitler, another Erdogan, another Kim Jong, that says more about you than it does about Trump...

  33. [33] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale,

    If you want to preach on hypocrisy, how about you explain Trump's praising of Comey's handling of the Clinton email server investigation up until the day he fired him for the same thing!

    And just to clarify, people upset at Comey's interference in the election and people upset that Trump fired him four months after taking office supposedly for the same thing is only hypocrisy if you believe Trump is telling the truth about why he was firing Comey. And if you do believe him, then you are saying Trump is the hypocrite!

    I'm sure Trump's decision to fire Comey has nothing to do with Comey requesting more funding for the FBI's investigation into Trump's campaign's ties to Russia. Funny it happened just before Trump met with Russia's ambassador this morning. Luckily the Russian gov't tweeted pictures of Trump with the ambassador so that Trump won't forget that they actually met!

  34. [34] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    The truth of the Left Wingery... No other truth is allowed and certainly no FACTS are allowed...

    There is no truth except the TRUTH! There is no Left Wing truth, nor is there Right Wing truth....there is only truth! Your belief in things that are lies does not make them the truth anymore than it makes them a fact. Lies are always lies.

    Plus, it's obvious that Trump was lying about the reason for firing Comey -- they let KellyAnne in front of the cameras again. When Spicer cannot reasonably explain (cover up) Trump's actions, it's Conway job to go out and utter idiotic sentences and deflect questions like a drunk Wonder Woman!

  35. [35] 
    michale wrote:

    If you want to preach on hypocrisy, how about you explain Trump's praising of Comey's handling of the Clinton email server investigation up until the day he fired him for the same thing!

    Once we finish this debate and if I am still around, I would be ECSTATIC to discuss the Comey/Trump issue...

    SPOILER.. I am INCENSED that Trump would fire Comey...

    There is no truth except the TRUTH! There is no Left Wing truth, nor is there Right Wing truth....there is only truth!

    Bullshit... For MILLIONS on the Left, the "truth" is that NOT45 won the election....

    Don't give me that BS koom-bye-ya line that TRUTH = FACT...

  36. [36] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @michale,

    And that describes NOT-45 or anyone of a hundred Democrat leaders...

    not the case. most politicians, no matter what their party, do something very different. they tend to talk at a high school level or higher, they reply to criticism with practiced talking points, they hedge their statements like lawyers, and they spin every point into some sort of story or analogy. trump's style of rhetoric is incredibly unusual among politicians.

    JL

  37. [37] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:


    SPOILER.. I am INCENSED that Trump would fire Comey...

    So you came on here to bash people for agreeing with you?!?!

    And let me be very clear:
    I didn't say Truth = Fact.

    I said, Your belief in things that are lies does not make them the truth anymore than it makes them a fact. Lies are always lies..

    Truth can be factual, and facts can be true; but I shouldn't need to explain this to you! (How Dr. Suess of me!)

    Lies are not truth. Lies are not fact.

  38. [38] 
    michale wrote:

    trump's style of rhetoric is incredibly unusual among politicians.

    *EVERYTHING* about Trump is unusual, if you use politicians as your yard stick....

    That doesn't make Trump Hitler...

  39. [39] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Nightmare scenario:

    Trump just named a special prosecutor into his campaign's ties to Russia!!!

    Jared Kushner!

  40. [40] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    It is simply ridiculous and hysterical to compare a freely, fairly and legally elected President to Hitler or any of those other scumbags you mentioned...the only reason...is because Trump has an -R after his name...

    First, I only mentioned those 'scumbags' because they have been specifically named by Trump as folks HE admires for one reason or another. If I were just randomly naming scumbags I could have said, for instance, Robert Mogabe, but he is not on that list.

    And I specifically did not mention HWMNBN by name, but you want to compare him to FDR, one of our greatest presidents? Shame on you.

    As for the -R after his name, yer darned tootin' when that "R" stands for right-wing, reactionary, retrogressive, and repulsive. But if you look up at my post at [20], you'll see that I'm more than happy to give reasonable Republicans credit for being more than rubber stamps.

  41. [41] 
    michale wrote:

    All I am saying is that, unless the subject matter is RHETORIC AMONGST WORLD LEADERS OF THE LAST 100 YEARS, there is absolutely NO just cause or reason to compare Trump and Hitler..

    And anyone DOING such a comparison is simply trying to invoke a hysterical emotional TRUMP IS HITLER connection...

    Simple logic...

  42. [42] 
    altohone wrote:

    Balthy
    30

    "Since then, the hope and protector of World Order has been America, and its strong democratic institutions. American Democrats and supporters of democratic institutions worldwide are understandably concerned about the 'new' world order - less free, less tolerant, less altruistic, and more militaristic - that this worldwide turn to the right heralds."

    In case you missed it

    https://theintercept.com/2017/05/02/trumps-support-and-praise-of-despots-is-central-to-the-u-s-tradition-not-a-deviation-from-it/

    A

  43. [43] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    *yawn* Okay, that non-topic has been thoroughly discussed. Let's get onto why you're INCENSED that Comey's been fired.

  44. [44] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    *EVERYTHING* about Trump is unusual, if you use politicians as your yard stick.... That doesn't make Trump Hitler...

    nobody here, with the possible exception of yourself, ever said that it did. nonetheless, DT's rhetoric is unusual in a way that specifically parallels AH's rhetoric. the only reason even that was mentioned was to prove that trump can and does read books when he feels like it. moreover, he understands what he reads and creatively applies it to real-life scenarios. the choice of reading material he learned from scares me. but on the other hand, knowing he has the ability to learn at that level gives me some hope.

    JL

  45. [45] 
    Paula wrote:

    If Trump Supporters/Republicans are confident there's been no wrongdoing by Trump or members of his team, what do they have to fear from an Independent Prosecutor? Why aren't they calling for one loudly, in order to PROVE Trump/GOP innocence?

  46. [46] 
    michale wrote:

    nobody here, with the possible exception of yourself, ever said that it did.

    By commission or omission, *EVERYONE* did...

    Because, since the subject wasn't RHETORIC AMONGST WORLD LEADERS OF THE LAST 100 YEARS, by bringing up any comparison you are, de-facto, claiming Trump is another Hitler...

    ESPECIALLY since you didn't issue ANY qualification when you made the initial statement..

    the choice of reading material he learned from scares me.

    And WHY does it scare you?? Because you are trying to make the point that Trump = Hitler...

    Because why is there any reason to be scared of Trump except for the idea that he is going to be another Hitler..

  47. [47] 
    altohone wrote:

    nypoet

    "but if that's all it took to induce your silence, it's a good bet that some here would have gone full godwin ages ago."

    Very true.
    Still might.

    He did tell us why he was leaving, and like Trump, broke his promise by returning.

    That said, the limited comparison you made remains valid. I don't know why he thinks repeating the same flawed arguments will be convincing this time.

    A

  48. [48] 
    michale wrote:

    If Trump Supporters/Republicans are confident there's been no wrongdoing by Trump or members of his team, what do they have to fear from an Independent Prosecutor?
    Why aren't they calling for one loudly, in order to PROVE Trump/GOP innocence?

    If NOT45 had nothing to fear and there wasn't any wrongdoing, why was she and the Democrats so afraid of an Independent Prosecutor to investigate her???

    Why weren't NOT-45 and the Democrats CALLING for one loudly, in order to PROVE NOT-45 innocence?

    You are so blinded by Party bigotry, you can't see the equivalency, even when it slaps you upside down the head..

  49. [49] 
    Paula wrote:

    Money where your mouth is time: are Trumpers confident their guy is innocent? Willing to put it to the test?

  50. [50] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    And WHY does it scare you??

    because rhetoric like that tends to take on a life of its own, like "patterns of force," so to speak. if you want to know how i'll answer a question, kindly don't try to answer it for me. about a month ago, someone said to "throw this comment into [his] face with gusto" in such a situation.

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2017/04/06/taser-unswiftly-changes-name/#comment-98181

  51. [51] 
    michale wrote:

    He did tell us why he was leaving, and like Trump, broke his promise by returning.

    What part of "I'll be checking in from time to time to see if logic and sanity has returned" do you not understand??? Too many big words for you???

    That said, the limited comparison you made remains valid. I don't know why he thinks repeating the same flawed arguments will be convincing this time.

    And the fact that everyone here thinks that TRUMP = HITLER *IS* valid is exactly what proves that logic and rational discourse is no longer present here..... Proves that all that is here is Party bigotry and slavery...

    Check back in another month or so to see if rational minds prevail...

    Too many big words for ya, A??? Think hard.. You'll figure it out...

  52. [52] 
    Paula wrote:

    Funny, since we knew Benghazieeeeee! was a Witch Hunt we said so. Then the GOP witch hunters had to admit, several times, they came up with squat. We said so. Comey concluded Emailgate wasn't a crime, after his investigation. We knew it.

    Now, trumpie/pubbies won't allow their team to be investigated. We didn't like it. But Obama NEVER squashed these investigations because Dems respect the institutions and the laws. And our folks were found INNOCENT.

    But Trump/GOP? Trying to squash investigations. What are they hiding?

    Russians hacked both the DNC AND the RNC. They dumped DNC stuff but held on to RNC stuff. Who are they blackmailing? Over what? What are the pubbies covering up?

  53. [53] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Al [42]: Greenwald, again. His favorite source lives in Russia right now, y'know.

    Asserting that right-wing ideologues like Kissinger and Kirkpatrick are 'central' to US tradition is akin to FOX's habit of equating the SDS and Black Panther movements to left-wing doctrine. While those people and movements certainly existed, they were never 'central' to American ideology, which for most Americans, and much of the rest of the world, remains: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

    Oh, and spreading Democracy.

  54. [54] 
    michale wrote:

    "throw this comment into [his] face with gusto" in such a situation.

    Yea, well, that was before everyone went dark-side and compared Trump to Hitler..

    Such a hysterical comparison voids a lot of rules and guidelines...

  55. [55] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    By commission or omission, *EVERYONE* did...

    by omission? meaning, since nobody actually said it, they said it by not saying it? not sure that one holds water.

    JL

  56. [56] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    all that is here is Party bigotry and slavery.

    In fact, in your absence, we've been engaged in several internecine debates. You should keep up.

  57. [57] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    "Obama has two arms and two legs, JUST like William Gacy or Ted Bundy or Hitler.. But I am, in NO WAY, comparing Obama and Hitler, Gacy or Bundy"

    having arms and legs did not distinguish any of these men from any other man. however, AH's rhetoric was as characteristic and distinctive as his mustache. if someone had a similar mustache and you pointed it out, would they be obliged to think you were calling them a genocidal dictator unless you made forceful qualifications to the negative?

    JL

  58. [58] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Tweet from Congressman Tim Ryan:

    Nixon had the Saturday Night Massacre. Now Trump is following suit w/ Tuesday Afternoon Massacre. We need special prosecutor to investigate.

    Heh. Looks like I spoke too soon...

    :-)

    -CW

  59. [59] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Yea, well, that was before everyone went dark-side and compared Trump to Hitler..

    Yeah, well, it wasn't 'everyone'. Get over it already.

  60. [60] 
    Paula wrote:

    Why compare Trump to Hitler when there's a perfectly good Trump-Nixon comparison available?

  61. [61] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    if someone had a similar mustache and you pointed it out, would they be obliged to think you were calling them a genocidal dictator unless you made forceful qualifications to the negative?

    My grandfather sported a 'hitler' mustache since the time it was called a 'Chaplain' mustache, and wore it until he died in the 1970's. For some reason, no one ever gave him any shit about it, probably because that would be stupid.

  62. [62] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Why compare Trump to Hitler when there's a perfectly good Trump-Nixon comparison available?

    Paula: did you catch the Ghost of Nixon (the Nixon Library) trolling Trump yesterday?

    https://twitter.com/NixonLibrary/status/862083605081862145

  63. [63] 
    michale wrote:

    by omission? meaning, since nobody actually said it, they said it by not saying it? not sure that one holds water.

    I meant that the claim was made and no one disputed it..

    OK, I'll try one more time...

    Would you agree that comparing a freely, fairly and legally elected President to Adolph Hitler is ridiculous and completely insulting to the 6 million innocent men, women and children who were brutally butchered??

    A simple yes or no is all that is required...

  64. [64] 
    michale wrote:

    Why compare Trump to Hitler when there's a perfectly good Trump-Nixon comparison available?

    Because you don't get to invoke the horror of The Holocaust with a Nixon comparison..

    Duuuhhhhh..... :^/

  65. [65] 
    michale wrote:

    Yeah, well, it wasn't 'everyone'. Get over it already.

    By commission or omission it WAS "everyone".. These are the facts. Get over it already...

  66. [66] 
    Paula wrote:

    [62] Balthasar: Yep!

    It's beginning to look a lot like Nixon…only I think top Pubbies are compromised too. McConnell, Priebus -- something is going on. That RNC hack, Rump meeting the Russian guy today, closed to U.S. Press but open to Russian Press -- how blatant does it have to get before Pubbies stop going along?

  67. [67] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Would you agree that comparing a freely, fairly and legally elected President to Adolph Hitler is ridiculous and completely insulting to the 6 million innocent men, women and children who were brutally butchered??

    the question is irrelevant. AH was freely, fairly and legally elected chancellor, and pointing out this additional similarity is not convincing. being jewish, we're a bit more attuned to such things, and pointing it out in no way conflicts with the ethos of remembering the holocaust.

    “Never again" becomes more than a slogan: It's a prayer, a promise, a vow. There will never again be hatred, people say. Never again jail and torture. Never again the suffering of innocent people, or the shooting of starving, frightened, terrified children. And never again the glorification of base, ugly, dark violence. It's a prayer.”
    ~elie wiesel

  68. [68] 
    michale wrote:

    the question is irrelevant.

    It's VERY relevant..

    Matter of fact, it's the ONLY relevant question..

    But the non-answer is my answer...

  69. [69] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    But the non-answer is my answer...

    the way the question was phrased made it irrelevant.

    however, given the circumstances and the similarities, the answer is no, there's nothing remotely ridiculous or insulting about pointing them out.

    JL

  70. [70] 
    Paula wrote:

    So do the lock-her-up-Trumpies agree with der Fuhrer 45 that Comey done her wrong?

  71. [71] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Whoops! Here's another one:

    http://www.salon.com/2017/05/10/nixon-redux-trumps-tuesday-afternoon-massacre-could-lead-to-his-impeachment-or-resignation/

    Looks like I may have started something...

    heh.

    -CW

  72. [72] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @paula [70],

    So do the lock-her-up-Trumpies agree with der Fuhrer

    uncalled-for. trump's similarity with AH begin and end with his rhetorical style. that in and of itself is disturbing enough.

    JL

  73. [73] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mopshell
    23

    Furthermore, it cannot be stated often enough that it was NOT Comey who released the contents of his letter to the press. That illegal act was committed by Jason Chaffetz who is now in trouble for ethics violations.

    Ding, ding, ding... we have a winner.

    Very nice posts and exactly right. :)

  74. [74] 
    Kick wrote:

    Mopshell
    23

    Furthermore, it cannot be stated often enough that it was NOT Comey who released the contents of his letter to the press. That illegal act was committed by Jason Chaffetz who is now in trouble for ethics violations.

    Ding, ding, ding... we have a winner.

    Very nice posts and exactly right. :)

  75. [75] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    25

    Some lines from the Wolf Hall miniseries came to mind last night:

    Anne Boleyn: "...those who've been made, can be unmade."

    Thomas Cromwell (lawyer): "I entirely agree."

    Spoiler Alert: Off with their heads! ;)

  76. [76] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    28

    Unless Trump has ordered the brutal slaughter of 6 million innocent men, women and children, there is absolutely NO CAUSE or reason to even MENTION Hitler in the same breath as Trump..

    NONE..

    Oh, really? Is that so? Well, it sure didn't seem to rate a mention when this guy did it in March... long before the conversation by JL and me causing the little "meltdown" and rants coming from the Florida swamps:

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2017/03/27/no-honeymoon-for-trump/#comment-97403

    The fake outrage and "oh, woe is me" hypocritical BS is duly noted.

    Have a nice day. :)

  77. [77] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    CW [71]: The worst thing about it, from Trump's supporters' viewpoint, is that it has thrust the term 'special prosecutor' (which I've heard explained every hour or so today) out into the public discourse.

    Y'know, I've been thinkin' that maybe Trump fired Comey because he hasn't made it clear that Trump Himself wasn't being investigated. That would explain the bizarre first sentence of that termination letter.

    A lot of folks have been saying on the TV that it's extremely unlikely that Comey would have actually told Trump that he wasn't being investigated, that that would be a breach of law and protocol that even Comey wouldn't do. On the other hand, could he dodge a direct question from the President in private?

    He might also have said, "No sir, we aren't investigating YOU", and been technically, if not ultimately, correct, because the FBI is presumably investigating Russian Interference in the Election, not Trump, per se.

    I'd bet donuts to dollars that Trump doesn't give the first whit about Flynn, except to the extent that either man's fate is intertwined. His own reputation is what keeps him up and tweeting. It follows that his real beef with Comey could be as petty as "refuses to exonerate me personally".

  78. [78] 
    Paula wrote:

    [72] Oh dear, Der Fuhrer was crossed out -- didn't you notice?

  79. [79] 
    Paula wrote:

    [72] But its nice of you to consider the resident snowflake's tender sensibilities.

  80. [80] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    29

    Unless the goal is to equate Hitler to Trump in the eyes of the reader, there is absolutely NO RATIONAL reason to include Trump and Hitler in the same sentence...

    And if the goal *IS* to equate Trump and Hitler???

    Well, that brand of hysterical lunacy speaks for itself...

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/guest-author----donald-tr_b_10581392.html

    ^^^^^ CLICK, CLICK ^^^^^

    Excellent article written almost a year ago by CW about the GOP's "Apprentice Demagogue" and "He Who Must Not Be Named."

    I highly recommend it. :)

  81. [81] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Re: [77] ...or it could be the significant increase in resources for the bureau’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the presidential election that Comey requested just days ago from Rod Rosenstein, the Deputy AG who wrote the document that the WH used as justification for Comey's firing.

    I'm guessing that request will be ignored.

  82. [82] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Let's talk about WWII and the intervening period between WWI and WWII and atrocities committed by the third reich!

    Otherwise, let's drop the flippant references to you know who!!!

  83. [83] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @liz,

    this began as a very limited parallel, based on substantial evidence, to prove a tangential point. however, it doesn't take ten million murdered for the rhetoric to be scary in its similarity. i know you don't like clicking links, but this really is worth a read:

    https://thedilettantesdilemma.com/2017/01/22/some-rhetorical-similarities-in-trump-and-hitler-speeches/

  84. [84] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    for you, Joshua, I will click a link. And, then, let you know what I think!

    Won't be tonight, tho ...

  85. [85] 
    michale wrote:

    Let's talk about WWII and the intervening period between WWI and WWII and atrocities committed by the third reich!

    Otherwise, let's drop the flippant references to you know who!!!

    A glimmer of sanity and logic!! Finally!!!

    And that's exactly my point..

    Anyone who flippantly invokes the horror of The Holocaust to further a Party agenda is proving beyond ANY doubt that said agenda doesn't DESERVE to be furthered..

    I mean, how bad is the point if it needs the horror of The Holocaust to have any semblance of merit??

    It's that exact flippancy that is at the heart of my being so pissed off about this...

  86. [86] 
    michale wrote:

    JL,

    but if that's all it took to induce your silence, it's a good bet that some here would have gone full godwin ages ago.

    Not really..

    I've come to expect that kind of low-brow, minimal intelligence from those rank and file Weigantians who are nothing but Party drones.. They can throw Godwins around left and right and all I would say is, "Figures... Par for the course... It's who they are.."...

    The fact that this kind of low-brow, minimal intelligence Party drone-ish behavior came from someone like you is why it was so vastly disconcerting and upheaval-ing and caused me to re-think and question my entire Weigantian existence..

  87. [87] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @michale,

    The fact that this kind of low-brow, minimal intelligence Party drone-ish behavior came from someone like you is why it was so vastly disconcerting and upheaval-ing and caused me to re-think and question my entire Weigantian existence..

    couldn't possibly disagree more on the characterization of the comparison as unintelligent or dronish. since no retraction is forthcoming, that leaves two basic choices. one, accept that we have a legitimate difference of opinion as to the appropriateness of the rhetorical comparison. two, continue to beat our heads against a wall arguing the point.

    JL

  88. [88] 
    michale wrote:

    couldn't possibly disagree more on the characterization of the comparison as unintelligent or dronish. since no retraction is forthcoming, that leaves two basic choices. one, accept that we have a legitimate difference of opinion as to the appropriateness of the rhetorical comparison. two, continue to beat our heads against a wall arguing the point.

    Still wrapping my brain around it, so the jury is still out.. :D

  89. [89] 
    michale wrote:

    I'm certain all of ya'all are waiting with baited breath.. :D heh

  90. [90] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    that's BATED breath. unless you have a penchant for eating worms, that is...

    ~the grammar nazi

  91. [91] 
    michale wrote:

    that's BATED breath. unless you have a penchant for eating worms, that is...

    Not as a matter of course, but there was that one time in OCS.... :D

  92. [92] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    herein lies the challenge: the tactics of persuasion and media manipulation that trump has successfully employed are incredibly unusual in today's politics. the last time these methods were employed with similar success was in nazi germany. based on the vanity fair story, 'my new order' may well have been used explicitly by trump as a guide to effective propaganda.

    although trump is not even remotely like a nazi in other meaningful ways, it would be negligent to refer to his media strategy without considering its prior success in germany, and the similarities between today's US political climate with that of the weimar republic. trump's media strategy is NOT associated with genocide, but it could still be dangerous for our democracy.

    "This does not make the American right fascist, or Trump a Nazi. It does however point to the recrudescence of persuasion techniques associated with these things and long thought extinct.
    ...
    "Nothing Trump does or says remotely justifies a serious comparison with the author of the Third Reich. The Nazi plans were always monstrous, and epic in scale...
    ...
    "And even the comparison with Mussolini, though appealing, is inappropriate. Trump does not propose to imprison his political opponents or invade Ethiopia. There is no commonality of aims or ideology or ethics with the fascism that seemed at one point to usher in a new dark age... "
    ~Nicholas O’Shaughnessy, expert on nazism

    http://www.rawstory.com/2016/10/expert-on-nazism-explains-the-shocking-similarities-between-trump-and-hitlers-propaganda-tactics/

  93. [93] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @liz,

    if you have within you the forbearance to click a second link, the above would also be worth your time.

    JL

  94. [94] 
    michale wrote:

    JL,

    I just view the idea of invoking AH to attack Trump is no different than the Right Wingery invoking an Islamic Manchurian Candidate to attack Obama..

    It just smacks of low brow, lazy, minimal intelligence type attacks when there are so many other choices of attacks to choose from that are FAR more legitimate and reasonable....

    As you said, we'll just likely have to agree to disagree on the point...

  95. [95] 
    michale wrote:

    based on the vanity fair story

    Yea.. And based on a Vanity Fair story, "Jackie" was the victim of gang rape at a fraternity house...

    Isn't it possible that, like the "Jackie" story, a political agenda was more in play than any facts or reality??

    Isn't that possible??

  96. [96] 
    michale wrote:

    It's a valid question and concern...

  97. [97] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Isn't it possible that, like the "Jackie" story, a political agenda was more in play than any facts or reality??

    not likely, since the story was pubished in 1990.

  98. [98] 
    michale wrote:

    not likely, since the story was pubished in 1990.

    Then, since it's almost 3 decades old, it's relevance is even less than if it were a political hit piece...

    although trump is not even remotely like a nazi in other meaningful ways, it would be negligent to refer to his media strategy without considering its prior success in germany, and the similarities between today's US political climate with that of the weimar republic. trump's media strategy is NOT associated with genocide, but it could still be dangerous for our democracy.

    Or it may be WONDERFUL for our democracy...

    Remember Professor Gill??

    "Most efficient state Earth ever knew"

    And Professor Gill noted that initially, it was VERY successful....

    I highly doubt that we have a Melakon in our midst or that, even if we did, a Melagon could bring about the worst excesses of the NAZI regime..

    The American people simply wouldn't stand for it..

    This isn't the 1930s where government can control all aspects of information distribution...

  99. [99] 
    michale wrote:

    although trump is not even remotely like a nazi in other meaningful ways,

    But I am glad we can agree that President Trump is not even "remotely" like a nazi in many meaningful ways..

    And you said you wouldn't issue a retraction.. :D heh J/K....

    Trump and AH may share some rhetorical qualities.. And, if I cared enough, I am certain I could find MANY Democrat leaders, past and present, who ALSO share Trump's and AH's rhetorical qualities..

    FDR and AH share a LOT more qualities than simple rhetoric.. With the exception of the outcome, FDR's actions were *EXACTLY* like AH's actions... Yet no one here will concede the similarity.. Why?? Because FDR is a Left Wingery hero....

    The fact that the rhetorical qualities are shared is slightly, ever so slightly, more relevant than the fact that Trump and AH also share the fact that they both have 2 arms and 2 legs...

  100. [100] 
    michale wrote:

    The fact that the rhetorical qualities are shared is slightly, ever so slightly, more relevant than the fact that Trump and AH also share the fact that they both have 2 arms and 2 legs...

    I know, I know.. we disagree on the importance of the respective relavancies...

    I can live with that...

Comments for this article are closed.